Which Is Better: GIMP Versus Photoshop?
I am not an Ex-Adobe Photoshop user; however, I’ll say this, Adobe Photoshop can be quite expensive. I’d really like to update for the fact that all my work is done using Adobe Photoshop Version 6.0 and I know that is old. Quite honestly, I love Adobe Photoshop and the reason why I am considering updating is the fact that the version I use is old.
But what about GIMP? I hear that Gimp is the free alternative to Adobe Photoshop? I downloaded it for Windows, and played around with it for a bit and decided to blog about it and ask for advice from my readers. Who out there uses GIMP and also has experience with Adobe Photoshop? Are these two program comparable?
After installing GIMP on my computer, I discovered that it kind of is similar to Adobe Photoshop, but I don’t know how to use it. I’ll have to invest time into teaching myself how to use GIMP just like I did with Adobe Photoshop.
Can I get the same out of GIMP as I do with Photoshop? Is it better to stay with Adobe Photoshop since I know how to use the program well? Is there a different product from Adobe that I should be using instead? How does GIMP compare?
I need a program that allows me to create graphics just like I have been doing in the past with Adobe Photoshop 6.0. What do you recommend?
Popularity: 31% [?]
30 comments
I tried Gimp but was unable to get used to the interface. Perhaps I just need more practice.
Even then, I do not think Gimp is up to Photoshop’s level. Photoshop is extremely stable, and Adobe seems to always come out with some new tool that you never know how you went without before. If your running 6.0 you are going to be amazed with CS.
One option if money is tight and you need Photoshop compatibility is Elements. If you can live without curves and 16 bit color along with a few other things.
Money isn’t too much of a concern. I’ll take a free program over an expensive one any day. But… only if the quality is the same or better. I have no problems investing money into Adobe CS if that is what I need.
My concerns are also TIME. Time is money… I don’t want to invest time into learning how to use GIMP if the end result will be graphics of lesser quality. If GIMP can do the same and learning is smooth, I am interested.
If Adobe CS should be a seamless transition from Adobe Photoshop 6, I am very open to that option as well.
GIMP is only acceptable IF money is a huge problem. Since it isn’t for you, buy Photoshop. GIMP has such an awkward interface… especially if you come from a photoshop background. I hate GIMP with a passion… just because nothing is where it’s supposed to be…
Functionally it’s a fine alternative for most people. But from an interface standpoint, ugh. In your case though, I’d say stick with version 6. No real reason to upgrade in my eyes.
Really? Man I appreciate your insight on that. I really love Adobe Photoshop 6, but felt like I was limiting myself by using it because it is older.
I really do appreciate your insight on GIMP. Yes, I have to agree, right out of the gate I was shocked… and amazes at the interface. Very strange… I could eventually adapt, but I am only willing to do that if it will prove to be more beneficial in the long run.
Here is the key so far: I know how to use PhotoShop, I don’t claim to be an expert, but I think my graphics are better than the average self taught blogger. Enough so that I provide a paid service and people are very happy with the graphics I make for them.
Is Adobe Photoshop 6 even still available? The real issue at hand is the fact that I need to install it on a new notebook and I lost my original Adobe install CD ROM. LOL!!!
GIMP is not of the same quality. If money is really a problem, a little searching and you could obtain a photoshop cs for the same price as GIMP if you know what I mean.
Thanks Jared,
But the once time of thinking it was cool to get pirated software are over the Internet has died on the vine for me. I never was really into it for the purpose of theft, more for the challenge of being able to attain software for free. Some people feel like they are special because they were able to figure out how to download software and then attain license numbers or serial numbers.
Since then, I feel that it is wrong to do so and don’t do it anymore. In fact, I have made it an effort to purchase a copy of every piece of pirated software that I have downloaded in the past.
People can’t go to Best Buy and walk out of the store without paying for software and the same applies on the Internet. Either pay for software that cost money, or go open source. Don’t be a crook.
Adobe Photoshop just plain rocks. I have been using before I was even on the internet and that’s been since the mid 90s.
I gave GIMP a download and a look and quickly decided to stick with Photoshop as I had already spent hundreds of hours with it and wasn’t about to invest a bunch of time using GIMP.
Another program I would recommend if price is the issue. PaintShop Pro. I think it is still very affordable. I have two friends that use that and I have used it myself. I has a lot of Photoshop qualities and it’s in the price range more people can reach.
