Comments on: 7 Reasons Why Gimp vs Photoshop is the Stupidest Flamewar in History

By: Shaun

Shaun — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:09:28 +0000

This is for Desmond. You said the cartridges for CMYK printers are a pain in the neck, but I know from personal experience that they are not all that way. Check out the Xerox 7760. Amazing printer, and the cartridges go in like loading a torpedo tube on a battle cruiser.

By: Richard

Richard — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 13:09:18 +0000

“The philosophy of the common man is an old wife who gives him no pleasure, yet he cannot live without her, and resents any aspersions that strangers may cast on her character.” – Santayana

The same might be said of OSs, software choices, etc.

Those readers that proved unable to restrain the need to flame merely highlighted the pertinence of the title of your post.

Thanks for a correctly and well-argued presentation.

By: Blake

Blake — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 22:19:34 +0000

If you can’t afford Photoshop then get out of the industry. ‘Nuff said.

By: Wow

Wow — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 16:18:21 +0000

Wow, a flame war on the “stop the flame war” blog. Godwin’s Lawn <100 comments. Bet me.

By: Harley

Harley — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 23:34:52 +0000

Is that pronounced “See-Mike”? I have used GIMP long before Photoshop (CS4 on Mac) and would not ever dream of considering any other tool for graphic design/photo-manipulation. GIMP, especially for the price, is simply an amazing piece of software. But then, I am in no way, shape, or form a professional web developer or photographer. Yes, kaneda, it is quite amazing that the posts keep rolling in.

By: madcell

madcell — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 09:47:54 +0000

seriously dude you sound like a Photoshop fan

By: Troy

Troy — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:41:07 +0000

The CMYK argument. Most people don’t even have a printer that needs CMYK. Your Xerox or Epson converts RGB into CMYK anyway. They only reason you would need CMYK format is for making plates for offset printing and your print shop does this for you.

By: Desmond

Desmond — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 03:28:01 +0000

I will say that, even though most of the computers at University use Photoshop (as have I for a long time), one computer had GIMP instead. Out of desperation, I tried it out, and the difference was astonishing. The file format exporting was a bit of a problem, but the paint bucket tool is far more forgiving than PS.

Plus, as I only have PSE7 for home, GIMP serves me a bit better because it has a Pen Tool. That made all the difference between weird amateurish squiggles and quality line art for me.

Oh, and CMYK refers to the “Cyan-Magenta-Yellow-blacK” color scale used for high-resolution color printing. The cartridges for those printers are a pain in the neck, though…

By: fitos

fitos — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 22:48:54 +0000

Whether a designer used GIMP, Photoshop, or even both when creating a design, most clients will never ask (or even care). The only thing they care is the design itself. So why should we brag a tool over another?

“GIMP is the best…”
“Photoshop is the best…”

It’s like promoting something you don’t even sell yourself. No matter how many people download GIMP or buy PS, you won’t make any profit from it.

By: althea

althea — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 13:04:39 +0000

watever..

By: kaneda

kaneda — Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:37:45 +0000

I’m sure at least 10 people who commented didn’t read the article.

My own opinion is simple, use whatever tool you have to complete the task at hand. If you can complete a task just as well with Photoshop as you can GIMP so be it.

I’ve never understood loyalty like this, as if your individual preference somehow effects the developers work. I blame ego. Makes sense, ego would cause the people to blame the tool over their own ineptitude. Meh.

Jay Bowles had it right, so did noamik. Yay! \\¬,¬)

PS: gz on this. 4 year old or so post still getting the comments rolling,

By: Anon

Anon — Mon, 23 May 2011 23:36:48 +0000

gimp is poop

By: Florin

Florin — Sat, 07 May 2011 05:54:39 +0000

I have worked with photoshop and illustrator for several years , i have tried gimp several times and i can tell you that for a free software it is greatness and can do many things that photoshop can do at 8bit/pixel. I describe gimp as a good 2d pixel graphic tool for home user but not for professional graphic design yet.If gimp wants to beat photoshop has a lot to catch out. Every one whom used photoshop intensive and jumps to gimp will say this for gimp : Excelent home user pixel graphic software.

By: amportfolio

amportfolio — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:58:44 +0000

I like that GIMP exists. I think it’s an ideal solution for those who don’t have the money for Adobe, or who want to branch out on other programs, or even for those who beg to get a pirated copy of PS…when they only need the basics.

I personally say you don’t buy a bulldozer when you only need a shovel. GIMP and even PS Elements are the overlooked solutions for many. I like PS and will pay for it, but I also then get selective on what I buy from Adobe. I won’t buy Premiere when I don’t use it. Dreamweaver, Photoshop, and Illustrator I use the most with an occasional Flash…so why shell out for loads more like Soundbooth and Premiere?

By: TheAshok

TheAshok — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 21:05:16 +0000

I wanted PS for some amateur photo editing. The I looked at the price tag and looked for alternatives. GIMPShop looked promising but it was unstable. Then I downloaded GIMP 2. Never used PS so I cannot comment on it but GIMP was easy to use and wonderful. I quickly looked at some video tuts and learned quite a but within a week. Still learning.

Two ways to look at the the price tag of PS:

1. If a freeware like GIMP has so many features, PS can discount those and reduce its price.

2. PS is mainly purchased for commercial purposes (magazines etc). Which means its customers are using it for commercial purposes – so there’s nothing wrong if PS makes some money out of it.

In sum, if you are just a hobbyist, amateur or fun-sake user, go for GIMP. If you need a sw for commercial uses, if you can afford it, go for PS.