Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Krita 2.9 Released, Their Biggest Release Ever

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    kde

    krita has a big problem : i dont want 300MB of useless kde libraries

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by adrenochrome View Post
      krita has a big problem : i dont want 300MB of useless kde libraries
      Then use it on Windows. Or build Krita yourself. Every release I see this bullshit comment from people who don't know how linux packaging works.

      On Linux, distributions make every optional dependency for every package mandatory. So if a library that Krita uses, optionally uses another library which isn't needed for Krita, it'll still get pulled in, whether Krita needs that transitive dependency or not. And so you get the huge list of packages that gets installed. Which still only translate to the size of maybe half a dozen image files. Shucks.

      And of course, since Krita is a KDE application and uses kdelibs, there'll be kde dependencies. If you don't like that, tough luck -- feel free to not use Krita. It's your problem, not Krita's. Hundreds of thousands of artists don't mind and will, in the meantime, produce astounding art with Krita.
      Last edited by boudewijnrempt; 26 February 2015, 05:33 PM.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Remdul View Post
        Forum doesn't allow me to fix typo, I of course meant to say "and I never liked PS UI and terrible performance compared to PhotoPaint". I can't believe it takes PhotoShop several seconds to save a 1024x768 PNG. Equivalent file saving has always been instant in PhotoPaint 6, and it dates back to 1999. Sorry for the rant. Go Krita!
        HA! so nice to see i am not the only one thinking corel photopaint was/is the best. never understood why adobe photoshop overrun the market. corels photopaint was so much better in every aspect and the ui much much more easier to handle and do what you want.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by a user View Post
          HA! so nice to see i am not the only one thinking corel photopaint was/is the best. never understood why adobe photoshop overrun the market. corels photopaint was so much better in every aspect and the ui much much more easier to handle and do what you want.
          300 MB is absurd. Paint of XP 338KB: one only file makes essentials operations.

          Comment


          • #25
            biggest but not so. I think response should be concerned.

            Comment


            • #26
              You know, it's amazing. You start reading comments to see if someone's making a great use of Krita, and you're just bound to stumble upon someone complaining how GIMP is so bad...

              Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
              Because they're taking 2-3 years to do 1 year of development work with the amount of people working on it? The only reasons I can think of for that are:...
              None of the options you listed are correct. GIMP is simply *tons* of existing code. Rewriting it to use a completely new image processing engine takes a lot of time, epecially since there's just one developer doing the majority of the work, with minor-like contributions from others. See for yourself:

              https://www.openhub.net/p/gimp/contributors/summary

              Originally posted by gotwig View Post
              I really do hate GIMP, no progress for over 5 years. [...] Btw, I think it doesn't even makes use of your GPU at all.
              Well, let me see. 5 years, you say?

              Single-window mode. Check.
              32/64bit per color channel mode. Check.
              Loading/Exporting 16/32bit per channel PNG and TIFF. Check.
              Basic OpenEXR support. Check.
              OpenCL-based GPU-side calculation and rendering. Check.
              Tons of brush engine improvements. Check.
              Unified Transform tool. Check.
              Cage transform tool. Check.
              Warp Transform tool (on-canvas version of iWarp plugin, same as Photoshop's Liquify). Check.
              New gradient fill tool, with preview/tweaking of the fill. Check.
              Improved foreground selection tool, works great for hair selection. Check.
              Transformation and painting locking for layers. Check.

              I can go on like that. Granted, many of the things above are in unstabe version only, because <see reply to Daktyl198 above>.

              Also, here's report about what the project did in 2014: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp.../msg00012.html.

              Now, can we get back to discussing Krita again, please?
              Last edited by prokoudine; 27 February 2015, 10:55 AM.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by boudewijnrempt View Post
                Then use it on Windows. Or build Krita yourself. Every release I see this bullshit comment from people who don't know how linux packaging works.

                On Linux, distributions make every optional dependency for every package mandatory. So if a library that Krita uses, optionally uses another library which isn't needed for Krita, it'll still get pulled in, whether Krita needs that transitive dependency or not. And so you get the huge list of packages that gets installed. Which still only translate to the size of maybe half a dozen image files. Shucks.

                And of course, since Krita is a KDE application and uses kdelibs, there'll be kde dependencies. If you don't like that, tough luck -- feel free to not use Krita. It's your problem, not Krita's. Hundreds of thousands of artists don't mind and will, in the meantime, produce astounding art with Krita.


                Boudewijn, listened to your interview on FLOSS, great stuff. Thanks for all the hard work on Krita as well. It's great stuff.

                Ignore the idiots..

                Comment

                Working...
                X