Affinity Photo on Linux/ Who would pay Poll

No mac, no windows system in my computers from 2002…
Who has sent 50$ to a free project?

I do give money and time regularly to open source endevours. Here’s an article I just wrote that went live today. I am also helping another developer write their wiki page. There are tons of things that we can do to help developers. And I understand the need to be a purist when it comes to your ideals. But personally, I believe in promoting ALL development, open and closed—but of course I prefer open :wink:

More of us have to get out there and let people know that open source is something that’s powerful and a legitimate alternative. I think only having open source opens on an operating system can be short sighted as far as bringing ALL tools to one platform and converting more people to Linux.

I’m a Windows user that is learning Linux. Microsoft has become too controlling. Apple isn’t any better. I hope one day to switch to Linux as my operating system. I bought Affinity for Windows and would but it again for Linux. I would also buy Photoshop for Linux, but would not rent it. What I would really like is an operating system that would run Linux, Windows, and Mac software seamlessly. It’s never hurts to dream.

1 Like

You can now get Davinci Resolve for Linux:

I choose Linux as my primarily desktop OS at home because I embrace the FOSS philosophy and because Windows sucks.

But at the same time I don’t mind paying for commercial software if they provide the features I can’t find in FOSS and if they have a Linux version. For instance, I paid for a copy of the Linux version of Photomatix. I tried some free Linux HDR software but they could not produce the kind of outcome that I was looking for. Photomatix can. Actually if Aurora HDR has a Linux version I’d probably pay for it as well.

If the app gives the tools I need to do the job and I can afford it, I would pay for it.

1 Like

I am waiting for affinity on Linux please lift this adobe curse for linux users

1 Like

I am happy with Gimp and Inkscape and Scribus and Kdenlive, sure they can improve and a lot, but I will stick with them and see them grow.


I hate GIMP with a burning passion (destructive workflows makes me mad), and Krita direction seem to be that they want nothing to do with being an all-around program even though the bases are covered, so of course I’ll buy Affinity Photo.

Nondestructive workflow are around the corner for GIMP, minus a lack of manpower to get things done faster, if I understand it correct.

“I hate GIMP with a burning passion” - while of course I can understand your frustration, please don’t forget what an amazing achievement Gimp is and what a monument to FOSS it represents. Every line of coding that the developers produce and share deserves our respect, in my opinion. Well-known commercial alternatives are available, but if you choose to use FOSS, that’s a precise choice that goes, hopefully, beyond not having to pay for software.

Couldn’t layers, to some extent, be used in order to achieve nondestructive workflows?

Finally, I would never pay for Affinity, since if I subscribed to the philosophy of commercial software I wouldn’t have used Linux for the last 20 years.

GIMP and destructive editing does in my view varies according to how it’s used. I mostly use it for layer work and see it as semi destructive in that respect. Rather than being destructive I see it’s main failing being that if the history stack is used it can mean repeating processing steps again but that to a certain extent depends on how it’s used. Higher bit depths will help anyway not ideally but it means info wont be lost so can be adjusted again and again. Unfortunately the setting used for what ever change was made are lost and some processes say sharpening can’t be undone - a layer can be saved though before doing it. Many aspects of the GIMP are like that compared with say PS which will group layers and tools into one function and also apply them sequentially retaining current settings. On the GIMP if say a curve done previously needs adjusting later it has to be done from a fresh curve.

On the pay for side it’s pretty well covered really - After Shot Pro. It’s a fairly capable package. I used it out of curiosity until the demo period ran out. The only thing I didn’t like was the size of the curves panel - too small. It also took a while to realise that it can handle layers and just how to adjust the blend size of brushes. It will do selective work via layers.


The thing is the roadmap indicates it won’t be looked at until GIMP 3.2 (3+ years and no guarantees), and GIMP is nearing 2.10, and GIMP history does not look good. If one is stuck with FOSS, one is stuck mixing programs (Krita+GIMP) with finding workarounds if one prefer nondestructive workflow. It isn’t worth starting over and filtering again if huge photomanipulation with 60+ filters. I once did 300+ layers with multiple filters which can add up to 1000+ layers if you convert masks to layers. I would not use GIMP for that at all.

Last time I heard which was some time ago no one from the Linux community was working on the GIMP.

I often here the same comments about it. Doesn’t have adjustment layers often crops up. A better description would be that this aspect isn’t automated as it is in PS. There is a need to understand the nuts and bolts of what is being done to the image and doing that “manually”. The chances are that the GIMP will be able to do it.

Personally I see painted layer masks as an essential at times. What I should bottom out on that area is if it’s possible to always have them in channels. That way if the image that they are being applied to needs discarding due to the need for a change the mask is still available, Mask aren’t destructive they can be changed.

I also see various styles of brushes as being essential at times also healing and cloning and the other bits and pieces.

300 layers? I’ve heard of people using 15 in PS if they are really struggling maybe a few more. At that sort of level final adjustment of each element would be problematic.

I think the main problem with GIMP is getting to grips with what the various layer modes can do. We are mostly stuck with pages like this one
but sometimes tutorials that make use of these modes in a different fashion to outlined there and can be useful. For instance I noticed one by Pat David the other day on converting to black and white using a single layer. My thoughts were for that I would use one of the plugins but here is a layer that can reduce colour gradually via the opacity slider. Something to play around with to see what else it can do. Maybe a different arrangement will boost it. Add brushes, masks etc and it can be done selectively. Use a processed version of the original image etc. The nice thing about the opacity slider is that it’s not destructive.

