this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
945 points (99.7% liked)

Open Source

34730 readers
1243 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 196 points 1 day ago (88 children)

Man, after decades, why does GIMP still have a marketing problem?

Just visit https://www.gimp.org/ and compare it to https://www.adobe.com/ca/products/photoshop.html

Just assume both did exactly the same thing and cost the exact same amount (free or otherwise). Which would you choose based on their website?

Why does GIMP (and pretty much all FOSS) have to be so secretive about their product? Why no screenshots? Why not showcase the software on their website?

It's so damn frustrating that every FOSS app appears to be command line software, or assumed that the user knows everything about it already.

Devs, you might have a killer piece of software, but screenshots go a long way to help with gaining interest and adoption.

[–] kaerypheur@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Hey, you look interested in becoming a marketing volunteer for GIMP. While GIMP is not as competitive in marketing as the others, you can help them if you want. 😎

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 5 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know man, I think the Photoshop homepage reeks of corpo crap, whereas the Gimp homepage does a good job at cleanly presenting the program in a quick way. Maybe I'm just used to FOSS, or already too allergic to corporate software, but going by the homepage design, my preference is obvious, there's not even a contest

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 hours ago

I think my point was missed. I wasn't saying that GIMP should copy what Adobe does (I can't stand Adobe and their β€œbusiness model” spyware bullshit.

My point was more to show that Adobe showcases the features of the software, so a potential user knows what it does without needing to go through the trouble of downloading it. It may not be what the user wants, and that's ok, at least they know!

But GIMP is so vague in their description and offers no insight to what the app does or looks like. There's no need to be mysterious.

[–] menemen@lemmy.ml 7 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, tastes are different, but I really did not like the photshop page design.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 4 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Taste aside, you can easily see what features Photoshop has, rather than guessing, right?

I should have used a FOSS example, since Adobe is just bad in general (users saying the page has pop-ups, etc.).

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 6 points 16 hours ago

The photoshop page doesn't even have a download link.

0/10 would not download.

[–] AuroraB@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 13 hours ago

the gimp one displays normally, while the adobe one shows a blank white page.

the choice is obvious

[–] Leeuk@feddit.uk 17 points 21 hours ago

Agree, however on clicking the photoshop link was first hit with 2 popups before I could see the page.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 68 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

Krita.org does a nice job of showing off their work and so does Blender

They're not flashy, but they definitely make me want to download them and check them out.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 4 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

How is Krita? I’m on a Mac and my biggest problem with Gimp and Inkscape has always been lack of MacOS integration. Mostly with the UI but even shortcuts were wrong when I tried it. And the mouse/trackpad gestures were the dealbreaker.

I use Pixelmator, which hopefully continues to be a well developed pay once app, even though Apple just bought them. That and Sketch get me all the design tools I need for 2D and web.

[–] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

How is Krita?

I fully converted all my workflows to Krita a long time again, its amazing

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 1 points 8 hours ago

I don't know about the Mac experience specifically but Krita was incredibly intuitive as someone who hasn't touched creative software in about 15 years. I downloaded it a couple of weeks ago, doodled a little, then remembered I suck at digital drawing and closed without saving

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 5 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Your first problem is you're using a Mac. But beyond the obvious trolling, Krita excels at painting and is getting better at text as well -so far text tools have left to be desired but they've been working on a revamp for some years now, probably coming rather soon. What I find lacking as a daily user (I do illustration in Krita, animation in Blender) is the general image manipulation tools. Transforming, snapping, transform masks... are often either lacking in flexibility or poorly performing. I use Affinity Publisher on the side for compositing my illustrations with text for print or web, I wouldn't be able to rely on just Krita for that. But for painting, it's absolutely fantastic -performance wise, usability-wise, the shortcuts are so well thought out it's a joy to use. It's really made with painting in mind. If you like using filters, they have a good G'mic integration with hundreds of builtin filters. I can't comment on their mac builds though, you'd have to try them yourself.

[–] Broken@lemmy.ml 1 points 13 hours ago

Have you checked out Affinity? They support Mac and iPad, and are comparable with the core Adobe suite. Its a buy once scenario (per major version release). My only problem is they don't support Linux.

Of note, they were purchased last year by Canva, but it has been stated they will keep the Affinity products separate for purchase.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (80 replies)