this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
227 points (91.3% liked)

Linux

48397 readers
920 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm starting this off by saying that I'm looking for any type of reasonably advanced photo manipulation tool, that runs natively under Linux. It doesn't have to be FOSS.

I switched to Linux, from Windows, about three years ago. I don't regret the decision whatsoever. However, one thing that has not gotten me away from Windows entirely, is the severe lack of photo editing tools.

So what's available? Well, you have GIMP. And then there's Krita, but that's more of a drawing software. And then...

Well that's it. As far as I know.

1. GIMP

Now, as someone migrating from Photoshop, GIMP was incredibly frustrating, and I didn't understand anything even after a few weeks of trying to get into it. Development seemed really slow, too. It's far from intuitive, and things that really should take a few steps, seemingly takes twenty (like wrapping text on a path? Should that really be that difficult?).

I would assume if you're starting off with GIMP, having never touched Photoshop, then it'd be no issue. But as a user migrating, I really can't find myself spending months upon months to learn this program. It's not viable for me.

No hate against GIMP, I'm sure it works wonders for those who have managed to learn it. But I can't see myself using it, and I don't find myself comfortable within it, as someone migrating from Photoshop.

2. Krita

Krita, on the other hand, I like much more. But, it's more of a drawing program. Its development is more focused on drawing, and It's missing some features that I want - namely selection tools. Filters are good, but I find G'MIC really slow. It also really chugs when working with large files.

Both of these programs are FOSS. I like that. I like FOSS software. But, apart from that, are there really no good alternatives to Photoshop? Again, doesn't need to be FOSS. I understand more complex programs take more development power, and I have no problem using something even paid and proprietary, as long as it runs on Linux natively.

I've tried running Photoshop under WINE, and it works - barely. For quick edits, it might work fine. But not for the work I do.

So I raise the question again. Are there no good alternatives to Photoshop? And then I raise a follow-up question, that you may or may not want to answer: If not, why?

Thanks in advance!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CarlosCheddar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Is there no way to run PS on Wine? Seems like that would be a compromise but I’ve never tried it.

[–] xenspidey@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Adobe software, at least semi modern versions do not work through wine. At least last i checked a few months ago

[–] BitingChaos@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Of all the design decisions in GIMP that seem to make it so weird or different to someone coming from Photoshop, Adobe has put in 2X the amount of design choices into their software simply to try to thwart piracy.

The amount of stupid libraries and processes it loads and "requires" to run is just crazy.

A lot of it became apparent when Apple dropped 64-bit support a few years back.

Developers had a decade to update everything to 64-bit. All the fancy (and expensive) Adobe apps were 64-bit, but all their licensing dependencies and anti-piracy libraries were strangely still 32-bit.

People with legit copies couldn't run anything after upgrading macOS. Only those with cracked/pirated versions (that didn't load the 32-bit libraries) could actually use the software.

I have no doubt that the mess of libraries and copy protection that Adobe "requires" would prevent their software from working under WINE.

load more comments (4 replies)