• StrawberryPigtails@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    27·
    1 month ago

    Sure… I can. But why would I want to? The open source options are better in almost every use case. Adobe hasn’t had a compelling product for my use cases in decades.

    Giving Adobe the middle finger isn’t worth putting up with their malware.

    • sanzky@beehaw.orgEnglish
      8·
      1 month ago

      it’s been a while since Adobe moved from standalone projects to what they call “content supply chain” they have no interest in competing at individual product level. if you only need photoshop, there are tons of better alternatives. they only become irreplaceable if you are in the enterprise level and need things like collaboration, project management, cloud storage, auditing, governance, etc (ie. creative cloud + workfront + their AEM DAM offering).

      I do consulting in Adobe products and every year their products are shittier but they still are indispensible due to inertia and integrated ecosystem

    • skribe@piefed.socialEnglish
      2·
      1 month ago

      I mostly agree. The only Adobe product I miss is After Effects. I haven’t found anything that scratches that itch.

      I use Blender (and others), but it’s not ideal for 2.5D effects.

    • Iunnrais@piefed.socialEnglish
      11·
      1 month ago

      I don’t know. With the exception of a single feature, I’ve found photoshop better to use than GIMP. The one feature exception is GIMP’s wonderful “color to alpha” feature, and I always keep a gimp install around just for it.

      Photoshop just seems easier to use, and more robust? With nicer effects, better filters, etc etc? At least for the features I tend to use. I’m not a professional by any means, but I tweak and composite and blend images a fair bit for my various hobbies (mostly ttrpgs).

    • DdCno1@beehaw.orgEnglish
      54·
      1 month ago

      Let’s be realistic. None of the FOSS alternatives come even close to Photoshop. Gimp has never been a good piece of software. Not to mention, if you’re doing commercial work, you need the original software to reliably work with clients and others.

        • nek0d3r@midwest.socialEnglish
          4·
          1 month ago

          One of the biggest feautures missing for professionals is CMYK color space. There are some workarounds found, but it’s not at the same level of Adobe and certainly not built for it.

          I switched to FOSS everything and I still miss a lot of stuff even if I’ll never touch Adobe again. Everything is so much harder to use and that was a sacrifice I chose to make for the sake of software freedom

        • therealdries@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          21·
          1 month ago

          In the case of GIMP it’s an interface that makes any kind of sense. Have to admit that Inkscape is looking pretty damn good these days - even though it’s not really a replacement for Illustrator and is more a good replacement for progs like Freehand and Coreldraw.

          • dudesss@lemmy.caEnglish
            1·
            1 month ago

            That’s how I felt it that its more the interface than functionality. Although I’ve never checked and compared with PhotoGimp

              • DdCno1@beehaw.orgEnglish
                1·
                1 month ago

                The latest flavor of trying to fix Gimp’s UI by modifying it to look like Photoshop. These go back decades and usually end up being abandoned after a few years.

                https://github.com/Diolinux/PhotoGIMP

                The whole premise is flawed. Gimp should be a viable program on its own, by having a UI that actually makes sense and not by copying the market leader, because this will always mean playing catch-up, it will always mean being seen as a lesser copy.