MuseScore is a particularly interesting case. I'd have said that it's more on the GIMP side of things previously, where you'd only use it if you couldn't afford Sibelius or Dorico because it's a seriously inferior product (an ironically painful thing to say, because even they are extremely flawed in their own ways). But then in response to a pretty scathing and humorous review, they hired the person responsible for that critique to head up a redesign, and today MuseScore is excellent.

[–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Obviously that's true. I don't use any of the two, since I rarely edit images and inkscape can be abused for when I do.
However, for me using PhotoShop would be pretty inconvenient. I can install GIMP with two? clicks on any machine and instantly use it. For PhotoShop I don't even have a device which has an OS on which it could run. Being unable to exercise the freedoms which free software gives me is pretty inconvenient, if I would like to at some point. Especially if I wanted to share the software with other people.
But I understand your point: if PhotoShop would be extremely more convenient for a task I need to regularly do, then it's possible I'd use it. There cannot be a right life amidst wrongs, so a pragmatic approach feels more sustainable to me than dogmatism.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Personally I find GIMP's design so poor that I would literally rather find a torrent and download Photoshop than try to do what I need in GIMP.

I'm not currently daily-driving Linux, but back when I was I'd have rathered torrent Windows and run Photoshop in a VM than put up with GIMP. That's how inconvenient GIMP is and how much better PS is.

[–] BautAufWasEuchAufbaut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Out of curiosity, what kind of work did you do with PS/GIMP?

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Nothing professional. I'm a hobbyist Photographer. Most of my editing is in a DAM but I do occasionally break out PS. The most complicated thing I've done was creating a map (both faux-satellite and faux-handrawn) of my RPG world.

For me, free software is most often competing against pirated pro software, so free software's "free as in beer" component loses its advantage, and instead it becomes about the convenience of just downloading and running (as opposed to the inconvenience of pirating) versus the convenience of more-polished software (versus the inconvenience of often-poorly-designed software), with money not factoring into it. And with installing being a tiny fraction of the time interacting with the software, I choose the more-polished option every time. (And for me, the availability of this software is a big part of the reason I don't daily-drive Linux any more.)

It's what makes Audacity and new-MuseScore so great. They're not inferior-but-free options. They're genuinely great software in their own right.

[–] miss_brainfarts@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 months ago

I think GIMPs biggest issue is that it still doesn't have non-destructive editing with ajustment layers.

It's the single most useful feature any kind of editing software can have. Not being able to use that makes any project that is more than a low-effort shitpost incredibly frustrating.

[–] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

I think Krita needs to be forked for an actual image manipulation software. I dont want Krita to veer from illustration, but IMO its a great base.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago

Obligatory Krita plug. Still can't draw for shit and know Blender like 20x better but unlike GIMP Krita actually makes sense, I can find stuff, generally it doesn't get in the way of being a canvas.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 8 months ago

it's way more convenient because i can just install it from repos, and don't have to pay out the ass every month for the privilege to use it