Wow people are still putting up with Linux! I used it for years but got tired of a lack of "workable" software.
I used to use UNIX and then Solaris at work. I recently had to install Windows Subsystem for Linux. Ugh, ugh again. Very cumbersome compared with easy-peasy Windows point/click/drag/drop operations.Wow people are still putting up with Linux! I used it for years but got tired of a lack of "workable" software.
And programs like GIMP and Scribus are very capable. Both of these programs use Little CMS for color management. ArgyllCMS can also be used for various aspects of color management work, including building custom scanner profiles with IT8 or HCT targets for use with scanning software.
But not Photoshop or Lightroom.
I have yet to find any need for Photoshop over GIMP.
Photoshop has:
* Dynamic adjustment layers
* CMYK color space
* Channel separations with user-adjustable channels (e.g. for spot colors)
* 'Live' sampling tools for color matching (place pipette in image and get a live readout as you twist curves etc)
* PostScript awareness
GIMP has none of that and no usable substitutes for them, either.
I have no/little interest in content-aware/AI-assisted fill, heal & expansion, but Adobe is way ahead in that area as well.
Then there's the user interface issue with Adobe's UI just being more streamlined, intuitive and effective.
Just a couple of things that come to mind as a daily user of GIMP. GIMP is really nice, don't get me wrong, but it seems it'll always keep dragging several years behind Adobe.
It's been ages since I attempted scanning under Linux; back when I did, Sane was in its infancy and support for film scanners was basically absent. I think I got my 4990 flatbed to scan reflective media (with very, very rudimentary scan settings), but no way it would engage the transparency unit. My Minolta scanner remained totally unrecognized by the software altogether. Hopefully all this has changed by now...
I don't really see the need for working in CMYK with photographs in an image editor
This is purely subjective.
As you said, it really depends on what you do with it.
I bumped into the limitations of GIMP pretty hard when trying to do color separations for alt. process printing. The same with trying to leverage PS capability of a printer to coax halftone screen negatives from it.
Photoshop has:
* Dynamic adjustment layers
* CMYK color space
* Channel separations with user-adjustable channels (e.g. for spot colors)
* 'Live' sampling tools for color matching (place pipette in image and get a live readout as you twist curves etc)
* PostScript awareness
GIMP has none of that and no usable substitutes for them, either.
I have no/little interest in content-aware/AI-assisted fill, heal & expansion, but Adobe is way ahead in that area as well.
Then there's the user interface issue with Adobe's UI just being more streamlined, intuitive and effective.
By the way, with this in mind, GIMP can preview RGB images for CMYK printing with the soft-proofing capabilities of its color management system.
And this is before you even touch on all the third party plugins and filters available for PS.
Yes, I use this function frequently. It's one of the areas in which GIMP has improved significantly over the years. Its soft-proofing capabilities are effective. However, this is unrelated to the ability to make separations etc.
The CMYK conversion will happen in the desktop publishing software or at the printer.
My application is/was a rather arcane one
That's the common way to do it in a desktop situation, yes.
It's different when you're actually printing spot colors; there are obviously color RIPs for this in the printing industry, but Photoshop can do it in a pinch, too, which can probably save tens of thousands of dollars in a highly specific software license if you want to explore, say, CMYK gum or carbon transfer. Unfortunately, GIMP only has rudimentary functionality in this area; there's a separations plugin that can do CMY and CMYK, but it's not configurable and the most crucial functions are not configurable.
My application is/was a rather arcane one, but I have to be honest in that over the years, I've bumped my head over and over again on the limitations of GIMP. I still use it and it's evidently great value (free, after all!), though.
Wow people are still putting up with Linux! I used it for years but got tired of a lack of "workable" software.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?