Any suggestions on Photoshop alternatives?

[JW5566]

I'm a long time user of Photoshop (on their Photoshop/Lightroom package at £10 a month).

I'm winding my business down, for which I used Photoshop daily, and would ideally like to save £120 a year - this soon adds up over many years.

I've tried GIMP which was free but I thought it was awful, not a judgement on the software as such but just so hard to get my head around.

What should I be looking at next? Affinity Photo looks most Photoshop like, almost like an older version of Photoshop, would that be the closest? Or anything else?

I use a MacBook Air mainly, so needs to be MacOS. Mostly image cropping, resizing, retouching, some de-fisheye work on photos, quite a lot of curves and levels editing, adding watermarks (a brush with some text), using the magic brush to remove unwanted things, exporting photos/images for web (including webp). I do a lot of cutting stuff out too - product photos - to clear the background away. And making YouTube thumbnails, which is basic image work plus text added over the top.

I don't use Lightroom and don't shoot in RAW.

There's so much in Photoshop I don't need but also a lot of things that I would really miss.

 

[chrfr]

Give Pixelmator Pro a look. It's available through the Mac App Store.

 

[buttongerald]

Tossing out another vote for Pixelmator. Incredible application, and developed by a passionate, dedicated, and creative team.

 

[Herbert123]

Your three main commercial alternatives are:

- PhotoLine
- Affinity Photo
- Pixelmator

My vote goes to PhotoLine. Its GUI may not be as modern-looking as the other two, but its workflow is solid and the curve editing/layer stack outperforms all others, including Photoshop.

I do also own Affinity, but only use it for a few things (like 360 degree editing). The base workflow still causes too many paper cuts for my liking.

A free open source option may also be Krita for certain work. It is more aimed at digital painting, however.

I'd suggest to you @JW5566 to test drive all of them and inform your decision by putting all three to work on the same test project.

 

[smirking]

There's one Photoshop alternative that's the most Photoshop of alternatives that seems to always get missed. It's Photoshop Elements. Depending on how much of the Photoshop beast you need, Photoshop Elements might be enough. I've installed it on my wife's computer. If you're using Photoshop to do heavy design work, Elements won't cut it, but if you're actually just retouching and editing photos, Elements just might cover your needs.

 

[apostolosdt]

If you don’t shoot RAW, better spend some time to get used to GIMP first. No money; then later make up your mind about a paid app. I use Affinity Photo. That’s in theory though, for I always go for GIMP, whenever in a hurry.

 

[JW5566]

Thank you so much for the suggestions. I didn't realise Photoshop Elements still existed given their subscription model but I have used it before on a PC.

I'll give the free trials a spin on the suggestions above.

 

[yitwail]

PS Elements is decent, though lacking some features obviously. I'm handy with terminal so I've installed ImageMagick and used the convert command to do some basic tasks Elements can't do, like trim an image or convert white color to transparent. If your MacBook Air is M1 or M2, the latest Elements runs natively in Apple Silicon.

 

[Herbert123]

Photoshop Elements can't compare with PhotoLine or Affinity Photo (or Pixelmator). Just the mere fact that PSE is unable to work with layers in 16bit image mode is (plainly stated) laughable. Let alone 32bit support.

The max size of an image is PSE is only 30.000 by 30.000 pixels. Smart objects? Nah. Smart filters? Nope. Vector masks? Huh? Layer groups? Uh Uh! Multiple layer masks per layer? Never heard of it! (Neither did Photoshop, btw).

Missing feature after missing feature. Lighting effects. Non-destructive RAW processing. 360 degree panorama editing. Automation, advanced batch processing, advanced export, vector editing, webp support, warping, filters,...

Those are the simple reasons (and more) why I cannot categorize Photoshop elements as a proper Photoshop alternative. It's far too limited in comparison to the other three. Great for the beginner or unassuming incidental image editing.

The final nail in the coffin is the pricing: all the other alternatives are less expensive. The Krita & RawTherapee combo is on the whole far more capable than Photoshop Elements and is open source and free!

The ONLY redeeming option for PSE users is to get the XXL plugin which upgrades PSE to something that can compete somewhat with the other three (four if Krita is included). But that's an additional $50 on top of $99.

 

[Aggedor]

Affinity Photo for me. Single payment, no sub, and it's close enough to Photoshop for my non-professional needs.

 

[th0masp]

Affinity Photo would have been my recommendation as the closest to Photoshop. Been using it as a direct PS replacement for several years now. But their recent version 2 is a proper disappointment in my opinion. Less performance, fresh bugs in addition to the existing ones as well as newbie UX issues all over.

In case Pixelmator isn't working out then you are probably best off to stick with Adobe for the time being and re-evaluate Affinity in a year or two. Probably cheaper to pay the Adobe tax for something familiar and working rather than jumping into Affinity V2 now and in addition to becoming a beta tester having to pay for anti-headache medication.

