I admit for the very limited things I do and only occasionally I use Paint.net
Still in my mind Gimp is much more powerful?
It is powerful, but usability is as shit as it always has been. Except for specific use cases Krita is the way to go nowadays. Even if it's focussed on digital painting, it has almost everything you need for digital editing as well, with a much more user friendly UX.
I think the main problem with GIMP is that it was made by developers with developers in mind, completely ignoring how digital artists work. Like it or not, everybody has to take pages from Photoshop (and co.) like how Affinity and Krita are doing, otherwise there's really no incentive to completely change your workflow.
So much. Yes. How do we all agree on this and yet it hasn't sunk in after twenty five years?
I mean, Blender got it. Be like Blender.
Gimp never even needed to be as robust as Photoshop. All anybody needs is a OSS alternative to casually touch up a photo every now and then if you aren't forced by life to be one of Adobe's hostages. Just give me a vaguely Photoshop-like thing with a semi-competent context aware filter that isn't physically painful to use. Kryta and others will pick up the slack for all the painting stuff.
As a developer I still find it an extremely frustrating and unintuitive experience.
Yeah the GUI is horrible with Gimp but it is very powerful software. I'm used to it's idiosyncrasities but it really needs a GUI refresh. It's powerful software held back from it's full potential.
I admit for the very limited things I do and only occasionally I use Paint.net
Unfortunately, it's not available on Linux
Still in my mind Gimp is much more powerful?
Yes it is, but it's also much more complicated. I never fully understood GIMP, I prefer simpler options like Paint.net.
I use it a fair amount. But I think the name is still an issue for some people. They should change it to GLIMPSE. GNU Libre Image Manipulation Program SoftwarE ... or something
I admit for the very limited things I do and only occasionally I use Paint.net
Still in my mind Gimp is much more powerful?
It is powerful, but usability is as shit as it always has been. Except for specific use cases Krita is the way to go nowadays. Even if it's focussed on digital painting, it has almost everything you need for digital editing as well, with a much more user friendly UX.
I think the main problem with GIMP is that it was made by developers with developers in mind, completely ignoring how digital artists work. Like it or not, everybody has to take pages from Photoshop (and co.) like how Affinity and Krita are doing, otherwise there's really no incentive to completely change your workflow.
So much. Yes. How do we all agree on this and yet it hasn't sunk in after twenty five years?
I mean, Blender got it. Be like Blender.
Gimp never even needed to be as robust as Photoshop. All anybody needs is a OSS alternative to casually touch up a photo every now and then if you aren't forced by life to be one of Adobe's hostages. Just give me a vaguely Photoshop-like thing with a semi-competent context aware filter that isn't physically painful to use. Kryta and others will pick up the slack for all the painting stuff.
As a developer I still find it an extremely frustrating and unintuitive experience.
Yeah the GUI is horrible with Gimp but it is very powerful software. I'm used to it's idiosyncrasities but it really needs a GUI refresh. It's powerful software held back from it's full potential.
Unfortunately, it's not available on Linux
Yes it is, but it's also much more complicated. I never fully understood GIMP, I prefer simpler options like Paint.net.
I use it a fair amount. But I think the name is still an issue for some people. They should change it to GLIMPSE. GNU Libre Image Manipulation Program SoftwarE ... or something