Still vastly inferior to photoshop, affinity, procreate, etc

>still vastly inferior to photoshop, affinity, procreate, etc
>still lacking in features photoshop has had for 15 years
>still not accepting input from actual artists
>freetards still try to claim it can compete with the best proprietary software
Just embarrassing.

Attached: gimp-logo 1.png (1700x800, 306K)

Krita

Nobody every claimed it was you mong, this is why krita and inkscape exist along side gimp. Clumping all 3 projects together would just create one giant bloated frankenstein.

Just do what everybody else is doing and pirate GIMP

Works fine for most casual users, which is almost everyone.

Poor gimp. Efforts have been made for decades, but it's still a hot piece of steamy sheisse.

no one claims this. everyone knows gimp is trash. and now that photoshop cc 2018 works perfectly in wine there's zero reason to use it.

>2018
>gimp has been in development for like 30+ years
>gimp still can't draw a circle
The absolute state of gimp and the freetards that defend it

Inkscape is vastly inferior to Illustrator.
Krita is doing alright for what it is, and at least received input from artists. Still badly lacking in features and versatility though.

Stallman says people should leave Photoshop and start using Gimp. Jow Forums worships Stallman.

>freetards still try to claim
>freetards that defend
Gimp is like the punching bag of absolutely everyone, what the fuck are you on about? If you're gonna make a rebbit-tier shitpost at least make it entertaining.

>Using Adobe CC anything
>Not pirating CS6
Get the fuck out nigger, we're not buying your shit

>we're not buying
Stop extrapolating, poorfaggot.

who said i was buying it? do you not realize CC can be pirated?

Well I really feel like a big boi now.
Fuck.

Attached: god.jpg (573x400, 85K)

Then implement the features yourself or pay someone else to implement them.
Since adobe is obviously paying you, feel free to use some of that money to fund other projects rather than just complaining about them.

GIMP is severely lacking in shapes, basically any additive image work is impossible on Gimp as the functionality just isn't there. It does well in transformative tasks (transform an image using only information it already has) and collage (multiple images for one product). I would say that in collage tasks it is objectively excellent and in my experience often superior to Photoshop. But in the other sorts of work Photoshop is objectively better.

For transformative work: Adobe has a good selection of software-based filters and and the perspective tools are all super intuitive, the people that designed these tools obviously have taken lessons from CAD software on managing orientation dimensions and perspective. Gimp's tools are in comparison broken and even the most common perspective and orientation problems must be solved with a Macgvering of ruler lines, counting pixels by hand and doing math by hand to figure out where things ought to go.

And Gimp's weakness: additive tasks. GIMP has no coherent philosophy on drawing, it's clear someone wanted at some point to follow Adobe and have drawing focused around the select tool but some crosstalk with the Inkscape camp caused some leaning towards a path system, and then some lone asshole presented a software filter for shapes and now we have three solutions and none of them work at all and the GIMP philosophy concerning the issue is somewhere between "This is not appropriate for an image editor you ought to use Inkscape and then import the path" and "Well this really ought to be an a software like Inkscape not GIMP, but it would be nice to have but nobody wants to work on this so here is a bad hack you can use in the meantime"

I'm not blaming anyone or mad at GIMP, I'm just trying to explain what the situation is and why it is that way.

>software is ACTUALLY called GIMP
>somehow people are surprised it stays gimped

Attached: 1467019794288.png (717x474, 661K)

GIMP is great for image manipulation. It is not meant to do other tasks.

GIMP is the ultimate brainlet filter.

never used photoshop because I don't want to pirate it "like everybody else does" and don't do image editing frequent enough to justify buying it.
I use gimp because I was able to get it for free and it does the things I want an image editing software to do.
obviously can't compare the 2, but I am pretty sure that more than half of those pirate fags don't "need" photoshop either.
it's just implied that you pirate it when you require anything better than paint.

I do get that a proper tool is sometimes worth it.
like, I bought mathcad, but before that I was using octave just fine.
and I only bought it because 90% of my license was sponsored by my workplace.

Attached: D48FB78A-2472-4D29-80D5-4A666349D419.jpg (1024x1344, 191K)

I haven't been a memey print and post images at my cubicle boy but I kinda want to start with this one.

T. Msp monkey

is there an open source alternative to adobe bridge? most important is sorting by camera that took the image. I recovered a bunch of shit with photorec and trying to sort it out, but bridge is completely unusable on an older i3 with 4jiggerwats of ram

What is a linux alternative to paint?

mtpaint is the best I've found

XNViewMP?

I like it, anyway.

thanks, I'll check it out

great argument
did I hurt your fee fees?
let me get that adobe pacifier you like so much

>*blocks your path*

Attached: krita-logo.jpg (690x232, 21K)

>Freezes for 180s on a 8 core @ 4.7ghz while blocking your path because you applied a filter.

You haven't tried rotating something in ms paint yet
Be grateful

>has 600 dependencies

GIMP has absolutely terrible user interface

why there is no paint.net in linux

I went from Gimp to Krita and then eventually gave in and bought Clip Studio Paint which has been very pleasant. I haven't had any issues with it yet.

>paying for software
I know, I know but I just couldn't handle Gimp anymore and Krita's text tool is an absolute mess. I'm at a point where I'll happily pay for good software but never in my life will I ever pay a monthly fee for it on a personal level.

Attached: girl_brunette_room_table_computer_book-729623.jpg!d.jpg (1600x1200, 1.2M)

>install gimp to try it out because open source
>UI is retarded but whatever
>try it out to see how it works
>it crashes 4 times in one hour
I uninstalled it and never looked back. What a pile of shit. I am thankful for an older edition of PhotoShop I have because obviously open source image editors like gimp have a long way to go before being considered usable.

Mate, I haven't seen that gimp is alternative to photoshop in a while. Gimp is good for simple editing, however new gimp sucks.

>oh, just a few months, I'll never pay for a whole year

2.8 was relatively stable but 2.10 still has some bugs. Don't try a new release and not expect there to be bugs and crashes, which is strange considering you even bothered to compare it to an older version of photoshop. If you want to help the project, consider making a bug report with a crash dump.

Never forget Krita is a fork of GIMP, and has surpassed it.

>Krita's text tool is an absolute mess
They actually updated it recently and now it's far more functional

>They actually updated it recently and now it's far more functional
>some awkward window where you edit your text and then have to apply it to actually show up on the canvas

Yeah, really nice

>free program lacks features of program that requires expensive subscription
Wow, who would have thought? What a scam!

kolourpaint is a decent paint clone

UI of GIMP is absolute mess. Fuck that.

With CC you literally just have to edit one local .txt file and you will have an eternal trial.