Courtesy to Twitter user XdanielArt (date of publication: 8 June 2024)

  • rhabarba@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    121
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    17 days ago

    Honestly, GIMP is not a good alternative to Photoshop. I know, “it’s free” is enough for many people, but it … just isn’t.

    • anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      77
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      With GIMP 3.0 it’s a bit better at least, they’ve finally added non-destructive editing:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfaq-Cm1ZkA

      Full changelog here:
      https://www.gimp.org/release-notes/gimp-3.0.html

      I’d dare say that unless you’ve already learnt Photoshop (and have to unlearn it) then Darktable+GIMP works fine for home photo editing.
      If you’re used to Photoshop and your skills with it is what puts bread on the table… then I completely understand not switching tools.

        • anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          17 days ago

          My understanding is that a lot of tech debt has been removed with the release of 3.0 and I’m hopeful it will make future updates simpler and faster. :)

          • trunklz29@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            I want to make GIMP work for me but it’s the small things like trying to select a layer and move it with the arrow keys but the arrow keys instead are incessantly switching between layers for some reason? I find the fussiness of layer selection among other stacked layers in your canvas frustrating also.

            I wish there was a plugin that made everything work exactly like Photoshop, made all keyboard shortcuts Photoshop user friendly, added content aware fill, etc…if these issues would be fixed then I’d use it more often. (I found and tried to install PhotoGimp for my Gimp install on my Mac but alas it didn’t work…recommendations?)

      • doxxx@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        17 days ago

        As somebody who has been trying to decided which of the RAW photo editors to use, I can tell you that Darktable has a steep learning curve over Lightroom. The UI is incredibly dense and the names of sliders don’t make sense unless you’re an image science expert.

        • anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          I’ll take your word for it, I’ve never used Lightroom.

          Whenever I played around with Darktable it seems finding a tutorial to get the effect I wanted was just a minute of searching away, and there’s a ton of beginner tutorials available too.
          https://www.darktable.org/2024/12/howto-in-5.0/

          But then I was the kid that rtfm the game manual on my way home from the store and love dense UIs as an adult. :)

        • jwiggler@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          17 days ago

          Darktable is a godsend to me for converting film negatives.But I pretty much only use image conversion, RGB curve, then fidget with the exposure and RGB sliders in negadoctor a little more then I’m done. No idea how to do anything else.

        • TheFonz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 days ago

          Been usin DT for close to a year now. I agree the learning curve is a little steeper than light room but once you get it, everything clicks into place. I can’t believe how powerful this program is and it’s free. It’s unbelievable

    • symbolic@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      17 days ago

      The same with Lightroom sadly. The open source alternatives are either too buggy or have UX designed by very “opinionated” people, making them painful and frustrating to use. I currently want to get rid of Lightroom but can’t.

    • Tonuka@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      I love love love GIMP!!!

      But yeah it’s not a PS alternative, and tbh that’s not really what it’s supposed to be or what its developers want out of it. it’s different

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      17 days ago

      My go-to PS app:

      https://www.photopea.com/

      All online, same controls, hell, same icons. I’m a little stunned that Adobe hasn’t sued them into oblivion.

      You can pay to drop the ads, but I’m not really seeing much end user benefit otherwise. Not seeing ads ATM, maybe I blocked 'em.

        • huppakee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          17 days ago

          You could give Photopea a try, if you’re looking for a free (as supported) alternatives, it has all core functions and a interface that looks very familiar. No installation required so you can easily test it, and use it in any browser (not sure how well it works without mouse and keyboard or low end devices though).

          If you want more than core functionality I don’t think there is a (legally) free option out there.

  • FireWire400@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Another great alternative to Acrobat (Reader) is Okular; it’s free, open source and runs on Linux, Windows and macOS.

    It’s been my go-to PDF reader since switching to Linux, since it already came pre-installed with Manjaro KDE.

    • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      i mean eveb masterpdf editor paid would help to not support adobe. this list should not be an image but a wiki. bitwig i also expected to see.

