Live data from Hacker News

25 Years of Krita

krita.org

51–60 of 101 posts

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#51

Krita is a great replacement for photoshop.

> Krita is a great replacement for photoshop. No it is not. Krita was meant to be an OSS alternative to Corel (ex Fractal Design, ex Meta Creations) Painter [1]. And that's what it became, eventually. And quite a bit more. I've been using Photoshop and Krita since the first version of both of these DCC apps came out (and Painter too, btw). Professionally. I.e. for most of my adult life. Krita is a great paint app. It…

Would it be accurate to say that Krita is a Procreate alternative?

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to be a phenomena I observe in the FOSS community where we reflexively respond to suggestions despite them being far beneath their FOSS alternatives. Only after digging or running into issues, do you find the good stuff. Brand name -> Low quality, highly mentioned -> High quality, rarely mentioned Photoshop-> GIMP -> Krita Windows -> Debian-family/Ubuntu/Mint -> Fedora I almost feel like a religious Zealo…

Why do you think Photoshop is low quality? In my mind Photoshop is very high quality. It just costs money and isn't open source.

In their example Photoshop was "brand name", while Gimp was "low quality" and Krita was "high quality".

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#53

Wow. I could've sworn Krita was only around 6 years old. I've only very recently started hearing about it.

While Krita has been pretty good for most of its existence it really wasn't until about ten years ago that it started having a life of it's own outside KOffice, then add some time to pick up more features and gain a reputation and you're right at 6 years or-so.

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#54
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think Photoshop is low quality? In my mind Photoshop is very high quality. It just costs money and isn't open source.

In their example Photoshop was "brand name", while Gimp was "low quality" and Krita was "high quality".

I see that now. For some reason I read the first arrow as the arrow of implication.

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#55
I was (and sometimes still am) using Paint Shop Pro 7 even on Linux (via Wine) until recently, but at some point i wanted to do some texture painting and found the whole process of "paint stuff, export to PNG, switch to Blender, reload texture, go back, etc" to be a bit of a PITA. I looked into making a plugin for PSP7 to show the image on a 3D model in a window but PSP7 only supported Photoshop plugins and making Photoshop plugins (for the circa 2000 version of Photoshop) seemed very convoluted as it was a quickly hacked together port of the process used on pre-MacOSX Macintosh.

So i thought i might try Krita instead. TBH i was never a fan of Krita's UI, it was too Photoshop-y for me (which i disliked, i found GIMP's UI better but PSP7's the best) but since it does have some digital painting focus and i prefer Qt apps to Gtk apps these days (GIMP is still on Gtk2 which i find perfectly fine, but very soon the Gtk3 version will replace it and i'm not a fan of Gtk3), i decided to check if i can make what i had in mind and if so stick with it.

I managed to hack together a plugin[0][1][2] for Krita to display a 3D model with the current image as a texture, initially using pure Python but later changed to a combination of Python and C (to do some more complex processing, like a feature in the latest version to force a predefined 8bit palette[3] to a texture). I also have some WIP shader support[4], though it is currently very experimental (as they increase the complexity a ton, but i'd like to be able to do use Krita for making simple materials).

I still think Krita is awkward in various places (i really dislike how paste works with automatic cropping, placing the new paste whenever it feels like and despite the 18913 paste commands there is no something like "paste into selection" to automatically scale the pasted image to fill the selection boundaries, which is extremely useful). These can be worked around of course (and the paste into selection thing can be done with a plugin), but i still find PSP7's UX much better overall.

From a plugin perspective sadly the plugin API is very limited: there is no way to "monitor" an image for changes, for example, so in my plugin (and this is something i've seen many other plugins do) i have to use a timer to constantly grab the image and upload it to the GPU. This is fine for ~1024x1024 and ~2048x2048 textures (depending on yoru PC) but having some sort of "the image changed at rect x1,y1,x2,y2" event would really speed things up. Similarly for things like checking if a document is closed (so you can get rid of its references) you have to enumerate all open views and see if there are any remaining views with the document.

