GIMP, on the other hand, is free software with a community-centric model: it has users and aficionados, not clients and customers. Yet, Photoshop is a commercial venture: it is supposed to provide a plethora of features to its customers.

Photoshop has established itself as the most popular software in its league, and any image editor, no matter how good or bad, has to face a comparison with Photoshop at some stage in its life. We cannot overlook the fact that Photoshop is, indeed, the industry-standard when it comes to image authoring and editing. For example, when I’m talking about my Linux OS to a non-Linux user, and if he or she asks about Photoshop, my response is along the lines of “Nope, no Photoshop I just use GIMP.” But, at the end of the day, GIMP doesn’t make itself a good Photoshop alternative just because I can’t have Photoshop on my system. Why It’s Unfair to Compare GIMP to PhotoshopĬonsidering the fact that GIMP is the default image editor for many popular Linux distros, and Photoshop is not yet available for Linux users, GIMP is heralded by Linux users as their own version of Photoshop. This can be correct to a certain extent. I can relate with this sentiment. However, instead of reviewing the set of features and other information that you can easily find in the GIMP docs, my focus will be on the viability of GIMP and its potential usefulness for designers. In this article, we’ll take a look at GIMP. It works on many operating systems, in many languages. It is a freely distributed piece of software for such tasks as photo retouching, image composition and image authoring. GIMP is the GNU Image Manipulation Program.

For those of you who are unaware of GIMP, here is how the software describes itself:

Gimp for mac reviews