  • Jankatarch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    What the actual fuck is adobe acrobat? A pdf editor with subscription model payment? Firefox, the browser, can edit pdf files. It’s 2025.

    • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      Firefox can do basic annotating, adding text and adding pictures but it can’t make a new PDF from scratch.

      You may be confusing Adobe Acrobat Reader with Adobe Acrobat? Full Acrobat is the proprietary tool to make a PDF file from scratch including some of the more complex functions.

      PDF is an open standard and has been for a while, so there are now plenty of alternatives for most of the functions. LibreOffice Draw and Inkscape can do a lot of PDF creation functions but not all. There are also “print to PDF” options to create basic PDF documents too.

      However some of the more niche functions are not widely supported or well supported; and there isn’t really any opensource dedicated PDF maker that I’m aware of. Layout tools are abundant but I think it’s things like building forms and document signing that is less easily replicated. There is Master PDF - a fully functional PDF maker which is proprietary and available for Linux; it $80 for a perpetual license. I’m not aware of any other alternatives myself.

      • Thrashy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        In AEC work we’ve moved almost exclusively to a competing PDF tool called Blubeam, which is proprietary but very worth the price, with tools for scaling, dimensioning, and producing material takeoffs from PDF drawings. Much of what you’d use Acrobat for in a more typical office environment are absent or limited, though.

    • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      17 days ago

      Adobe acrobat is THE PDF editor. PDF is a proprietary format created and developed by Adobe. Any software that can edit PDFs is doing so in a format they do not have any control over. And there just aren’t any proper PDF editors that are feature complete. now if you’re an individual who needs to make a PDF in the privacy of your own home, by all means, use a cheap or free or FOSS application to do so. But if you need that PDF to be readable and useable and seamlessly compatible on other computers for other users for ever? Better pay the Adobe tax because there is a good chance, it won’t look the way you expect it to when someone opens it up in Adobe which their company definitely has.

      • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        I’m not sure this true - PDF is an open standard. The issue isn’t generally with layout and reproducibility - a good PDF maker and a good reader will give you an accurate representation of how it looks on all devices once the PDF is created.

        Certainly there isn’t a dedicated FOSS tool for make PDFs; Libre Office and Inkscape do a decent job but not perfect which may be what you’re referring to. And they’re not dedicated PDF makers plus the real problem is building fillable forms and signature tools.

        But there is a proprietary alternative called Master PDF that is a dedicated and supports all the PDF standard features I believe; one perpetual license is $80 compared to Adobe subscription based charging. I’m not aware of other options myself but they may exist. But it’s a viable alternative to the “adobe tax”.

        Also of course if you have Office 365 from Microsoft, you can use Word to export docs to PDF reliably (in my experience). Obviously as far as you can get from FOSS, but it is an option on Linux via web browser if you have it from work for example; at least you don’t have to pay Adobe but it’s scraping the bottom of the barrel for this threat I know!

      • tehn00bi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 days ago

        There are a few other PDF editors that are cheaper, but they don’t have the same features. PDF seems like something that has outlived its purpose. There has to be other document formats that provide a similar or better experience and prevents alteration.

        • whereisk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          PowerPDF or Kofax or whatever it’s called now was very close to parity if not exceed functionality for most office jobs.

        • huppakee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          should be? yes. could be? if one of the big corpo’s with money decides to spend it, yes. But don’t assume ‘there has to be one’, it’s not like file formats suddenly appear like a rare insect or something.

        • floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          Any document format could prevent alteration with the addition of a digital signature.

      • Bouzou@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        I don’t know how it stacks up price-wise, but I’d argue Bluebeam is a far superior PDF editing program. It even covers some word processing, Illustrator, and some PowerPoint adjacent things.

        That being said, I can’t see it as practical for the average consumer.

      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        it won’t look the way you expect it to when someone opens it up in Adobe which their company definitely has.

