171–180 of 197 posts
Flabbergasting. Krita's development started almost 20 years ago... and it is the first time I ever hear about it.
It’s often mentioned on HN. That’s how i discovered it. https://hn.algolia.com/?query=krita&sort=byPopularity&prefix... Is there a way to get weekly summary of HN for the top stories? There are probably lots of stories I miss.
Please be aware of the summary being /slightly/ editorialized :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like good tools as much as anybody, but I am always impressed with what a little talent and practice can do with existing tools. This story was in the news lately, about a woman that uses nothing but MS Paint: https://mymodernmet.com/grandma-ms-paint-art/
That's exactly as saying that someone made a full c++ program using nothing but notepad and therefore it's impressive. All I see its someone that made their lives more difficult by purpose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s actually an important and counterintuitive point that many newbies don’t understand. Eg, someone wants to learn to play guitar, so they go to the store and buy the cheapest, shittiest guitar available. Then they fight with it for a year and give up. It is true that a genius like Jimi Hendrix could, if he were still alive, take the exact same shitty guitar and make a 50k audience scream, but, crucially, you’re…
As a counterpoint, I see lots of "all the gear no idea" kayakers who think that buying the newest design will improve their paddling, when they would be better spending more time on the river than in the shop. Though I discussed this with someone else fairly recently- as kayaks become more idiot proof, there are a lot more incompetent people on the rivers now, "surviving" rapids that are really beyond their ability.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I think it's a bit sad to be whinging at those good pieces of free software for lacking features, and just recommend proprietary software instead. Surely, it is also the developers of the proprietary software that are causing this lack of features by not sharing their code for those." That is probably the most ludicrous statement I've heard today. Being "free software" does not shield you from criticism. And it is n…
> And most people do not care one iota about whether a piece of software is "free" or not. Can "most people" afford paying $600 yearly fee to edit images? Are "most people" concerned if they fail to make a yearly payment and loose access to all their projects because of vendor lock-in with Adobe's products? Most people I speak to about this are very concerned about this, although they may not know that these problems…
If that were to happen, it stands to reason that Gimp would never get any new features, ever again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I think it's a bit sad to be whinging at those good pieces of free software for lacking features, and just recommend proprietary software instead. Surely, it is also the developers of the proprietary software that are causing this lack of features by not sharing their code for those." That is probably the most ludicrous statement I've heard today. Being "free software" does not shield you from criticism. And it is n…
> And most people do not care one iota about whether a piece of software is "free" or not. Can "most people" afford paying $600 yearly fee to edit images? Are "most people" concerned if they fail to make a yearly payment and loose access to all their projects because of vendor lock-in with Adobe's products? Most people I speak to about this are very concerned about this, although they may not know that these problems…
Considering Adobe's Creative Cloud is pretty popular, it seems that yeah, they can. But that's irrelevant to whether a piece of software is FLOSS or not.
"although they may not know that these problems are caused by Adobe apps being non-free"
How dare those bastards ask to be paid for their work!
"I just don't think that suggesting proprietary alternatives in this context is particularly helpful as they also lack features of freedom, e.g. sharing, privacy and absence of vendor lock-in."
In this context, nobody gave a shit about that. They wanted the features that let them get their work done. If FLOSS doesn't have it, it doesn't get used. End of story.
"If Adobe freed the source code of Photoshop, how long do you think it would take for missing features to make it into Gimp?"
Irrelevant, cause that's not going to happen. If the Gimp developers aren't good enough to make those features themselves, without copying off of Adobe, perhaps they should work on something else.
"... except if the task involves working with other people who may not have access to that software, or may not want to run proprietary software, or may not want to give up their privacy or freedom."
So, nobody? Photoshop is the industry standard. If you're not using it, you're the one who's the odd person out, not them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Gimp is like Linux's MS paint on steroids Oh yeah, if steroids bring layers, masks, paths, a shitload of selection, transformation, and cropping tools, a whole lot of filters and loaders for all sorts of image file formats, complete color management support, 32-bit per channel processing and suchlike, then you might be correct :)
>complete color management support GIMP still only half-supports CMYK in 2018, though. But as someone who uses it professionally, I agree that GIMP is a Linux's Photoshop, not a Linux's MS Paint. I'm guessing that the user you replied to has only used it as such and hasn't dive into all the tools and features it offers. With all the bugs and half-broken tools it has, I still think it is a great piece of software, and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh well, despite of everything we said and wrote about kickstarters, people still post this :) We are simply not in a position to do centralized crowdfunding.
Couldn't a competent developer just ask for direct funding from a Kickstarter campaign? No need for any central authority really.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And most people do not care one iota about whether a piece of software is "free" or not. Can "most people" afford paying $600 yearly fee to edit images? Are "most people" concerned if they fail to make a yearly payment and loose access to all their projects because of vendor lock-in with Adobe's products? Most people I speak to about this are very concerned about this, although they may not know that these problems…
"Can "most people" afford paying $600 yearly fee to edit images?" Considering Adobe's Creative Cloud is pretty popular, it seems that yeah, they can. But that's irrelevant to whether a piece of software is FLOSS or not. "although they may not know that these problems are caused by Adobe apps being non-free" How dare those bastards ask to be paid for their work! "I just don't think that suggesting proprietary alternat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TL;DR: A program needs either (a) features + good UX/I or (b) rock-solid stability + amazing performance characteristics to compensate for anything else lacking. Gimp has neither, it's some kind of "middle ground" thingy that annoys everyone. > give up your freedom for a few extra features Not really, I use like 10% max of Photoshop's features I guess. But those features simply feel perfectly implemented, they just f…
> Honestly, its hard to say what's wrong with Gimp, because I can't figure out anything fully right about it. Even the fact that I'm comparing with Adobe Photoshop, a program itself known for horribly beginner-hostile and unintuitive (but in a weird way "learnable" and "natural") UI is a sign of how off things are. Ugh, this is so true. I've never done professional graphics work, but I've used Photoshop on and off fo…