I did consider building Krita myself and trying to contribute improvements but the build process is a bit shaky and even after i managed to build it, it crashed at startup. As Krita is something i'd probably rely on going forward for my own gamedev needs, i'll probably try again though.

[0] http://runtimeterror.com/tools/kritaview3d/

[1] https://i.imgur.com/X4k0qeU.png

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciAZmgKe3Ao

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAxiXQVLcRw

[4] https://i.imgur.com/I5RXHqy.png

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to be a phenomena I observe in the FOSS community where we reflexively respond to suggestions despite them being far beneath their FOSS alternatives. Only after digging or running into issues, do you find the good stuff. Brand name -> Low quality, highly mentioned -> High quality, rarely mentioned Photoshop-> GIMP -> Krita Windows -> Debian-family/Ubuntu/Mint -> Fedora I almost feel like a religious Zealo…

Fedora and Debian (stable) are not really directly comparable, they have different goals. Fedora is essentially a beta channel for RedHat, equivalent to Debian Unstable/testing. Fedora will ship a more up-to-date desktop, but Debian will be better for servers and/or users who don't need the latest Gnome.

> Fedora will ship a more up-to-date desktop, but Debian will be better for servers

This is the problem, people are recommending Debian-family for desktop.

I don't think people are really talking about server linux, that is almost a solved problem.

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#57
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is Fedora better than Debian? (genuinely curious)

It's not, it's just different. You mostly get newer stuff and more breakage.

> more breakage.

NO! STOP!

Seriously, don't spread rumors. Debian "Stable" has bugs and issues that up-to-date distros have solved.

The word "Stable" has 0 correlation with bug-free. It is entirely meaning "outdated/old" and used for bug consistency, not OS stability.

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to be a phenomena I observe in the FOSS community where we reflexively respond to suggestions despite them being far beneath their FOSS alternatives. Only after digging or running into issues, do you find the good stuff. Brand name -> Low quality, highly mentioned -> High quality, rarely mentioned Photoshop-> GIMP -> Krita Windows -> Debian-family/Ubuntu/Mint -> Fedora I almost feel like a religious Zealo…

How is Fedora better than Debian? (genuinely curious)

Faster, feature rich, less bugs, things just work.

Debian-family will have you running into hardware issues, peripheral issues, software conflicts, and using the terminal to update/install things.

I used to think Linux was cheap/knockoff Windows.... No, that was just Debian-family. Fedora is better than Windows.

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#59
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to be a phenomena I observe in the FOSS community where we reflexively respond to suggestions despite them being far beneath their FOSS alternatives. Only after digging or running into issues, do you find the good stuff. Brand name -> Low quality, highly mentioned -> High quality, rarely mentioned Photoshop-> GIMP -> Krita Windows -> Debian-family/Ubuntu/Mint -> Fedora I almost feel like a religious Zealo…

Fedora >> Debian is an interesting take. I've never particularly got along with rpm-based distros, and they always seemed much the same quality, just different. What makes the difference in your opinion?

Copypasted:

"Faster, feature rich, less bugs, things just work.

Debian-family will have you running into hardware issues, peripheral issues, software conflicts, and using the terminal to update/install things.

I used to think Linux was cheap/knockoff Windows.... No, that was just Debian-family. Fedora is better than Windows."

Re: 25 Years of Krita

#60
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of overlap, but I’d hardly call GIMP low quality. I use Gimp for photos (layers and such) . It wasn’t intuitive but I know how to use it now: I have Krita on an android tablet with a stylus for painting (it’s brushes are amazing) and frankly it’s pretty fun to use. Using open source can be “free” but if you use something a lot they alway need donations.

Compared to Krita's interface, abstractions, and capability, GIMP feels pretty archaic. It's a vaguely capable photo editor but it's awful for digital painting.

Well that might be because, well, GIMP is made for photo editing, not for digital painting. Of course, GIMP does have some drawing tools in it, but that's clearly not the task it was designed for.
Post reply on HN