Adobe CS4 vs Gimp shootout at Extremetech

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

03/10/2009 05:03:40 PM · #1

CS4 vs GIMP shootout

An interesting comparison, though perhaps a little one sided, IMO. Much of the article concentrates on the killer speed and capabilities of CS4 running on high end equipment. I'd have liked to see more details on how they compared on the low to mid range hardware that most people own. Maybe they will do a follow up article.

Still a worthwhile read for understanding differences and learning how you can make photoshop scream.

Prash

Nikon D90

03/10/2009 08:12:03 PM · #2

Looks like a decent review. But I agree with you that it doesnt make sense to compare a highly commercial product with a freeware community-developed system... especially for speed performance. One must be stupid to compare the speed of those two.

It would have been more beneficial if the comparison was on teh end results and tool's availability.

jasonmccarthy

Sony DSLR-A100

Sony 75-300 mm f/4.5-5.6

03/10/2009 08:30:02 PM · #3

I have a Black MacBook 2.16 processor with 2 gb Ram running CS4 Suite and running cleanly and quickly with no lag or problems.
Speed is superquick and able to work cleanly through photoshop, fireworks and dreamweaver.... If this helps lol

Message edited by author 2009-03-10 20:30:18.

Pug-H

Pentax K10D

Sigma 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical HF for Pentax

03/10/2009 10:07:37 PM · #4

I have a discount ticket - $300 off from Amazon - for CS4. I was reading some of the reviews there and some people complained they couldn't even get it installed on their computers.
So, is it really worth it? I'm still muddling along with PS Elements 5. I've tried GIMP but kept getting lost in all the little windows it brings up.

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS

03/10/2009 10:17:55 PM · #5

I'm not currently interested in Photoshop. I've been using PaintShop Pro for a long time now, and I'm too cheap to buy Photoshop when there is very little I can't already do in PSP. I just thought it was an interesting article that might be of benefit to some.

docpjv

Fujifilm X-E1

03/10/2009 10:53:15 PM · #6

I think Lightroom 2 is very underestimated by the diehard Photoshoppers...

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

03/11/2009 09:43:54 AM · #7

Just checked in at Extremetech this morning and appears the author has changed the title of his article to better reflect it's real point. Now it is titled "The Best Hardware for Photo Editing".

eschelar

Canon EOS-7D

03/11/2009 11:28:37 AM · #8

what an odd article.

He's testing all these things from the point of view of 'having hardware so that it is possible to do certain functions in PS simply for the purpose of doing them quickly'.

His testing has questionable value for real world photo editing because most of the stuff is seldom used - which is why so many of them are only included in the extended version of PS.

Yeah, I know that plenty of people do work on 10k x 10k pixel images and could use that computing power, but it just sounds weird the way it's written.

"Not all graphics apps are created equal�in fact, Photoshop is in a league of its own. Coupled with the right hardware, it can really blaze a trail."

Uhm. The primary reason for using PS isn't simply because it's fast.

"If there's a downside, most of these GPU accelerated features currently exist only in Photoshop CS4/CS4 extended�which costs in excess of $700. We hope that we'll see similar performance-enhancing features in consumer level photo editing tools soon."

Uhm. I don't think consumer level photo editing tools really need this. When working on 8-12 megapixel 16 bit TIFFs, CS3 on my 5 year old Tablet with 2GB of DDR RAM and no GPU already has "lightning-fast zoom" from 12.5% right up to 400%, and I open 6 adjustment layers that allow 90% of what the average consumer will be doing to the average photo in a quarter of a second.

I really don't get what he's on about.

I don't personally know a lot of consumer level shooters that regularly print fine art prints at 300DPI bigger than A3.

I really don't see a 0.043 second longer lag time for applying the 'water paper' filter as a major obstacle for creative expression in photography.

Maybe I'm just a stick in the mud though.