41–50 of 91 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Krita was started in the previous millenium, too. I've been Krita's maintainer since 2004... If I have to think about what I did with my life, https://krita.org/en/about/krita-releases-overview/ comes to mind :-)
Wow, this guy really sounds like a winner: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCnter_Freiherr_von_Grave...
Why is the handle not straight with the grid?
How does Krita compare to Gimp at this point? (Since someone on the comments here said it can be a Photoshop drop-in replacement)
Is this a good choice for drawing vector graphics? (Inkscape is a bit clunky.. or maybe I'm just not good at using it)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me, the thing that brings me back to Krita over and over is that fact that it's intuitive to use. I've been trying to use GIMP for the past 10 years and still have no idea how to resize an image/canvas or where the heck the crop tool is. In Krita those things are exactly where I end up looking for them.
Wife still uses Photoshop CS 2 on Windows, and I've basically told her that when her computer dies, she's getting Linux and open source software, or she's gonna have to figure out Windows 11 by herself and pay the subscription for Adobe. "Fine with Linux" she says, since it's installed on other computers in the house, "... but what can I use instead of Photoshop?". "Use Gimp, of course!" I say, and install it on her…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe Gimp has one of the worst UI/UX ever made? I still stand by my theory that gimp was made as a troll program to see how far people will defend opensource no matter how objectively bad it is to use.
As somebody who uses Photoshop for a living, I prefer the GIMP. The GIMP falls down on a few major features, not on usability. I can also see how Photoshop as the standard has broken people's brains so much that the concept of "intuitive" becomes entirely lost. It's not as bad as Illustrator, but features are just randomly thrown everywhere; the only reason I'm fast at it is from hard-won experience. It's impossible…
What was intuitive was Paint Shop Pro at around v3 and v4. I compliment Krita for being almost as intuitive as PSP.
How does it compare to Photopea for beginners? Is it similar enough that I could follow along tutorials meant for Photoshop? Edit: It looks like it's oriented more towards painting than photo editing
I don't find your blanket statement accurate. It is suitable for both applications, painting and photo editing. I have used it strictly for photo editing professionally and privately and it works flawlessly. Highly recommended. I use the knowledge I have from my Photoshop days and apply them in Krita, no issues there. For me it is a Photoshop drop-in replacement.
At some point (in the 2010s?) there was a decision to refocus on digital painting, I think maybe because of the difficulty of keeping up with the expansive featureset of something like Photoshop or GIMP (and maybe the additional difficulty of still keeping a focused, pleasant UI).
But it's not like the developers removed a bunch of functionality. It's cool to hear that Krita remains capable of handling some heavy duty photo editing use cases.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe Gimp has one of the worst UI/UX ever made? I still stand by my theory that gimp was made as a troll program to see how far people will defend opensource no matter how objectively bad it is to use.
As someone who never used Photoshop before I find Gimp's UI functional and nothing worth complaining about. Especially I like the MDI interface with each widget being a seperate window.
(At that time, Photoshop was also MDI, IIRC.)