Personally I feel high end pp is difficult to pick up what ever is used and there isn’t any need to blame the GIMP. If some one wants to produce images like these there is one hell of a learning curve even in PS.
:grinning:Picked that lot because there is a mix. Some a bit OTT and some ok in that respect - in my view anyway.


This is simply not true.

1 Like

And, you are not wrong about it, but the problem is that if you want to change a variable factor, you’d have to go back, and start over from scratch. Krita, Affinity Photo, and Photoshop allows the user to skip the scratch part, and allows the user to directly manipulate the variable factor. That means less clicks, and more time being saved. They also have the benefits of something like instanced layer, but as far as I know, only Krita has a true instanced layer feature, and that also can save a lot of time. To me, manipulating variable factors, and masking the effect is really essential, and in those 3 programs, you don’t have to create a mask to do that. They all do the job when you apply a filter mask/layer, and you can go directly paint on the filter mask/layer mask. You pretty much can waste tons of time if you don’t have these options, and that’s the main reason GIMP is not accessible to many people besides absence of CMYK support, and as some people say, it does not matter how good destructive tools are, if they are only destructive or semi-destructive, then there’s no point using the program.

Exactly my point. Some people love to use so many effects, and some of them love to be able to manipulate variables used for those effects by going back and edit the variables straight away. On the FOSS world, you have to combine Krita+GIMP to get the most of it as they both have their pros and cons (One highly flexible nondestructive editing system at the cost of some useful things for the photographers, and the other has a lot of destructive tools at the cost of having to find workarounds to the absence of nondestructive editing). They’re stuck with Affinity Photo, and Photoshop if they actually want a program that offers more than GIMP+Krita combined. If they’re lucky to run into more obscure programs that does the job, then that would also be the answer to them.

A few thing can mimic nondestructive effect with layer mask/opacity, but there’s a lot that can’t be mimic’d or takes some times to do again, and it’s requires you to find workarounds to that. That’s why I love Photoshop, and Krita as an additional tool if I’m working with photographs alongside with GIMP. You don’t really have much choices besides either staying on GIMP and trying to mimic effects that’s a lot easier to do on Photoshop/Affinity Photo/Krita at times or learning to combine GIMP and Krita to get around limitations of those two programs, and making the most of it if you’re on FOSS world.

They’re still missing out on critical features that the other 3 programs do offer after more than 15 years of development, but at least they’re finally addressing or acknowledging it. That’s a good new, but bad news is that GIMP will always be tarnished with a reputation of horrendously slow development, and for a while, they will remain as a non-professional degree application.

We’ve got a few folks working on GIMP right now, and there is movement (even if it seems slow).

The GEGL port is moving forward, and some contributors are bringing in some neat painting/animated oriented features (like Jehan Pages). Some new work on layer groups was recently pushed (Ell’s pass-through).

Really, the biggest problem we have right now is a lack of capable contributors. Not just drive-by commits. :frowning:

If you’re willing to adjust your thinking/approach - most of what you probably need could be done by carefully approaching the problem. I personally haven’t really missed adjustment layers, but if I had a nickel for every “thing X” that Ps has that GIMP simply has to have, I’d be quite rich (like, $4.50 or so).

As a side note, I wonder if not having adjustable layers hasn’t helped my understanding/feeling of PP. I will sometimes reach a point where I’ve rolled up multiple changes at a mid-way point, and create a layer from visible. If I want to modify something down the stack I’ll re-do that step to taste. Doing it a few times, I get a better feeling for what it will do to drive my work towards my final image. That tends to stick in my head so that the next time I am approaching the same problem, my brain says “a-ha!” and I can get much closer on a first pass. :slight_smile:


Rather a lot of OS occurs because some one wants it and may loose interest when it’s done what ever it does to their satisfaction.

Once the GIMP goes to a deeper colour depth it becomes what might be called inconveniently none destructive other than for operations such as sharpening. Personally I don’t care two hoots about sharpening as I generally only use it twice. Once at the beginning and again when ever a shot is finished and reduced. The problem with an 8bit colour depth can often be seen when histograms are viewed after processing - gaps and the info has gone so can’t be bought back. If something is manipulated too much the gaps will cause problems.

Anyway I generally only use it for layer work on shots that have been largely corrected some where else. I mostly usually use RT and Fotoxx. Fotoxx keeps a lot of undoes and is destructive but 2 clicks save a version. It works in 24bit fp and has a number of useful adjustments and brushes and selection tools. Sometimes it’s better to save and switch to the GIMP. Not done it recently but suspect the GIMP can be used as a plugin in it as well. In the past any application could be.


FYI gimp 2.9.5 supports up to 32 bit images.


Let me share my opinion:
As a photographer my day-to-day needs are covered by excellent darktable.
Gimp is useless for me for photo editing as it is terribly slow even with medium sized pics like 12MP. I use it only for graphical work such as freeform selecting in product photos etc.
So no need absolutely to purchase AFFINITY FOTO.

That does not mean I do not purchase software at all on linux. Vuescan is an example as there is nothing comparable to use my Coolscan 4000 with color negatives or slides in FOSS.

So as always … it depends …