I am sure that eventually photo craft will become better than PS though as is the case with open source.
Look, I'm a big fan of open source projects, but GIMP is an open source Photoshop competitor that has been around for almost three decades, and it is harder to use and substantially less capable than PS. Being open source doesn't magically make something good, or mean it'll take over the industry, and there are really only a handful of cases where that's actually wound up being the case.
GIMP is an open source Photoshop competitor that has been around for almost three decades, and it is harder to use and substantially less capable than PS
GIMP is the way that it is because GIMP users like it, not because it'd be impossible to clone the UX of Photoshop. I don't actually use GIMP, but there's a comment that reads something like "GIMP is actually really easy to use and makes more sense than Photoshop," under every comment like this.
A few thoughts on this. First, GIMP looks the way it does because very little actual design and usability thought went into it. Developers put stuff wherever they thought it should go and that became the canonical location for it.
Second, modern GIMP is light-years better UI than it used to be.
Third, it also depends on what you learned. I used GIMP long before I ever touched Photoshop so I understand it better. Working in Photoshop is harder for me than GIMP.
Fourth, even with that being said I still think GIMP needs some professional UI/UX designers to dedicate major time to overhauling it.
Same. I do have access to a legit CC subscription but I daily linux. I needed to do some fairly simple graphics editing. I could not fucking figure out GIMP. I had an easier time figuring out how to set up a windows VM so I could install Photoshop CC on that and use it instead.
Third, it also depends on what you learned. I used GIMP long before I ever touched Photoshop so I understand it better. Working in Photoshop is harder for me than GIMP.
I had a different experience from you and others in this thread. I started editing in GIMP and struggled a lot with it. I could get things done, but very slowly, and the results were often not... great. After about a year, I switched to Photoshop and, within about a week, had surpassed where I'd gotten to with GIMP.
This was, to be fair, almost a decade ago, though the last time I tried GIMP I still ran into a lot of the frustrations I'd had initially, though they were now compounded by the fact that I was used to how Photoshop did it, too.
"Popular bad, unpopular good" is a fine mindset for a 14-year-old trying to develop their own sense of fashion, but in software development it's a recipe for disaster. Photoshop is popular (no scare quotes needed) because it's the best option.
Fundamentally the problem comes down to most people are allergic to change, and i dont necessarily mean this to put anyone down. The human brain us a tool for learning things but not unlearning things, unlearning habits and expectations causes actual measurable distress in subjects when tested, i personally enjoy gimp and find it fairly intuitive, ive also never actually used photoshop in the first place im sure id have the inverse learning problem that anyone coming from photoshop has
A "change" can also be for worse just as can be for better. Even Photoshop UI didn't change much (I'm affirming it because I've been using it since 6.0).\
\
I also used GIMP and I say to you... If you think it's fairly intuitive, PS is a bit more
Gimp changed its interface a few years ago, now its fucking unusable. Nothing worse than software that changes under you. I learnt it once, but they had to ruin that. Why would I keep using it? It'll only change again, and all my effort is wasted again.
Fuck Gimp, and any software that changes for the sake of change. The best UI is the one you already know, and the worst is the one that changes.
GIMP is actually really easy to use and makes more sense than Photoshop. At least for me, I've used both and still do occasionally depending on the project needs. But no way in hell do I pay for it ;)
I’ve been a big fan of LibreOffice since its inception. But that might be just because I followed it from the old Star Office until it became OpenOffice, and finally forked into LibreOffice. It’s got a pedigree that goes way back, and I think it tops MS Office in UI/UX.
And in the non-open source world, Affinity was a paid competitor for around a decade, and is now free* after being acquired by Canva. And it still hasn't caught up, though it is very very good and probably does something like 95% of its Adobe counterparts. But for some people that 5% is important.
That was before Fable. Hobbyist open source devs will eventually have more power with AI than professional software engineers did before AI. It may not be now, but within 2-3 years I don't see why not.
I think the main argument for why not is that coding a program that works and creating a product are two very different things, and AI is only good at the first one. Taking Photocraft from very impressive tech demo to tool that people can actually rely on would take a ton of human effort, even if it doesn't catch a legal ban hammer from Adobe.
239
u/needlesfox 1d ago
Look, I'm a big fan of open source projects, but GIMP is an open source Photoshop competitor that has been around for almost three decades, and it is harder to use and substantially less capable than PS. Being open source doesn't magically make something good, or mean it'll take over the industry, and there are really only a handful of cases where that's actually wound up being the case.