Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-web] Alexandre Prokoudine attacks on GIMP critics around the Web

GIMP is better than Photoshop for my purposes. No, it's not trying to copy
(which I think is the actual problem most people have with GIMP), and
therefore does some things differently as a result, and the tools are not a
one-to-one match (thankfully).
It's also free, completely cross-platform, and does not have nearly the
bloat that Photoshop has.
It's also faster on older hardware than Photoshop is with a tablet, but
maybe that's because GIMP doesn't require other bloated unfortunate
operating systems like windows and MacOS to run, both of which have their
own truly unfortunate set of restrictions.

What you want for illustration work is Krita. You should definitey look
more into it - It's a powerhouse of awesome features, which Photoshop users
would envy if they knew about them. Sure, you will have to get used to an
illustration workflow, but that's another reason why GIMP is seen as better
for photoediting tasks - That's really where it shines.

Disclaimer: I'm a career graphics and product designer, and after using
Photoshop from ver 2.5 (1992) all the way up to CS3, I decided to see how
much of my workflow I could switch to GIMP (mainly because of problems with
Windows and MacOS). After some initial growing pains, and a lot of GIMP UI
improvement over the years, I've been quite happily using GIMP every day
for work on cheap and light-weight laptops that barely run Windows 10
(forget about also running Photoshop).  GNU/Linux + GIMP allows me to do
this. (and Blender, Inkscape, Krita, etc.)

It seems people have no patience to learn new things or actually get
involved in a development community as the one that revolves around GIMP,
but these folks usually miss the point, and often the benefits of community
developed software.


On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 5:48 AM Ken Moffat via gimp-developer-list <
gimp-developer-list gnome org> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 05:51:00AM +0000, Ryan Stark via
gimp-developer-list wrote:
One question to ask is why are Procreate and Photoshop so popular with
digital painters and Photoshop wasn't even originally designed for this?
One major reason for this is the way the internal textures to the brushes
are handled. Photoshop isn't even super fast for painting but this
gives lovely brush textures. Clip Paint Studio does this but it does it
a crap way.

I will note in passing that top-posting on developer mailing lists
is generally regarded as bad form (on user lists it seems to be less
unacceptable, although still a PITA), and even gmail can be beaten
into shape for that.  But these 'digital painters' will need to
speak up for themselves on either the -dev or -user lists before
anyone will pay attention.

Meanwhile, the gimp developers have made vast progress in the last
year, for which I thank them (even if I don't agree with all their
decisions re importing raw photos ;) : there are few developers, and
they do not have infinite time to work on whatever interests them.
I will suggest that this thread is a distraction to them and will go
nowhere unless you are either willing to provide code, or to find
someone whom you can sponsor to produce the code.

I hope I will speak for most people here when I say that I don't use
Photoshop and I had never heard of Procreate until you mentioned it.
As a user of libre software, to me they appear to be irrelevant.

Take three of these a minute for four minutes.  Don't take with
alcohol or you'll grow an extra head.
                                      -- The Doctor
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:    gimp-developer-list gnome org
List membership:
List archives:

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]