Comments on: GIMP vs Photoshop vs Pixelmator – Graphics Editor Shootout

By: Nathan Greenstein

Nathan Greenstein — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 03:27:55 +0000

Really, GIMP isn’t the best choice for anyone. Its feature set is acceptable, but its interface and sometimes-lackluster results mean that it’s slow and frequently painful to use. Even if you’re on a tight budget, Pixelmator is well worth the money.

I never called GIMP anything like a piece of garbage. It's a powerful piece of software, but I believe that Pixelmator is a better choice for just about anyone.

This is a fair comparison; all apps were given equal tests and scored on the same metrics. I have plenty of experience with each app (I was a GIMP user for years). Any points that GIMP lost are due to interface or feature set limitations.

GIMP 2.6 is not at all defunct; it was the current version distributed from the GIMP website at the time of this writing (as it is now, months later). All apps were tested using the current stable, distributed version.

By: Nathan Greenstein

Nathan Greenstein — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 03:22:08 +0000

Hey, nice job on that! It looks great.

GIMP, like Pixelmator, has no built-in Inner Shadow function. Without using a plug-in, it's impossible to produce the inner shadow effect without plugins. (Yes, it could be done by manually selecting and playing with feather, fill, and gradient values, but the results are clunky and immutable and the time required to find values that work in a given situation can be prohibitive).

All three apps reviewed have many plug-ins available, and I made the decision to review each app as exactly as it's distributed (without adding any plug-ins). That's why I opted to use a stroke instead of an inner shadow in GIMP (as I did in Pixelmator).

By: boomheadshot43

boomheadshot43 — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:09:56 +0000

Congratulations, you successfully made gimp look like the garbage it isn't. I would have expected better from this, a fair comparison of the three. Just because you can't use a program straight off, does not make it junk. Plenty of tutorials and people who actually know *hint (Strangehold) how to use this program, next time, do some research, and use a more recent version that hasn't been defunct ages.

By: Strangehold

Strangehold — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 20:52:14 +0000

That logo you made with GIMP was bad, I have made a better logo than that with GIMP(2.6), and I will happily provide the .xcf files to prove it.

This took me less than an hour (Which is why it’s not shaped properly).

Heres a link : http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5751/logohy.png

By: Nathan Greenstein

Nathan Greenstein — Sat, 14 Apr 2012 02:06:44 +0000

See above for info on my experience with each application.

If you have improved versions made with GIMP, I would be interested to see them along with a little explanation of your techniques. Post links if you've got 'em. :)

I used UFRaw, as it is what's bundled with the Mac version of GIMP. The idea was to test each app's included functionalities; nonstandard plugins weren't tested.

I have no interest to comment or disparage any particular software; this is an objective, non-sponsored review.

By: Nathan Greenstein

Nathan Greenstein — Sat, 14 Apr 2012 01:53:43 +0000

GIMP 2.6 is still the current version. I did this review with the most recent versions of the app publicly/stably released when written.

By: Nathan Greenstein

Nathan Greenstein — Sat, 14 Apr 2012 01:16:27 +0000

I have a good level of experience with each of the apps I reviewed.

I was a GIMP user even before I was a Photoshop user, and I know my way around well. Pixelmator was a relatively new app for me, but I have definitely used it enough to offer a fair comparison.

By hours, I've used Photoshop the most and it's the app that works best for me. It's followed by GIMP, which have quite a bit of experience with. I have a solid working knowledge of Pixelmator, but I admit that I probably don't know all the hidden tricks of the app.

I have no doubt that artists more skilled than I can (and have) create amazing things in all three of these apps :)

By: Nathan Greenstein

Nathan Greenstein — Sat, 14 Apr 2012 01:11:28 +0000

Acorn looks like a nice app! I'll try to do a review of it in the future.

By: ASC

ASC — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 13:38:11 +0000

Moreover, with the sentence "GIMP has a RAW processor", you make me thing you have little knowledge about this program, since there exist some ways to do it (that's the magic of open source). I supose you have used one of these: UFRaw or Raw Therapee...(it would be nice to say which). From my newbie's point of view you should clarify it, because out there is a lot of people who could confused with your post (unless you have some interest to disparage Gimp or benefit other software).

By: ASC

ASC — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 11:07:31 +0000

Totally agree with #cksum, you should mention your capabilities because things can change a lot. I am not a professional, but I think I could do all the processing thigs and the logo better than you with the gimp (and I am just a begginer). I supose you really use photoshop because all the time you are rating it as the easiest one to do all the things. I think the idea of performing this test is magnific, but if you do not have experince in all of them, may be it would be nice to ask someone to do the test with the programs you do no usually use.