• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 8th, 2023

help-circle





  • Your still don’t get it. Adobe brings the user more value, because using their software users are able to work quicker, finishing more work and earning more money. Adobe subscription is negligible. Freelancers earn more in an hour of work. But save a lot more.

    Even people like me, who are for some weird reason especially inclined to use FOSS, we try to dabble in it, every few years check is anything has changed. But it doesn’t. It remains the same. Pros can’t afford not to use the best software and nothing comes close to ps, ai. Sad but true.



  • :)

    Tried them all. They don’t compare.

    There are some that can be replaced easily, like Adobe premier, maybe even after effects. Audacity for sure. Not indesign, Not illustrator, not photoshop. Not only because the alternative are worse, but because everyone else uses Adobe and its incredibly easier to collaborate. If you are a pro in graphic design, like a real pro that these tools are a daily use, you can’t use anything else but Adobe.





  • What is actionable? Maybe this :Make ux more like ps so more people will be able to use it or want to use it? :)

    You want small things to fix? Small actionable things. I’m saying there is a broader issue that you cannot easily patch. I don’t care about your criticism of ps, many people have tons of criticism, I have tons, none of it matters with the situation at hand.

    What was gimp project about? Pushing users away with design patterns that exist nowhere else?


  • Pros don’t give gimp a chance but many of us still test try it. It’s not viable, not only because Adobe is a must have because of interoperability but because it’s faster to work in, it’s faster, more stable, more supported,… literally there is no category in which it was worse. Ux is not the best for sure, but it’s still way better than gimp. Even more, everything works in the same patterns as the users expect. Same as other graphical programs. It’s easier to use, easier to switch, easier to use similar software. That’s ux. Gimp doesn’t have that.

    Because of all that, it doesn’t have a target audience beyond someone who is just very determined to use something free.


  • You are complaining about the amateur? A pro will never use gimp. Ps is too integrated into professional work, not too mention it has a better ux, it’s more stable, uses more for formats, had better support,… The semi pros still prefer to use affinity. You are only left with amateurs! And still, they prefer to use krita, a program not even meant for this kind of work!!!

    There is no doubt that there are big problems with gimp.



  • I tried it last year in a failed attempt to get of ps, which I to every few years.

    I can’t name specifics, but ps is just more intuitive, more user friendly, faster, more stable, gives you more for formats… I don’t even think ps is all that. Even if we forget Adobe owns the pro space here, it’s just not viable to use gimp professionaly. I never understood why gimp doesn’t just copy all the user flows from photoshop when it’s clear that not only they work, but all users are familiar with them from other software.