 

[Herbert123]

@th0masp Or give PhotoLine a chance. Runs solid, and surprisingly feature-rich. Avoids all the paper cuts and bugs that Affinity Photo currently suffers from.

While I have access to Photoshop via my work, I do all my image editing, barring a couple of specific tasks, in PhotoLine. I prefer to work in PhotoLine and Photoshop feels clunky to me nowadays compared.

But I realize PhotoLine might not be for everyone. For a seasoned no-nonsense advanced Photoshop user PhotoLine comes closest to the PS feature set. Some things actually better, other things not as good but can be offset with other tools easily.

Best licensing of all, barring open source Krita, of course.

 

[JW5566]

Thanks for the continued suggestions, very helpful 👍

 

[th0masp]

@th0masp Or give PhotoLine a chance. Runs solid, and surprisingly feature-rich. Avoids all the paper cuts and bugs that Affinity Photo currently suffers from.

While I have access to Photoshop via my work, I do all my image editing, barring a couple of specific tasks, in PhotoLine. I prefer to work in PhotoLine and Photoshop feels clunky to me nowadays compared.

But I realize PhotoLine might not be for everyone. For a seasoned no-nonsense advanced Photoshop user PhotoLine comes closest to the PS feature set. Some things actually better, other things not as good but can be offset with other tools easily.

Best licensing of all, barring open source Krita, of course.

Point taken - I didn't have that on my radar at all, assuming that it was a Windows-only software.

 

[MacGizmo]

I don't use Lightroom and don't shoot in RAW.

There's so much in Photoshop I don't need but also a lot of things that I would really miss.

Affinity Photos is the ONLY alternative if you're doing graphic design - because it's the only one (that I'm aware of) that supports Pantone color and CMYK workflows and offers most of the tools Photoshop has.

If you're dealing primarily with photography-related tasks (color correction, etc.), then your options are much more wide-open (others have mentioned some great alternatives).

 

[AngerDanger]

I've had luck with the web-based Photopea but haven't run through each feature to see how it'd work as a 1:1 replacement.

Plus, you get to decide if it rhymes with 'photo pea' or 'utopia'.

 

[Herbert123]

Affinity Photos is the ONLY alternative if you're doing graphic design - because it's the only one (that I'm aware of) that supports Pantone color and CMYK workflows and offers most of the tools Photoshop has.

In a way that is truer now than ever: Adobe and Pantone fell out with each other, and Pantone colours are no longer supported by Photoshop, Illustrator, or InDesign by default! Graphic designers working in Adobe apps are new actually forced to subscribe to Pantone's over-priced software-as-a-service to gain access to those Pantone libraries.

Affinity still includes them as standard.

But I would have to correct you in regards to the suitability of PhotoLine vs Affinity for graphic design work:

- PhotoLine fully supports a CMYK workflow and is colour managed. This includes spot colours, overprint control, and easy channel print options.

- If the Pantone libraries are purchased they can be installed and used by PhotoLine (as indicated above, Photoshop users would have to purchase/rent those as well.)

- Affinity is missing a KEY ingredient that makes it impossible for several types of graphic design jobs to be completed in any of the Affinity products: the utter lack of support for 1bit images.

For this last reason Affinity is only suitable up to a point for graphic design work. For example, 1bit black and white images meant to be printed at higher dpi values are still widely in use in the industry: for comics, academic illustrations, and black and white illustrative work in general.

In Affinity this is impossible. A 1bit image at 800ppi is converted to a 8bit image and output like that in the final PDF. In short: a disaster.

PhotoLine, however, supports this without a hitch. As a matter of fact, its support for 1bit imagery FAR outpaces ANY other alternative, including Photoshop: PS refuses to work with layers in 1bit image mode. PhotoLine allows for full layer support, as well as the option to mix 1bit image layers freely with layers that are 8bit, CMYK, RGB, greyscale, and have different resolutions in the same file! No need for smart objects (as is the case with Photoshop).

It is also possible to assign a spot colour to a 1bit image (similar to InDesign and Illustrator). Again, this is not possible in Affinity.

For these reasons I would have to argue against Affinity as a complete replacement for the Adobe equivalents for graphic design work. PhotoLine offers all (and more) compared. None of the other alternatives are able to do so, including Affinity.

Obviously the Affinity community has asked for proper 1bit image workflow support since Affinity was first introduced on the market, because it is ridiculous that it is not possible to work with these. Serif's response: they will never support 1bit. Only as an export option.

And till this day Photo converts these images to greyscale, and Affinity Publisher cannot output 1bit images to a PDF without converting these to greyscale 8bit images, rendering them worthless.

A real shame. One more reason why I work with PhotoLine and why my vote goes to PhotoLine as a true Photoshop replacement for much graphic design/publishing work.

 

[Herbert123]

I've had luck with the web-based Photopea but haven't run through each feature to see how it'd work as a 1:1 replacement.

