Krita 5.0 Beta Released With Better Performance, UI Polishing

[mppix]

There is no one that ever did such a count, and I'm pretty sure both tools can do the same fundamental thing, as well as simpler tools like MyPaint. simply put, not even layers would be necessary to get things done, so all this "GIMP get to do the same thing all those features you pointed doo but..." kinda not make it to me. Even if someone get to the insanity of hating itself so much to go there and count all the functions and both does not have the same rigorous number of features, to me, both are similar sized in terms of feature.

U serious?
This is about capability, not number of menu items.
You can professionally edit a photo in gimp (plenty do) - but not in krita.
I still like Krita's interface better.

[oiaohm]

There is no one that ever did such a count,

This is absolute wrong. The training manuals made by the course teaching krita and gimp some of them have in fact done full feature counts. Funny enough is you can see the difference just in number pages. A book covering all the features of gimp is 3 times thicker than a book covering all the features of krita. The book covering all gimp features in thickness is closer to a book covering all the photoshop features in a particular version.

Gimp in feature count is not just a little bigger than krita. Its a lot bigger by almost a factor of 3. As a person using the gimp and krita they can appear the same. Do consider those training manuals do end up covering features you would never find other wise in gimp. General usage Krita you will come into contact with over 95 percent of its features.

Gimp has a higher feature count but those features are not of the same quality. Yes if you compare quality built features Krita does have more features. About 1/4 features of gimp are properly developed out where almost 100 percent of Krita features are fully developed out.

RomuloP find where to get counts of number of features is kind important to work out developers numbers vs features metric. Lot of people miss how often those writing training courses end up doing program feature counts. I will give you would not have thought were to find the count. Yes a lot of people presume the feature count is not done because places like Wikipedia and reviews don't publish it.

[rabcor]

Oh please for the love of god tell me there are some serious performance improvements, last time I tried using Krita it just wasn't ready for modern day digital artist's ideal work resolutions and large brushes were basically unusable. Instant preview fixed a lot of the speed issues but it just wasn't enough.

And lastly I hoped they fixed that god awful gradient rendering issue where using more than one stroke to shade something with a soft brush (or airbrush) resulted in hideous visual artifacts making smoother rendering styles actually impossible (I recall the issue wasn't present in 16 bit mode and that there was someone working on this, but I mean this thing was a huge dealbreaker for me and the reason I actually stopped using krita in the first place, it was just below my bottom line at that point)

Krita's always been so close to being this super awesome program for so many digital art workloads but there have always been little things (I say little but of course I know they're big problems to solve when you're in the actual code of it, they just seem little because they're a small handful of issues that are very easy to point at and explain) like this dragging it down, these pesky little bugs and performance issues that have kept it as a niche program, I may seem a bit entitled to want more out of a free and open source program, but I mean if nobody comments about what they hate about it, how would the devs ever know what needs to be improved?

Just a few things that need fixing and improving to make the program viable to a much larger amount of artists... I really hope to see this program succeed more than it already has.

[rabcor]

Good job! Krita is the closest match to Photoshop, even if it is painting-oriented.
It feels more complete than GIMP.

I just wonder why does this program get less publicity than GIMP...

It doesn't. In the open source community? Maybe, I don't know. In the art community, the one that's actually relevant to the program? GIMP is barely a blip on the radar anymore because everyone knows Krita is simply better than GIMP at almost everything that's relevant to digital artists.

Also to the people saying that Krita has less features than GIMP or is worse than GIMP For photomanipulation? That's just misinformation, I imagine most of the people saying it are people who heard it somewhere, and they probably heard it from people who always just used GIMP; then learned abotu Krita, tried it for all of 10 minutes and decided they preferred GIMP because they already know where everything is in GIMP (You know, the same way people who stick with windows prefer windows because they know how to use it and learning to use linux would be a lot of work for them); and so when they couldn't find a feature from GIMP in Krita they assumed it wasn't there and ragequit, but the thing was probably there all along just named something different.

The way I see it as someone who has used both programs quite a bit, everything GIMP does Krita does better, I did not dive too deep into the photomanipulation aspect of things however so I might actually be wrong about this, I acknowledge this, but Krita is actually very decent for photomanipulation, it's not on photoshop's level, not by a longshot, but neither is GIMP.

[RomuloP]

This is absolute wrong...

No it is not... Any book closely following features only, will be slim, for both programs. GIMP books go deeper on techniques, because this is how photo edition works... That does not map well to software feature and there is nothing like this in painting, mostly because painting is not much procedural as photo edition. Also some books go on about mapping processesses from Photoshop to GIMP exactly for the same reason, there is more exact science around photo edition than painting, but this does not tell a thing about features simply because most of the things Krita is about, is quality of life for painters.

I also disagree about your perception of Krita general usage or even artistic usage, but I also disagree on your definition of what may be a feature or or feature measurement probably, so it will be pretty hard we ever come to an agreement even if you come with numbers here.

U serious?
This is about capability, not number of menu items.
You can professionally edit a photo in gimp (plenty do) - but not in krita.
I still like Krita's interface better.

Yeah... I am.
I would be surprised if a painting tool would be better in photo edition than a tool for this purpose.
And I disagree on what it is about, if this was the case, C or C++ would be both more feature rich painting tools and photo editors. I believe that many like GIMP and Krita interface better than C and C++ too.

[RomuloP]

Oh please for the love of god tell me there are some serious performance improvements, last time I tried using Krita it just wasn't ready for modern day digital artist's ideal work resolutions and large brushes were basically unusable. Instant preview fixed a lot of the speed issues but it just wasn't enough.

With instant preview I've already worked with 500 pixel size smudge brushes and almost no lag. Still not took my time to test 5.0 but my eyes are glowing for this 'paint thicknes' among new engine features, its almost real oil there

[khnazile]

The inability to open older *.kra files is a major downside of future release. I believe some people would refuse to update because of this.

[mppix]

Yeah... I am.
I would be surprised if a painting tool would be better in photo edition than a tool for this purpose.
And I disagree on what it is about, if this was the case, C or C++ would be both more feature rich painting tools and photo editors. I believe that many like GIMP and Krita interface better than C and C++ too.

I guess we should compare krita to inkscape not gimp then.

[usta]

OpenColorIO 2 is finally supported or still not?

I have just fixed the FindOCIO.cmake so it started to at least compile (withOUT OCIO support ) whenever you have OCIO 2.x on your system. ( Before that patchit even couldnt compiles )

Next milestone is to add 2.x support.

[RomuloP]

The inability to open older *.kra files is a major downside of future release. I believe some people would refuse to update because of this.

Where you got this from? I Installed the beta here to test this as it is a important point to me but had no problem opening old, even very old file.

I guess we should compare krita to inkscape not gimp then.

To me anyone can compare any of the three with each other, but I understand why people compare krita with GIMP. Both work on raster, GIMP can be used to paint and Krita also have some capability to edit photos, it is normal that people get to compare them.