My vote is for PHOTOHSOP and Version 6 is fine for me, for now. It does more than I will ever need.
This is one of tehem comments that won’t help very much but….. In my past life as a digital retoucher / graphic designer for large format print and exhibition (phew almost forgot about that life!), I used to use Photoshop. However there was a guy there who really was the best. He used to retouch slides wityha magnifying glass and a horse hair brush. Malcom, as he was called, gave me many talks on the advantages of Gimp. He told me memory usage was far more efficient, meaning you cna work on larger files more quickly and that the options for retouching beat anything else available.
I still have not tried it as I thought it was solely a linux / unix program. However I recently saw that it is available on all platforms these days so will have to download it and give it a test run.
For sure… and one thing that points out is you mentioned system resources. Adobe Photoshop does run quite heavy on my system resources while GIMP doesn’t appear to do so. I still haven’t had much time to use GIMP.
I’ve looked at Gimp a couple of times, but the interface just doesn’t seem that good. However, in terms of freeware, I do use Paint.net which is another good simple paint package, has anyone here has tried that?
The GIMP can do decent web graphics. There is an alternative GIMP install called GIMPShop (http://www.gimpshop.com/) that helps to make the GIMP interface on Windows more like Photoshop. Take a look at that version since it can make GIMP a lot easier to use if you are used to Photoshop. Personally I only use the GIMP when I have to and if money is not a problem buy Photoshop. It has a lot of great features in the new versions.
First, a bit about me. I’m a student and have taken several computer art classes focused around photoshop (though my major does not involve either graphics or computers.) Using Linux exclusively at home, I decided to start trying gimp as an alternative, but was a bit wary at first due to the number of complaints I have read regarding how difficult gimp supposedly was to use, and how it was not as feature complete as photoshop. Shortly after playing around with gimp… I’ve gotta say I am very very impressed.
Okay… 95% of the complaints here are about the gimp interface. This is the most sorry excuse to not use a piece of software I have ever heard! “Zomg… but the buttons are in different places!!1″… cry me a river.
First of all, the fact that gimp isn’t confined to a single window makes it vastly superior for multi-monitor workspaces, as well as making it much more customizable, and work better across platforms, desktop environments, widget toolkits, etc.
Secondly, the interface is not thaaaat different from photoshop. And the ways in which it is different are great! In gimp, each of the component dialogs (history, navigator, layers, etc) are completely modular, and can be created and arranged at will in any number of either isolated or connected windows, and also can be tabbed. This was not introduced into photoshop until CS afaik, and still isn’t as versatile as Gimp’s layout configuration. These modules are remarkably similar to photoshop. Things like paths, layers, channels, navagator, history, etc… they are all there, and are all very comparable to photoshop. If arranged correctly, the gimp interface can be made identical to that of photoshop (if you for some reason really want it to be).
One thing that impressed me right away was the fact that by default the color palate itself is in a tabbed module. No opening a separate window every time you want to adjust a foreground or background color.
The one thing that is different, but which shouldn’t take more than an hour of tinkering to figure out, is the names of the tools and their positions. (we’re talking ONE single panel of controls here… its not that tough folks.) I found it to be very intuitive. Healing brush = Healing tool. Clone stamp? clone tool. Lasso = free select. Seriously… you would have to be a complete moron to not immediately understand what these things do just by mousing over them and reading the caption. Even the icons resemble the tools purpose.
One thing about gimp that I generally find superior to photoshop is in making selections. For example: photoshop has several tools for creating/modifying paths. Usually when trying to draw a complex path involving many curves, you must first draw the rough outline of the path, then switch back and fourth between several tools to add/remove paths and adjust curves. In gimp, all of this is done with a single tool, and all of the options for that tool make much more sense than they do in photoshop. When you drag a handle from a curve in gimp, it doesn’t create both sides at once (so you usually end up having to drag one back to the middle, which isn’t exact, and can cause confusion), but rather you can create them independently. Other selection tools are better as well, such as the scissors select tool (equivalent to magnetic lasso). magnetic lasso is practically unusable in photoshop unless you are dealing with basic shapes with high contrast to a background. Gimp more intelligently creates nodes along the selection, and those paths can be dragged and altered in real time in much the same way as path nodes can. (and of course, you can switch between paths & selections just as in photoshop.) Gimp also uses “modes” for replacing, adding to, or subtracting from a selection. You just click a button, and it will always add or subtract. This is way better than having to hold down a hotkey and not remember to let up on it and lose part of your selection. Theres also quickmask & other such nifty things you’d expect.