Photopea is a wonderful web app and a quite good Photoshop alternative - but ONLY if your work is limited to 8bit only. 16bit or 32bit is unsupported.

One unique feature: PP opens Fireworks layered PNG files. It's the only app that pulls this off, and is great for ex-Fireworks users to convert their work to layered Photoshop files for use in other apps.

 

[dpny]

Another vote for Affinity Photo. It's the closest thing to a drop-in PS replacement. It is, however, kind of an uncanny valley to use, as it's close enough to PS to start working immediately, but different enough in the details to be frustrating sometimes. That said, Affinity has a very complete library of 3-6 minute tutorial videos on their site.

Pixelmator is good, too. It's kind of a mashup of PS, Illustrator and After Effects. My big issue is it automatically assigns a color space when opening a RAW file, which kind of defeats the purpose of using RAW files.

Affinity is missing a KEY ingredient that makes it impossible for several types of graphic design jobs to be completed in any of the Affinity products: the utter lack of support for 1bit images.

For this last reason Affinity is only suitable up to a point for graphic design work. For example, 1bit black and white images meant to be printed at higher dpi values are still widely in use in the industry: for comics, academic illustrations, and black and white illustrative work in general.

Just a note: production is full of overlapping circles of requirements, some of which never touch. I've been doing print production work for almost 30 years and can't remember the last time I used a 1-bit image. So, if your workflow doesn't include using them, I wouldn't worry about Affinity Photo not supporting 1-bit. You know what kinds of jobs you work on and can decide accordingly.

 

[organicCPU]

In a way that is truer now than ever: Adobe and Pantone fell out with each other, and Pantone colours are no longer supported by Photoshop, Illustrator, or InDesign by default! Graphic designers working in Adobe apps are new actually forced to subscribe to Pantone's over-priced software-as-a-service to gain access to those Pantone libraries.

You can always work with Pantone colors without installing any swatch libraries just by defining a certain name for your decided spot color. E.g., set up a spot color with the name PMS 185 C and the printer will know that he has to fill the printing machine with that certain beautiful red color to print it on some kind of coated paper.
It helps to have Pantone color fans if you are in the need of defining or evaluating Pantone colors, but you'll only need to subscribe to the software, if you need an easy way for color conversions or lookups, like knowing what is the closest CMYK or RGB match for some Pantone color or vice versa.

Mostly image cropping, resizing, retouching, some de-fisheye work on photos, quite a lot of curves and levels editing, adding watermarks (a brush with some text), using the magic brush to remove unwanted things, exporting photos/images for web (including webp). I do a lot of cutting stuff out too - product photos - to clear the background away. And making YouTube thumbnails, which is basic image work plus text added over the top.

While Adobe Photoshop is the most matured photo editor, Serif Affinity Photo is usable, too. PhotoLine is definitely worth to check it out.
However, I'm using many different tools for different tasks. Considering your requirements, you should also take a look at iWatermark Pro for Mac, DxO ViewPoint, DxO PhotoLab and ON1 Photo RAW. Although DxO and ON1 tools are best for editing RAW formats, they can also work on other filetypes. For better results in perspective corrections like de-fisheye, you should have camera´s EXIF Metadata (especially focal lengths and camera as well as objective type) included in your data.
Then think about, if Automator or AppleScript could help you by automating repetitive tasks like saving thumbnails to different sizes or compress them for web.

 

[dpny]

You can always work with Pantone colors without installing any swatch libraries just by defining a certain name for your decided spot color. E.g., set up a spot color with the name PMS 185 C and the printer will know that he has to fill the printing machine with that certain beautiful red color to print it on some kind of coated paper.

Bit off topic, but it's also a good idea to define any Pantone color you use as spot with the custom 4C breakdown you want. That way, if someone decides to print the piece digital short run, which is increasingly common, you know what color you'll get.

 

[organicCPU]

Bit off topic, but it's also a good idea to define any Pantone color you use as spot with the custom 4C breakdown you want. That way, if someone decides to print the piece digital short run, which is increasingly common, you know what color you'll get.

Agree, that´s a good idea. Though, color conversion from spot color to 4c or RGB could output unwanted color values. I recommend to always check the colors in the final result, if they´re the expected ones.

 

[dpny]

Agree, that´s a good idea. Though, color conversion from spot color to 4c or RGB could output unwanted color values. I recommend to always check the colors in the final result, if they´re the expected ones.

While I agree in principle, with digital short run most people aren't going to look too carefully at the colors. And that's why I define my own, 4C breakdowns. At leas then I know (theoretically) what the final output will look like.

 

[Neil.gtis]

Hi
I have just got a copy Adobe premiere elements 2021 for £49 from Wex
just trying it out
Now so different than on a windows laptop
Neil

 

[Vref]

I’m a photoshop or gimp guy

If what you need exceeds gimp, just bite the bullet and get PS