        That sounds like a problem between them and Adobe tbh

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        Building off of this, the PDF standard supports all sorts of craziness. It can have embedded math and logic similar to excel files, to the point there’s templates available for banks which will automatically calculate entire loans (including weird ones like balloon mortgages and variable interest rate stuff) without leaving Adobe Reader, and the recent Doom PDF and Linux PDF projects exploit the fact that pdfs support embedded javascript.

        There’s also an actual market for enterprise PDF templates like the banking ones I described with automatic calculations and whatnot. So some people literally make their living selling PDFs to businesses that businesses actually use

      • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        not true. dont oay adobe so more pdfs will look like the user intended. dont fall adobe scams like weird functions that should be in a pdf anyways. pdfs created with masterpdfeditor look exactly as intended. so, again: no, adobe is a scam. always has been.

        • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          Funny, it’s been less than 24hrs and I got a ticket in complaining about why PDFs look one way in Ease US PDF editor and totally different in Adobe Reader. You’re just wrong. I didn’t say it was worth the money to pay for Adobe, and I didn’t say it wasn’t a scam. But I do tell the truth when it comes to true parity, there are competitors to PDF editing but there is no free PDF editors that properly do the job 100% of the time.

          • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            i do not know what “ease US PDF editor” is and dont care. there are plenty of broken editors. i am saying you are wrong to think only adobe scamware can create pdfs that look as intended in the reader.

    • kandoh@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      In Acrobat I can go into print preview and see what my file will print like using only black and a spot color ink, I can auto-convert RGB images to CMYK, and it has a pretty robust set of accessibility features so the visually impaired can read it.

      It’s for professionals.

  • Baguette@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    17 days ago

    Neat list, but imo photoshop is closer to being called a photomanipulation/image editor than photography. lightroom is the more dedicated photography software.

    Also I wouldn’t call paint.net an alternative to photoshop. I love paint.net but its a relatively simple image editor and its functionally limited even with plugins.

    • Bouzou@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      Yes, that was my first question: what about Photoshop as an image editor? What is a comparable replacement for that?

  • anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    17 days ago

    Just a small thing, but as of the latest release Inkscape has a functioning live-trace tool

    It was one of the biggest things keeping me using illustrator but I used inkscape’s trace yesterday and it worked great

      • anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        17 days ago

        It’s a tool that helps ‘trace’ a raster image into vector shapes and paths

        it’s useful for creating vector artwork from raster images - sometimes a logo or icon is only available in a poor resolution raster image, and so having an easy way to convert it into vector saves a ton of time.

        I used it yesterday to create an SVG file for CNC plotting of a company logo. It would have taken me a few hours to hand-trace it myself

        • Tattorack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          17 days ago

          I sometimes get commissioned to make a logo here and there. This would come in very handy.

        • marzhall@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          Oh jeeze, that’s been around as a plugin in inkscape since at least 2011, I remember vectorizing an episode poster from Adventure Time using it. But I’d believe it wasn’t quite as good as whatever photoshop had. I used the “never learn photoshop” trick to be happy with what I’ve got, but then I only edit images for fun.

    • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 days ago

      How much time have you put into Inkscape now? I’m hankering for some reviews from people who are also refugees from the Adobe ecosystem.

      • anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        I don’t use it regularly enough to weigh in comprehensively- I use it mostly for processing svg drawings created in other programs for cnc plotting, or for compiling svg drawings onto standardized layouts for sending to a printer

        My only complaint with inkscape is that it’s a bit slow with rendering complex shapes/canvases with many points, but otherwise it does everything I need from a vector program.

        • dantheclamman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          17 days ago

          The CNC plug in is so useful! I also made my wedding save the dates in it and some figures for a scientific manuscript: worked great.

  • OmgItBurns@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    17 days ago

    Dreamweaver is still used? I used it a bit back in the day when Macromedia was around and shortly after Adobe got a hold of it. How does it work with the modern web? Does it work well with modern programming languages or is it still just a WYSIWYG HTML editor?

    • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      17 days ago

      I used it briefly in a class around 2015ish. It worked about as well as any Adobe software does, but honestly it was really difficult to use and quite frankly it probably would take just as long to learn the HTML and CSS skills necessary to make a decent website as it would to learn how to make one in Dreamweaver

  • kn0wmad1c@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    17 days ago

    Just started using reaper, coming over from audition and it’s so similar I didn’t have to re-learn anything.

    • AstralPath@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      17 days ago

      REAPER rules. I started on ProTools in 2010. Ditched it for Reaper in 2012 and never looked back. Best $60 I ever spent. I’ve gladly bought multiple licenses for my devices over the years.

      • jake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        REAPER is absolutely one of the best pieces of software out there. I’ve been using it too since maybe 2009, though not so much in the last few years (not moved to an alternative, I’m just not doing so much audio these days).

        I love the business model, the development cycle, etc. and even though it’s not open source it kinda has a similar community feeling. Every bit as feature-filled and capable as any of the industry standards.

  • TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    GIMP is unfortunately not a good competitor, the UX/UI is atrocious, and that’s after spending 25 years using it now… I switched to Krita for most things at this point. GIMP needs some sort of revamp.

      • TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 days ago

        I see two new features that look fantastic, but the rest of the UI seems likely unchanged. I’ll definitely give it a shot though.

    • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      Seriously, gimp is barely usable for anything, they need to put the damn thing our of our misery.

      And it spawned gtk, which is yet another monument to software masochism.

      Will give krita a shot, this shouldn’t be that hard.

        • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          Affinity being prosumer puts it perfectly. If you only work on your own on smaller projects it does everything it needs to do but as soon as you work with other people professionally and have to share files? There‘s sadly no alternative for Adobe whatsoever. I am very happy with Affinity 2 but it‘s not a standard in the industry.

          Personally I can not recommend using Adobe‘s AI features at the moment. I had to work on completely AI generated images for difficult customers and I assure you it was anything but pleasant. In the end it would‘ve been cheaper, faster and give far better results to use a stock image and edit it traditionally than being told to fix this and that with endless prompting.

    • Nyticus@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 days ago

      But that’s what makes GIMP special. There’s some users who feel that Photoshop has stopped being relevant for some uses among those users. GIMP may be a decade behind but it could be swimming in what people remembered best about Photoshop before its enshittification and retains that kind of nature.

    • Ziglin (it/they)@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      I keep hearing this but having never really used Photoshop myself. What are all the missing features?

      I’m not a professional but there hasn’t been anything that I wanted to do in GIMP that I couldn’t do because of its limitations and with GIMP 3.0 having non destructive editing I have no complaints other than the sometimes janky UI.

        • Ziglin (it/they)@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Being told that I don’t have them doesn’t help me understand the issues professionals have with GIMP. I’ve heard a lot of hobbists say the same thing only to list a few features that GIMP already has and then give up because they don’t actually care enough to try it for more than 5min.

          I’m curious whether some professionals are the same. I suspect that some will and likely more won’t but if nobody can give examples it feels weird to be arguing about it.

          So if you are a professional I’d be curious to hear more.

    • IcyToes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      17 days ago

      Enshitification by owners of Audacity including telemetry. They eventually backed down, but that was after Tenacity forked off it and people started using and improving it.

        • Alk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          I can’t press the record button without it crashing and it fails to see half of my audio inputs, so I’d say not great.

          • Aphelion@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            17 days ago

            The sad reality of audio software has been that usually the paid commercial software is better and more reliable. I’ve used Audacity alot for work, and it gets it the job done, but tools like iZotope RX are light years beyond in features and UI/UX.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        Don’t know if you can call this “enshittification” as that implies it got progressively worse. It was bought out by a corporation and immediately turned to shit while also being neglected.

  • peregrin5@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    The Affinity Suite is so worth it. Pay a single time and get all the apps on all major OSes instead of the stupid subscription bullshit Adobe tries to lock you into.