And thats just selections… Now, i’m not saying that gimp has everything photoshop does. But by that same token, I wouldn’t say photoshop has everything that gimp has, or that it does everything as well as gimp can. There may be a few very advanced features that are implemented in one but not the other, and visa versa, but I am quite confident that all of the fundamentals are there, and that gimp has everything that is needed for a serious graphic designer.
AND! on top of all of this: Gimp is free in both terms of freedom and beer! That alone to me is more than worth a few technical concerns. When using proprietary software, when you run into a bug, something thats not implemented, or some other software conflict… you’ve generally hit a wall and theres nothing you can do but complain to customer service staff that do not care about your problem, and cannot fix your problem. Free software allows you the ability to jump on IRC and talk directly to the developers if you need to. (yes, some of us actually sit on IRC and answer questions.) You get great documentation, community support that is way better than commercial support in most cases, and source code access.
In conclusion, I wouldn’t listen to these folks who installed gimp for 5 minues, 5 years ago, and gave up immediately. Actually use it for a few projects and see what it can do. If theres someone out there who is more intimately familiar with both gimp and photoshop (not a 5 year old version either…), and can offer better insight than I can, feel free! Also, as was mentioned… theres gimpshop. I’m not sure how heavily developed it is though. I’d try the regular gimp first.
I agree with Smorg. Compared to Photoshop 6, GIMP rules the school, but compared to CS3, while very expensive it wins by a *few* points. Use GIMP.
I’m a software developer and designer, among other things. I’ve been using Photoshop for almost fifteen years, since version 3.0, and GIMP for the last year.
GIMP is for people who want power. Real power. Photoshop is for people who want convenience, sort of, as long as they’re doing things they’ve done for years, and don’t have to do anything new or very complicated.
Photoshop can’t be scripted, and the blunt, rudimentary command-line tools it offers are not nearly so powerful as GIMP’s Scheme interfacing. Translation: if you have a lot of photos to edit, Photoshop won’t help you much unless you pay a huge amount for server editions of custom-built software, whereas GIMP can do it out of the box. Photoshop is more closed-source than most bank vaults, so it’s almost impossible to build your own module or find a module that does what you want it to if Adobe hasn’t built it yet; whereas, if somebody hasn’t built a plugin to do a particular thing in GIMP (and, since everybody’s free to, there are a lot more) you can build your own. GIMP can read and write almost every image format imaginable, whereas Photoshop tends to be proprietary and to drive your saved files through a hole the wall in order to keep you from using them in any other program. Photoshop has some real problems with actual rendering if you’re on the PC version (can’t speak to the Mac version, I’m not as familiar) whereas GIMP has improved light-years over the last few years, and, so far as I can tell, is hugely more versatile when it comes to decoding the tags on tagged-image-format (.TIF) files.
In short, as far as the interface is concerned, Photoshop is crap. It offers very little power, very little scripting, very little optimization, and very little customization. All it offers is a slightly more pleasing splash-screen on startup; which, since Photoshop tends to take about three hours to start up on my machine, is a good thing.
There is one, and only one, drawback that GIMP has: its support of CKMY colorsets is somewhat limited. There are, however, several workarounds for this, because, as I’ve said, in GIMP, since anybody can fix, adjust, rebuild, or reconfigure anything they want to, people have already started working on patches and improvements. Photoshop development takes significantly longer. Closed-source software moves more slowly than mud through a sieve.
I should also mention the horrible mess that Adobe, a company which has made a huge amount of money from the low standards and lack of education common to most designers, has made of the portable document format. It had a lot of potential when it was originated, but Adobe has at turns been innovative and miserly, and the PDF associations with PostScript have been intentionally confused in order to keep the proprietary nature of the format profitable to the Adobe corporation. The last few updates tangled the web even further with idiotic schemes for linking portable documents with hidden web connections and secret notifications for authors and Microsoft-esque copyright protection that is as wasteful and inefficient as it is inept and utterly useless what it tries to do: prevent copying of documents. These mangled developments have not only made PDFs almost impossible to develop through Adobe’s own software; they’ve introduced whole levels of insecurity to the home user and layman, who has no idea if their PDF is trying to connect to the internet, and who is suddenly vulnerable to an unattended connection buried in a document that few can understand in the first place.
