As a former Photoshop user, I found all the paradigms and ways of thinking in Gimp were just so utterly different from what I was used to. Simple things like cropping, resizing selections and layer management felt like exercises in frustration.
Tried Krita instead, and I'm immediately feeling at home and able to be productive straight away.
I'm sure Gimp is awesome but my brain didn't like it. If anyone else is feeling the same way, give Krita a try.
This guide is misleading. Sure, the product functionalities overlap, but if you have a mature workflow, you will not be able to switch without investing a LOT of effort in relearning your workflow on the new product stack. This is one of my MAIN reasons I hate the "I tried to switch to Linux and failed" genre of content. You're not going to find identical like-for-like replacements in Linux world that won't require significant effort to relearn. It's something us Linux users through and through need to bear in mind.
Also, we need to be cognisant that "just switching to Linux" narratives, fueled off infographics like this, will lead to frustration and dismissal.
No, I don't know how to change this - and morphing e.g. gimp to be a clone of Photoshop isn't the answer either.
Photoshop ➡️ Krita
Illustrator ➡️ Krita
After Effects ➡️ Blender
Premier Pro ➡️ kdenlive
Adobe XD and Figma ➡️ Everything about these tools seems wrong to me (see comment below)
Cinema 4D and 3DS Max ➡️ I thought everyone ditched those in favor of Blender long ago? LOL
I completely do not understand the appeal of tools like Figma. As a developer who's made lot of single page web applications (though not in a while... Maybe everything is different now? 🤷) tools like Figma seem like they'd create a major headache for developers.
I mean, sure: If a tool gives you a quick, easy, collaborative way to mock up a website and user interactions then by all means! But it looks like people are going far beyond that and using Figma to generate code. In my experience with such tools in the past, that's where everything goes wrong.
If the developers themselves aren't using the tool then the code will drift from the GUI design tool too much over time, becoming a boat anchor that holds development back and slows everything down. But maybe folks are just using it to get things started? I dunno. I just don't get the hype around it.
Then again, I'm a guy who does all his CAD design work in OpenSCAD so I might have something like a superpower in regards to visual reasoning that prevents me from understanding the issues others have with conceptualizing code-as-design 🤷
InDesign had those text boxes that you could link to the next text box with the little red plus, and the words would flow back and forth. It's the only thing in all of the Adobe Creative Suite that I miss! FUCK ADOBE, GIMP FOR LIFE!
It's always the same. Many people tell you how a software is not a replacement for other software. Of course it isn't, because otherwise it would be exactly the same piece of software.
Tell me a replacement for LaTeX, Postfix, zsh, vim or OpenSSH. There isn't, because these are the best from my point of view.
Instead of recommending one alternative, you sometimes need to combine them. The most powerful tools are btw combinable in a tool chain and the best are controllable from common scripting or programming languages.
I found it quite useful to ask ChatGPT to compare these products. Very good neutral explanations I thought. It seems that almost all of theses boil down to "are you annoyed enough by Adobe's subscription model to switch?".