The vast majority of them. Photoshop was designed from the beginning to work with print media -- it's called Photoshop for a reason.
Conversely, the people who just need to whip up some graphics don't need Photoshop; they have cheap alternatives like PaintShopPro, Paint.NET, or competing lesser-known commercial software.
Comments
You miss the point. The Gimp and Inkscape, as for as they go, are great tools - if you care about nothing but the Web.
They are in no way, shape, or form, ready for the print production environment. Not even close.
How many photoshop users really need to do print production work? Compared to people who just need to whip up some graphics, perhaps for the web?
It's not necessarily about being "the best", it's about being "good enough". The Gimp is probably there for what a lot of people need.
Oh, how about almost anyone who needs to work with a commercial printer? And I said Gimp is fine "for the web". Were you listening?
This is not a question of "best" vs. "good enough" for those who need CMYK and color management. It's a question of "works" vs. "doesn't work".
The vast majority of them. Photoshop was designed from the beginning to work with print media -- it's called Photoshop for a reason.
Conversely, the people who just need to whip up some graphics don't need Photoshop; they have cheap alternatives like PaintShopPro, Paint.NET, or competing lesser-known commercial software.