Adobe is finally getting the picture and opening up the source for the PDF format. It’s nice that we’re finally able to free ourselves from badly-designed memory-hogging programs like Acrobat and Photoshop with alternatives like Sumatra, GIMP, GhostScript, and others. In a year or so, Adobe had better improve its Acrobat interface drastically or risk losing a huge chunk of market share to developers who know how to write programs that people can actually use. I haven’t touched Acrobat in a good two years, and while that’s because I know some command-line stuff that’s infinitely faster and more powerful, it’s only a matter of time before somebody writes a GUI that blows Acrobat out of the water on the PDF front.
To sum up: Adobe Photoshop is pleasing to the eye, and, if you aren’t really dedicated to doing anything new or drastic to your images, and if the ‘hassle’ of learning a slightly different and much more powerful interface isn’t really worth it, you can do without the power and settle for Photoshop. I still don’t quite understand why people settle for $500 computer programs simply out of habit, but that’s their prerogative. It’s pretty clear to me that Photoshop is popular nowadays for the same reason that Microsoft Word is popular: it’s a crap program that costs too much, but everybody’s been using it for years, so it’s hard for them to stop. Not only is it good for your design work if you switch to GIMP; it’s good for design in general, because taking market share from Adobe encourages good design practices, opens software, and takes away the power of companies like Adobe who’ve been holding back the image-manipulation forefront for so many years.
The GIMP interface is actually very good, too. It’s just more powerful. But my wife always says that she hates Porsches because the struts are so stiff and the steering is so tight. Lots of designers are like my wife– they like the utter weakness that is Photoshop.
GIMP is scriptable, editable, customizable, portable, more versatile, more open, and just plain better. Photoshop is none of those things. GIMP simply offers more tools for the manipulation of images, and makes it easier to manage that manipulation.
For example, it takes about thirty seconds to increase the contrast on a hundred photos by 30% in GIMP. I don’t think there’s even a way to adjust the contrast on a hundred photos at once in Photoshop. I’ve seen some limited server-based custom versions of Photoshop that allow batching and scripting (at tremendous cost, of course) but none of them is really as powerful as GIMP’s ScriptFu module.
Photoshop is for designers who don’t like to learn. There are many. GIMP is for designers who want power.
Considering Gimp is absolutely free, it is fantastic.
Photoshop really does allow you to do some truly amazing things but you pay through the teeth for it.
I am hoping to start a free graphics course by email newsletter, very soon for un-experienced Blogger. It will be focusing on Free or very low cost software and aims to make better designers of all of us.
That would be way cool my friend… let me know when you get that going and I will gladly cover a post on GCDC telling my readers about it.
a few years back there was a comparable difference with a distinct advantage in favour of photoshop, PS will always be a great tool, however gimp has closed the gap and now has more features to boast. give it a try and fall in love with open source software!
I used gimp and photoshop before , i find both of them great.
But, if you knw how to use gimp or you are hardworking enough to learn the tutorial , you can do alot of great things too.Gimp does almost everything tht photoshop does. It can help ppl makeover, makeup , changes your eyes colour , hair colour , can download brushes and alot alot more. Also , there is also a wonderful liquify tool in gimp. So , if you can get it free and it’s something tht is as good as photoshop , why dont you just download it for free and give it a try. I tell you , it’s bravo. Also , gimp is easier to use and more user friendly. I tried both of them , and i knw gimp is good. I am using gimp now. Everything seems easier. But, photoshop is good too. Maybe, ppl can use both of thm , you will get a good outcome. (:
I just want to say thanks to Smorg and Jeff Johnston for giving such a complete breakdown of the advantages of GIMP. I have been on the fence for a while now, well on the fence is not really the correct term because I can’t even afford photoshop at the moment, but I have been reluctant to try out GIMP because I wasn’t sure it would be worth the learning curve required for an application that was inferior to the ‘real thing’. So anyway, thanks.
