[maw]

Anyone know Photopea? The alternative to Photoshop? Or more precisely the browser version of Photoshop.

Here it is Photopea.

Ciao, Mario

[GUB]

And why not just the real Gimp?

[BigMackCam]

And why not just the real Gimp?

I guess this could be useful for lower-powered machines... netbooks, Chromebooks etc.?

[GUB]

I guess this could be useful for lower-powered machines... netbooks, Chromebooks etc.?

Mmm I suppose so. Trouble is it is not so much the app but the image and the bits it is being processed at that is the load. But I have just had a bit of a play with it and wonder if it could be a good first editor for learners. I like that the processes are still like gimp and photoshop. In fact it seems forked off Gimp.

[maw]

And why not just the real Gimp?

I guess this could be useful for lower-powered machines... netbooks, Chromebooks etc.?

Mmm I suppose so. Trouble is it is not so much the app but the image and the bits it is being processed at that is the load. But I have just had a bit of a play with it and wonder if it could be a good first editor for learners. I like that the processes are still like gimp and photoshop. In fact it seems forked off Gimp.

Gimp and the other programs have nothing to do with it, if you haven't noticed it is a Photoshop clone, in browser version and totally free, let's give it time to grow...
You can also change language on the fly, I'm sure many will use and appreciate it.

A

You Tube

You Tube

to Photopea

Mario

[UncleVanya]

I tried Pixlr when it was descent on my Chromebook and liked that. But over time they have ruined it and other free or low cost options. I'm sceptical that this won't also fail long term.

[maw]

I'm sceptical that this won't also fail long term.

I suppose it makes sense what you're saying, Photopea and among the latest arrivals and probably others will follow. I respect the great work and self-sacrifice of many programmers who do it without profit.

RawTherapee and Darktable are just a few examples, this last solution Photopea from the browser seems to me very nice and comfortable because it doesn't take up space and it's light and fast,

more than the most famous programs.

In the past I used CorelDraw and Photopaint, Painter, and many others..., but they seem to be used only by few people or almost forgotten, and yet they were good programs.

We are the users who decree the success. I've been using Photoshop since version 3.0, but lately it's gotten heavier and heavier and heavier and heavier and heavier and heavier.

I liked the CS6, it would have been enough to update the Camera Raw and add some little news, now instead you have to add something to the computer to each version.

Do you agree?

[BigMackCam]

Since Photopea isn't open source, the developers are obviously aiming to make it a commercial venture - and I wish them all the best in doing so. I notice that in their current pricing model they offer full use of the online app free of charge but with advertising. Disabling that advertising requires a modest monthly payment. The problem here is, most folks - given the option - will unfortunately go with the free offering, and many of those will already use ad-blocker software such that advertising revenue isn't forthcoming - in which case, that free model won't work for long. My guess is, at some point in the future - once a large enough user base is established and dependent on the software - the free-with-advertising option will either require folks to disable their ad-blockers (which many won't be prepared to do), or it will be scrapped and only the monthly subscription options will apply. After all, if it's a commercial venture, it has to make money somehow. I wish the team well and I hope it's a success, but I think they have a tough job on their hands to make it work financially...

[boriscleto]

Since Photopea isn't open source, the developers are obviously aiming to make it a commercial venture - and I wish them all the best in doing so. I notice that in their current pricing model they offer full use of the online app, but with advertising. Disabling that advertising requires a modest monthly payment. The problem here is, most folks - given the option - will unfortunately go with the free offering, and many of those will already use ad-blocker software such that advertising revenue isn't forthcoming - in which case, that free model won't work for long. My guess is, at some point in the future - once a large enough user base is established and dependent on the software - the free-with-advertising option will either require folks to disable their ad-blockers (which many won't be prepared to do), or it will be scrapped and only the monthly subscription options will apply. After all, if it's a commercial venture, it has to make money somehow. I wish the team well and I hope it's a success, but I think they have a tough job on their hands to make it work financially...

Like most web startups they are just looking for someone to buy them out