I'm a very anti Adobe person, and as I recently read a thread on here about v3.0, which is supposed to improve the program significantly. However, I still get annoyed when I hear these Photoshop fanboys knocking on Gimp.

Do you think that Gimp will ever be so good, that it will make Photoshop obsolete? I'm a believer that open source can always beat proprietary. But is Photoshop too well established that it is too late?

In so many ways, it's already better than PS depending on your point of view. If you add G'MIC to the GIMP, it's nod doubt superior to PS.

Graphic artists regard Photoshop the only way to make their ads, etc. It has a certain amount of snob appeal. If you can afford PS, then you must be very good at making ads and stuff.

GIMP is not out to replace Photoshop. GIMP is out to make the best photo manipulation program it can make. And as Lyle said, it surpasses PS in quite a few ways.

There will always be people ready to pay for the "security" of having a designated entity to maintain the code (and to blame when things go wrong), so PS is going to stay around for a long while.

What will replace PS won't be Gimp. It will be cloud-based, AI-assisted image editing that will do a job good enough for most people, individual users first and the publishing industry next(*). Gimp users will dwindle at the same time for the same reason. However, since Gimp isn't a commercial venture, a drop of the user population won't mean a halt in development. Eventually, Adobe will go bankrupt, and their swan song could well be to make Photoshop open-source. And the Gimp-PS competition will start again, on a more equal standing. And since both will be open-source, they will borrow from each other, eventually evolving into a single program.

(*) And I don't see Adobe there. Because the hard part isn't so much the software than getting a corpus of training data. Google has it, but Adobe missed that boat.

I am quite certain there are folks out there who use PS and GIMP together for their commercial work. GIMP just has too many useful plug-ins that PS doesn't have and never probably will to pass up using them for free.

That is where GIMP excels against PS. User ability too add to the code and/or create plug-ins. And this could be good for GIMP's future as PS users may create some future filters or fabulous GIMP code that they need for their work.

Photoshop vs Gimp
Office vs LibreOffice
Windows vs Linux vs Mac
lol

at the moment
I'm using Atom a code editor for writing books
and Krita for making the covers
if its there and i can use it, why not
I never limit myself by excluding programs

I do have to add something. I don't ever want GIMP to replace PS or PS to replace GIMP. Competition between these two programs have led to so many innovations that I cannot possibly name them all. The only thing I wish GIMP would have that PS does is GPU acceleration. I think one day it will. Regardless, I'm a GIMPer; decided not to re-install PS CS5 after I had to rebuild my PC. Will miss ACR though, but I'll try to work around that when it comes up (don't take that many pictures anyway, so no real big deal).

Good way to put it, Lyle. Without any competitive edges in play, companies get lazy as ______. And we all know what happens when lazy happens. NOTHING!

It will never replace photoshop for me until it gets actions, or something similar. Taking all day to write a script to do repetitive tasks is not the same and nowhere near as convenient.

I do wish GIMP could easily create macros like PS (actions). Instead, you have to learn Script-fu or Py-fu to do so and I just am too lazy to do that. lol

Maybe one day some genius will figure out a way to record macros for GIMP.

I have an idea that might work in theory but i don't really want to do it since it would involve a lot of tedious steps.
It'll be limited to what you can record though like you wouldn't be able to record a live manual selection.

You can have a script that starts a recording all it does is wipe out a text file that is used for recording actions.
Then perform steps, where each step is a script on its own that does one simple action.
Each step will write/append it's action into the text file with parameters used.
For example if you do 3 things then you'll have to run 3 scripts that does your 3 steps...then 3 lines will written to the recorded text file with parameters and stuff.

Now that you have the recorded text file, you can have a "run recording" script that translates that the written steps into script code and run them.

Ah; easier said than done, Tran, but my bet is, you are the programming genius that can do it.

It can be done. I am so sure like 90% sure.
Maybe i'll do a proof of concept with just few recordable actions scripts like
- set active layer and you enter the layer number like 0 is layer on topmost layer...
- gausian blur
- change foreground color
- fill layer with foreground color
Just to to prove that it can be done then maybe other keeners can help add more recordable actions scripts.

Althought it won't be the same as recording your actions.
It'll just be you running a bunch of scripts where the scripts are individual simple actions and recording those scripts.

its as Oregonian says
"It has a certain amount of snob appeal"
i think this its the only thing Photoshop exceed GIMP atm
but GIMP users are not far behind

I work with Photoshop & GIMP
I'm not limited by a OS, brand, hype, X vs Y
every program got its ways to do things, some are easier in Photoshop other in GIMP
I work al lot in blender, when I have to tweak de end image a bit
I open krita, not because its the best program to doe, but its the icon next to bender
for me only the end result matters

lylejk -
here's my proof of concept

Graechan,
please read next post

Graechan,
Please ...
give version 4 of script
a try since this version will create directory "recordings" under your GIMP's user folder if not yet exists.