Smorg and Jeff are absolutely correct. In my PC days, I was a heavy “Paint Shop Pro” user which I would consider good training wheels for GIMP/PS. Now, I’m on a Mac with GIMP. A friend of mine has a Mac and bought photoshop. His skill level is that of someone self taught and he just manipulates his vacation photos and maybe adds text captions. For me, I pretty much do the same, as well as some personal graphics that I integrate into home videos, mess around with the layering, create personal greeting cards, or anything else I want manipulated.
I am probably using about 4% of that GIMP is truly capable of doing… and I’ll probably never know how wonderful the program really is. My friend with PS probably knows about 4% of its capability as well.
For anyone out there who is like me and just needs an awesome graphics program for personal projects – just get GIMP and save the $$.
Last year I jumped out of the MS boat and adoted Linux. It took me some time to adapt to GIMP, but now I feel totally confortable with that. PS is nice, but it is part of a money oriented, bloodsucker ideology. GIMP is another story. And it rocks!
I’ve been doing graphic design in Photoshop CS3 for a while now, but it has an issue that no one seems to be able to help with. Randomly it bands its gradients. If you do a google search it’s a common problem, and there’s no answer to those who ask for help. Why would I spend more money on this product? There’s no help from Adobe so they’ve lost me.
I searched the web and found your website where I took the time to read through all the comments and those who clearly had knowledge of GIMP swayed me to try it out. Already, in just a few hours, I’m starting to see how GIMP is just as flexible as photoshop but actually easier to use once you start to get a handle on the tools.
First thing I aimed to do was a gradient – and it was perfect. I opened up CS3 and replicated the exact colors – it was banded. Same colors. It was nothing to do with the monitor, with 8 bit/16 bit/32 bit settings, nothing to do with print proofing. It’s just simply a bug with no apparent solution but a reinstall. Done that before, not doing that again.
I like Photoshop but I regret buying it because I love working with gradients and so now it’s virtually useless to me. I’ll be persevering with learning GIMP from now on – already I’ve found some key tools that I wish photoshop had but doesn’t that make my life easier.
My next thing is to see if GIMP can replicate Photoshop’s layer styles easily. It doesn’t appear to be able to at first glance. I’ll do a search on the web on this because if it does have the ability to perform layer styles then I’m sold for life on GIMP.
Note: There is apparently a plugin that emulates layer styles. If it does, I’ll be donating to the open source project for sure.
Well I’ve been using Photoshop for several years, and I love it. It does so many things for me.
However, you should keep GIMP installed, and download updates. Though Photoshop tops the game on MOST things, GIMP is open-source and occasionally receives features and updates that aren’t even available in Photoshop. The ability to expand GIMP with free add-ons really makes it stand out.
At the same time, I wouldn’t abandon Photoshop. The interface makes much more sense and it’s very powerful.
Well, if you look around you’ll find many more copies of version 7– that was the first version to use the more current version of photoshop brushes, so that’s one of the most used versions across the market.
Adobe only sells the current version of the software they manufacture, so if you’re looking for a copy of older software, eBay or some other software selling website will be where you need to look.
[...] Other software in this category include Adobe’s PhotoShop (not free by any means!). Some say “GIMP is a poor man’s Photoshop.” Want an opinion on which is better, Gimp or Photoshop? [...]
I am one of those avid, “self-taught” types who, like Steve above, probably only scratches the surface of either of these applications, although I love familiarizing myself with both. I’ve been playing with Photoshop for many years, and only found GIMP because it was highly touted on the Ubuntu website as the photo manipulation software for the Linux crowd (I got into Linux due to the same curiosity and joy I derive from acquainting myself with new ways of doing things on the computer).
Like many, I was initially under whelmed with GIMP. I was even more under whelmed with Linux. In both cases, I was suffering from Window-itis. In Linux, I couldn’t install new programs, in Gimp, I could load a photo, but couldn’t figure out how to do anything with it, and the GUI in both instances was almost cartoonish in appearance.
That was then.
Having worked through one excellent instructional book on the GIMP, I now feel equally at home with it as I do with PS, and principles learned as I worked through that GIMP book have expanded my knowledge of PS.
I am amazed at the range of adjustments I can make with each program, but the fact that GIMP’s power comes at absolutely no cost to me has won me over. I read that GIMP lags behind PS in that it doesn’t (yet) offer full CMYK support and 16 bit depth, but I’ll be the first to admit that I am not far enough along to appreciate the lack of those features.
