This is demonstrably incorrect. I was doing freelance and I did ALL my graphics in GIMP. My bills were paid because of this project for two straight years because of GIMP.
There is nothing of great essence that Photoshop can offer me that GIMP can’t provide.
I think the worst problem with GIMP is not that it isn’t a powerful enough tool, but that they make it a point of the project to make it as distinct as possible from photoshop, so a lot of pros don’t really want to even bother learning how to use it. I have tried using it a few times in place of my pirated copy of Photoshop (whenever it stops working), and everytime I try, it baffles me how making something that is obvious and intuitive in photoshop needs 5x more work to do it in GIMP.
Ive been using GIMP for years and once you adjust to how it operates, it’s quite powerful. In fact it has some rather useful features once you unlearn Photoshop. It reminds one a bit more of Corel Paint from back in the day.
Is this new one pro level? I haven’t looked into any of them really, but a friend sent me the CAD one, and it looked like it wasn’t 3d, and didn’t have the physics/shape engine
I’ve been a published photog for more than 10 years but I stopped doing paid photography work during covid and it’s just a hobby now. Need my lightroom. I don’t have time to spend 30 minutes masking a sky or subject when lightroom can do it in 1 second automatically and usually better than I could manually.
Edit: Sorry I misread. I thought you were saying I was new to pro photography. I haven’t got a chance to try the reverse engineered lightroom yet but I’m excited to. Fuuuuuuck adobe.
Gimp isn’t good enough for pro level work.
This is demonstrably incorrect. I was doing freelance and I did ALL my graphics in GIMP. My bills were paid because of this project for two straight years because of GIMP. There is nothing of great essence that Photoshop can offer me that GIMP can’t provide.
Can gimp mask a sky or subject automatically and reliably yet?
I shoot in natural light exclusively and rely on those features.
Also what about camera raw profiles for fuji? Last I checked no
“tis a poor carpenter that blames their tools.”
A photo with masking takes like an hour to edit manually but minutes with the Adobe AI tools
You can do the same thing in gimp technically, but my time is too valuable now to be tracing tree branches manually with a brush.
I think the worst problem with GIMP is not that it isn’t a powerful enough tool, but that they make it a point of the project to make it as distinct as possible from photoshop, so a lot of pros don’t really want to even bother learning how to use it. I have tried using it a few times in place of my pirated copy of Photoshop (whenever it stops working), and everytime I try, it baffles me how making something that is obvious and intuitive in photoshop needs 5x more work to do it in GIMP.
Ive been using GIMP for years and once you adjust to how it operates, it’s quite powerful. In fact it has some rather useful features once you unlearn Photoshop. It reminds one a bit more of Corel Paint from back in the day.
Is this new one pro level? I haven’t looked into any of them really, but a friend sent me the CAD one, and it looked like it wasn’t 3d, and didn’t have the physics/shape engine
I’ve been a published photog for more than 10 years but I stopped doing paid photography work during covid and it’s just a hobby now. Need my lightroom. I don’t have time to spend 30 minutes masking a sky or subject when lightroom can do it in 1 second automatically and usually better than I could manually.
Edit: Sorry I misread. I thought you were saying I was new to pro photography. I haven’t got a chance to try the reverse engineered lightroom yet but I’m excited to. Fuuuuuuck adobe.
But what about this new LLM-generated one?
Edited my comment because I can’t read apparently