Photoshop express and splashup, does linux need regular photoshop anymore?

[madjr]

with new web apps like splashup
http://www.splashup.com/tour/

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2299/2385119517_1c969e7a83.jpg


the new photoshop express.

http://www.photoshopsupport.com/photoshop-express/free-photoshop-express/photoshop-express-screen1.jpg

and all other native linux apps:

Gimp, krita, pixel, etc.

does linux really need photoshop ?

Is domination coming to an end? or will it evolve to the web?

if you're a pro graphic designer who has migrated to ubuntu, do you really need photoshop?

would you pay for a linux version or you're happy with the free alternatives?

[maybeway36]

Regular Photoshop still has more features integrated more elegantly than anything else, IMO.

[klange]

Personally, I will never leave my good ol' Photoshop 7. I use GIMP for quick things, but Photoshop is still more powerful - and far more powerful the new web apps.

[mrgnash]

With GIMP and Inkscape, I don't want or need Photoshop.

[GMU_DodgyHodgy]

For what I need - the open source apps do fine. However, as a general rule I would prefer that more closed source applications that do provide funcitonality would be ported to Linux (e.g., Pixel). I think it would speed the adoption of Linux.

While the Linux platform provides most of the apps I need out of the box - there are some apps I would love to have in Linux and would pay for. For example, I really good iMovie/Windows Movie Maker replacement that is stable and feature rich.

More choices = better for everyone.

[madjr]

For what I need - the open source apps do fine. However, as a general rule I would prefer that more closed source applications that do provide funcitonality would be ported to Linux (e.g., Pixel). I think it would speed the adoption of Linux.

While the Linux platform provides most of the apps I need out of the box - there are some apps I would love to have in Linux and would pay for. For example, I really good iMovie/Windows Movie Maker replacement that is stable and feature rich.

More choices = better for everyone.

haven't you tried Kdevline ?

[DirtDawg]

Professionals still need Photoshop, yes. If for no other reason than Gimp's lack of CMYK support, which is a really, really big deal. Gimp is great for web design and I like it better than Photoshop. It runs faster and I think the layout is nicer(yes, that's right. I think Gimp's layout is more efficiant than Photoshop's), but without CMYK support, I'll need a WIndows partition around for Photoshop.

Also, Gimp lacks "feathered" paint bucket which drives me crrraaaaaaaaaazy!

Long live Gimp!

[Foster Grant]

There are some cludges out there for CMYK support, but I can't say I'm impressed so far. What really hurts The GIMP is its execrable interface.

Which is too bad. The other various publishing tools on Linux — and here I'm including CinePaint, Inkscape and Scribus (especially Scribus) — have almost matured to the point that a freelance graphic designer could have his or her entire workflow (and billing, thanks to Gnumoney) in free-as-in-no-money open-source software. Buy an inexpensive modern PC (even a laptop) and install Linux rather than dropping a couple grand on a Mac and then another grand on Adobe Creative Suite.

Photoshop Express is not worth talking about at this point, and possibly never. I am not pleased with the license terms. I'm not sure what the license terms are for Splashup.

Honestly, web apps ... I don't trust 'em. I prefer to run trusted binaries on my computer rather than take a chance on remote code.

[igknighted]

Regular Photoshop still has more features integrated more elegantly than anything else, IMO.

True... but the question isn't whether photoshop is better, the question is if Photoshop is enough better to justify the cost, as well as overcome the philosophical/political reasons to choose a free (as in speech) software alternative.

Voted no because I would never pay $900 for any software that wasn't a direct business expense.

[fktt]

what if i need to paint a 4K x 4K HDR texture? cinepaint is currently the only option afaik. :(

[handy]

Does anyone know what the versions after Photoshop 7 have going for them?

Adobe must have come up with something to get the pro's to upgrade.

[bailout]

Professionals still need Photoshop, yes. If for no other reason than Gimp's lack of CMYK support, which is a really, really big deal.

Have you tried krita? I think it has cmyk support, as well as 16bit editing. Not really a user myself so not sure whether it will fit your needs in other ways as I don't really know how it compares to gimp.

[daverich]

Have you tried krita? I think it has cmyk support, as well as 16bit editing. Not really a user myself so not sure whether it will fit your needs in other ways as I don't really know how it compares to gimp.

hey that looks interesting.

but,- it's all open source right,- so CMYK support in Krita,- could be moved over to gimp by someone with the knowledge?

CMYK is also massively important to me.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[Dixon Bainbridge]

Photoshop is overkill for most users. It's became the de facto choice for most people, but the fact is, its not necessary. I'm an avid photographer and I now spend more time in Raw Studio and Lightroom than I do in Photoshop. There are plenty of alternatives out there to suit your needs, most of them less arcane than Photoshop.

[3rdalbum]

There is nothing wrong with The Gimp's interface. It is very close to Photoshop on the Macintosh. The only thing that hurts it is the lack of Application-level window management in Metacity. If you don't understand what I mean by that, take a look at Metacity's gconf settings.

[jespdj]

The online version of Photoshop is nice for simple things, but I'm not going to upload hundreds of 13 MB RAW files from my camera, probably the live version doesn't even work with RAW files. So the online PS isn't suitable for what I do with Photoshop CS3.

For what I need - the open source apps do fine. However, as a general rule I would prefer that more closed source applications that do provide funcitonality would be ported to Linux (e.g., Pixel). I think it would speed the adoption of Linux.

While the Linux platform provides most of the apps I need out of the box - there are some apps I would love to have in Linux and would pay for. For example, I really good iMovie/Windows Movie Maker replacement that is stable and feature rich.

More choices = better for everyone.

haven't you tried Kdevline ?
You mean Kdenlive (http://www.kdenlive.org/) (not Kdevline: swap the v and n).

[bailout]

hey that looks interesting.

but,- it's all open source right,- so CMYK support in Krita,- could be moved over to gimp by someone with the knowledge?

CMYK is also massively important to me.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

I don't think it is that easy. Krita is much newer and I remember seeing a post by one of the developers saying it was easier for them to start from scratch with cmyk,16-bit etc than it would be to add these things to gimp. I know 16-bit and cmyk has been talked about in gimp for years but they still haven't managed it.

http://www.koffice.org/krita/

[Foster Grant]

There is nothing wrong with The Gimp's interface. It is very close to Photoshop on the Macintosh.

Non-factual statement. Menus belong in one place, not in two. Form should follow function. The GIMP and CinePaint break that cardinal rule.