I own very good camera equipment – a powerful, fast dSLR body with a full array of quality lenses, and, before acquiring those, owned (still do), what, in its day, was one of the finest 35mm film bodies available.
Today, I make thousands of digital exposures, and in my collection are thousands of film-based images on negatives and slides that I want to manipulate.
When finished, I view these images on my screen, print them via a good ink-jet printer, or share them with friends and family over the net.
My stuff is good enough that some of it has been used in promo pamphlets, press kits, newspapers, etc. (not that any of those examples is definitive of being great, but I will claim those uses as evidence that my output isn’t all that bad).
My point is that, avid as my interest is, I am still only average – but probably well beyond the capability of many a user struggling with the decision to invest in PS or download and use GIMP for free.
So often, I see threads such as this dominated by posters who advocate PS over GIMP because “serious users” only use PS, or if you want what the pro’s use, buy PS, or, worse, GIMP is junk, and, if you want xxxxxxx gazillion gradations (sorry, can’t remember the number), get PS ’cause GIMP limits you owing to its 8-bit limitation, and the GUI sucks in GIMP, and on and on, this from users who, likely, haven’t even worked with GIMP in its most recent stable release.
On my machine (XP, 3.0 GHz, 2 GB RAM), PS does operate more smoothly – previews are almost instantaneous, while, in GIMP, I have to watch the effect flow down my screen (takes all of two seconds, usually). Brushes in PS move in smooth coordination with my trackball input. There is a slight jerkiness in GIMP as the brush movement ever so slightly lags behind my trackball input.
But, GIMP opens much faster (much faster), and I love that perspective clone – clone in real time with perspective that I can select, set, control.
One thing sorely lacking in GIMP on my setup is the print function in Windows. I simply cannot set the print size that I need (4 x 6) in GIMP and have to resort to some other means to get my images to the printer (sometimes I use PS, sometimes I use other software – not a hard work around). Printing from Linux used to be impossible, but I finally paid for TurboPrint (not a huge expense), and that problem is solved.
For me, there is no one perfect program – and neither of these two blows the other out of the water. But, would be users are under-served by the sort of comments I cited above that steer them clear of GIMP for lack of features that most of them will never use.
If you can be honest with yourself about what you will do with your images, then, for most of us, either program will do, and, of course, if either will do, it leaves me wondering why so many choose to purchase PS or buy one of its scaled down versions.
If I had known then what I know now about GIMP, I doubt I would have paid for PS.
Caruso
I have both CS3 and GIMP. I use the GIMP because I find it is just as good ( a little bit different, but not much ) and it runs a good bit quicker on my tablet PC. Unfortunately, the GIMP has adopted a really horrible new GUI system that makes it a nightmare to use (almost every window, including pop up windows, hides behind the canvas; this is a HUGE pain in the butt as you are constantly shrinking/restoring windows – the ‘preview’ function is rendered nearly useless by this, as well. Also, some windows seem to bunch together – so if I try to shrink one, it shrinks ALL of them). As it is, I only use the last version of GIMP that was released before the horrible GUI “upgrade”. They don’t make it available on their website but I had it saved to my computer. If I didn’t have that version backed up, as much as I love using the GIMP, I would have dropped it like a psychopathic date.
P.S. I use the GIMP for heavy duty image manipulation, 3D model texturing, painting and making comics.
Uhmmmm….. I don’t know how to use either of those 2 applications. But our lesson in computer subject is about GIMP and its disciple components. I’m learning about photoshop by now before trying to use GIMP but as far as my concern, and by our personal programmer, Adobe Photoshop have greater disciples and easier to know. GIMP is only for those who have money problems and for our lessons in computer. So, uhmmm,,, may i request where can i find a basic things about GIMP. I need a link for tutorial on GIMP and….. The tutorial must be a video tutorial so that i can understand it better. We have a book about GIMP and its our lesson for our whole school year but i cant understand on whats written in the book so i need a video tutorial
If there’s a wrong grammar in my sentences, sorry, I’m just a 13 year old kid
I have used PS since 6 and GIMP for a few years now. IMHO Saving damn near a thousand bucks is worth a few issues. Previous posters have done a great job summarizing the additional pluses of GIMP (as if not being a slave to corporate greed wasn’t enough – seriously the more users an open source program has the better it is). Too bad they came too late so Garry doesn’t see or respond to the positive posts about GIMP.
Leave a Comment