A Look at Gimp

Image via Wikipedia

The three hour pre-conference session I did on Gimp, the open source alternative software to programs like Photoshop, gave me a good opportunity to get to know it.  I am a died in the wool Photoshop guy, with an Adobe certification in Photoshop and over 10 years experience using the tool for the web as well as print design work.  The graphic artist in me wanted to immediately shoot down this tool as just another poser trying to do things it has no business doing.

But I was wrong about Gimp for several reasons.  First, Gimp was never designed as a direct competitor with Photoshop.  It can do some of the same things (quite well), but it is a free editor.  It is also far more specific in its design than Photoshop (which can be a good thing as well) and, most importantly, it does quite well head to head against Photoshop anyway, considering it is FREE!!

Since I am evaluating this tool as something that can be used to teach image editing in schools, my background in graphic design continually crept in to the evaluation process.  It is nice enough to teach students how to use a tool (any tool) but one of the things that has always bugged me about schools is that they continually try to foist off inadequate tools that they got for a dime on students and parents by saying "It's just like" a certain program (I am staring with complete disapproval at YOU, Microsoft FrontPage/Expression Web).  When in reality, they are absolutely NOT something that would EVER be used in a professional environment for quality output.

Let's face it.  There is a REASON that Photoshop is the standard for professional image editing.  There really just isn't anything better out there.  So don't tell me there is.  But having worked in higher education as an instructor as well as sys admin, I was constantly bombarded with how "good" certain totally inadequate tools were.  Either because the school didn't want to pony up the cash for the real tools or because they were in bed with certain software companies and agreed to only use their (completely useless) products and force them on the teachers and students.  All the while wondering why their students were getting degrees but not getting hired.  Yet local companies were telling them constantly that they were teaching on crapplications that would never be used.

This trickles down in to high schools and even middle schools as well.  I have been very disappointed to hear about business programs, art programs or yearbooks that are trying to teach students image editing on some woefully inadequate program like PrintShop.  GAH!!  Why bother?  You are not teaching ANYTHING useful at that point.  Move on to something else.

Anyway, sorry for the rant, but it leads me to my current research on Gimp.

I was introduced to this tool last year.  I downloaded it, played with it and then subsequently forgot all about it until I started teaching Photoshop to the teacher in the state of Missouri.  Inevitably, talk would turn to money and faces would fall when teachers were told how much Photoshop actually cost.  Most schools, even with deep educational discounts, just can't afford to fill a lab with fully licensed copies of Photoshop.  I completely understand.  So many of them asked what else could be used?  I went back and started looking at Gimp again, and I liked what I saw!

Let's talk Gimp for a second...

First of all, get out of your head that Gimp is anywhere NEAR as powerful as Photoshop.  It is MAYBE 50-60% of Photoshop as far as functionality.  But!  This is a GOOD THING!!  Look, I'm Adobe certified in Photoshop and I will admit to knowing no more than about 80% of what the program can do.  It's just that big!

What you get with Gimp is the 50% that you NEED to do a basic job, without all the millions of other things (3D capability, anyone?) that just get in the way or become a distraction when you are trying to learn not only the tool, but the process as well.

This does not, however, mean that you are "feature poor" if you choose to use Gimp. It has plenty of tools for manipulating and enhancing images that are on a par with Photoshop.  And the best thing is, most of them walk and talk just like the Photoshop tools (although some have slightly different names and behaviors).  This is also a good thing.  It allows you to learn the techniques with windows, terminology and processes that are parallel to Photoshop.  This, for schools, means that if a student is taught the proper technique for editing color in an image in Gimp, it is simply a matter of learning where to go in Photoshop to get that dialogue box to open (Levels, for example).  After that, it is pretty much the same.  This is a critically important point in favor of Gimp as a teaching tool.

The tools, although named slightly differently than the Photoshop tools, all work pretty much the same way.  There are a few different tools in Gimp, but the basics are all there.  Learn to use them in Gimp and you know how to use them in Photoshop.

When I teach my Photoshop classes, I emphasize that the tool can be broken down into two basic and critical phases.  Making selections and working with layers.  If you can master these two areas in Photoshop, it becomes an easy tool to work with.  This idea transfers seamlessly to Gimp.  Both work exactly the same way.  If for no other reason, when a school is considering what tool to teach (and Photoshop is not an option), I would recommend using Gimp over any other tool just because of it's Photoshop-esque way of handling selections and layers. 

Gimp does have a few critcal holes that need to be filled.  The largest one is the lack of a "Save For Web" feature.  This is easily remedied by downloading a plug in by that name from the large plug in library created for the tool.  Other than that, it works right out of the box and seems pretty stable.  It is also not nearly the resource hog that Photoshop is so it can be used effectively on older or less powerful computers.

I have not had the opportunity to analyze the output of this tool in the print environment.  Nor have I had the chance to talk to an offset press company about using Gimp files.  My guess is that, since Gimp still uses bitmap text, it is NOT recommended that you use the text tools in Gimp for offset press work.  The text will come out grainy and just not look like you want.  I have, however, saved several files for the web and uploaded them side by side with Photoshop images and only start to see slight quality differences between them at very low JPG settings (the Photoshop images are better).  But most of the time this just isn't an issue.  it is rare that you would need to set your JPG quality at 40 or less and this is where differences start to show up.  No biggie.

To conclude my rambling rant...

Gimp is a GREAT tool.  It will certainly do a critical, two-fold job for schools.  First, it is a great, NO COST alternative to Photoshop for schools to use when manipulating images for websites, print media, etc.  Second, it is a high quality tool for TEACHING image editing due to its similarity in form and function to the venerable Photoshop.  And if/when students ever do step up to Photoshop, the transition will be smooth and (relatively) painless...!