I was a user when the Krita team focused on painting. I admit that I was among those disappointing at that time because I naively wanted Krita to become open source Photoshop. I thought they were making a mistake in the direction they took. I'm happy I was wrong about that.
For the two very most common bitmap editing tasks(color remapping and selection-based edits) it's OK and it even boasts some fancy features these days. For drawing, it has a workable set of brushes and fills, though I think Krita is the better app here now. For graphic design things(typography, layout, layers of procedural effects) too many things still involve a slow, indirect workflow, but there are signs of this problem being chipped away at.
(The single best tip I have for GIMP is: get in the habit of using the "/" key quick search instead of using the dropdown menus)
This one is more obvious maybe: I also found learning the keyboard shortcuts really useful when working on a web comic.
I don't have anything but praise about level of thought that went into modelling the UI and considering different use-cases, by author(s) himself. Extremely open and inclusive (in the best sense of the word). These people know what they're doing and do it well.
Even translations are community driven :)
Disclosure: I'm just a reader of P&C, who found the comic not so long ago and fell in love with it!
Does anyone who has been involved or kept track since earlier days have any insight into why this isn't more well known among the pantheon of digital illustration tools prescribed to budding artists? From the about page they've been around for a long time! I'd love to understand the market forces that were in play here.
There are a lot of negative people, and some people just want a magical dropin replacement one to one clone to the proprietary software, they dismiss new comer and opensource tools like these, However things are changing as more and more people are doing art with krita and it is spreading gradually.
the main market force is people on forums saying stuff like "the icons and menus aren't exactly those of Adobe Photoshop so it is literally unuseable"
For some reason it isn't as "standard" as Gimp.
Yet I had _literally_ never heard of Krita until last year; I was trying to figure out how to edit an image for work using my work-provided MacBook Pro and my boss said "I always use Krita."
Something something XKCD 10,000. https://xkcd.com/1053/
I haven't used Blender in a long time, but from what I've seen they've progressed by leaps and bounds too, and many prefer artists prefer it to the commercial alternatives. Solid evidence that open source software can rival or exceed commercial projects for the things that require user friendly UXs.
It's very stable and very polished, and really intuitive to use. Out of all the open source graphics/image editing tools, it is definitely my favourite now. It rivals or even surpasses its proprietary competitors in both features _and_ usability, which is no small feat.
However in other areas it's a bit lacking (vector graphics, and anything beyond simple-ish image manipulation).
A huge thanks to David Revoy who releases his "source files" and brush kits, they are tremendously helpful in terms of studying techniques he uses, and the brushes are simply and increase productivity a lot.
> We want to make sure that the support for HDR visuals becomes part of Qt itself, so other applications can follow.
I love it!
It's not mentioned on the Donate page itself though, so I'm not sure how they found that out in the first place.