Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Krita 1.6 — State of the Art 212

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the headed-in-the-right-direction-anyway dept.
brendan0powers writes to tell us Linux.com is reporting that while Krita 1.6 may have been released with the rest of the KOffice suite this week it is anything but a run-of-the-mill piece of productivity software. Krita is a 'fully-loaded raster graphics workhorse' definitely capable of standing up to most anything else available. Linux.com and Slashdot are both owned by OSTG.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Krita 1.6 — State of the Art

Comments Filter:
  • by chill (34294) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @07:17PM (#16681761) Journal
    While the comparisons to Photoshop and The Gimp are inevitable, Krita is one of the more advanced components of KOffice. For me, it long ago replaced The Gimp as my image editor of choice. If you are looking for a good image editor for Linux/BSD, you owe it to yourself to investigate Krita.
    • Does it acheive a goal that couldn't have been achived within the GIMP codebase with less effort? E.g. different UI modes?

      Surely a name starting with a K instead of a G wan't enough?

      I don't see how this kind of replication of effort best serves the adoption of Linux on the desktop in the long run.

      • by pherthyl (445706) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @08:40PM (#16682763)
        Does it achieve a goal that couldn't have been achieved within the GIMP codebase with less effort?

        Perhaps, perhaps not. In any case, Krita is surpassing the Gimp in some areas that people have been complaining about for years in Gimp, and nothing was done. As a developer, what would you rather do, argue on the Gimp mailing list until your face turns blue about wanting to change the interface, or just start your own project? Sometimes you have to make a clean break to get new ideas implemented.
      • by abigor (540274)
        Other operating systems run a variety of competing graphics software, and it doesn't seem to have affected their uptake.

        Krita is a part of KOffice, an impossibility for the Gimp. It's about deep code reuse (koffice libs and kdelibs), not about a different UI.
      • by Al Dimond (792444)
        Sometimes it's actually easier to make a clean break than to modify an existing codebase. Sometimes an existing design is tied to assumptions and that you don't want to make, design decisions that you want to make differently. And for people that are familiar with coding KDE programs writing a pure KDE app will be easier, and they'll produce better code that integrates better with KDE.

        I'm not familiar with this case specifically, but these could be among the reasons that they chose to write their own.

        I'm
      • by carlmenezes (204187) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @09:10PM (#16683075) Homepage
        Well, I agree with you and I don't.

        Look at the distros for example. Lots of em out there and then Ubuntu comes along - when it did, we were like, "who needs ANOTHER one" - and does something right. People notice that and move to it. Other distros try to adopt some of the plus points. That's not wasted effort. I guess evolution of a species is the closest I analogy I can get to. The best survive.

        So if Krita comes along and even though it duplicates 90% of the functionality, if Krita gets it right, then all that 90% of the effort is worth it.

        It's diminishing returns, yes, but in the end, its the extra mile that distinguishes the leaders from the also rans. It may not be any extra functionality at all - just the way its been put together that makes it a winning combination. Then the power of open source takes over and everyone benefits.

        I think thats great and thats kinda what evolution is - varying the combination of a lot of existing stuff ever so slightly to see which one produces the best. So its a double edged sword - a freakin amazing one at that :)
        • This is not a personal criticism, just a slight tweak in your wording...

          Evolution has nothing to do with producing the "BEST" anything. Evolution produces the "most fit for survival". Saying that "evolution is (...) varying the combination of a lot of existing stuff ever so slightly to see which one produces the best" implies a higher purpose or thought behind the random mutations that evolution exploits. The truth is that most of this "varying" produces less fit entities and they quickly die. That doesn't
      • by chill (34294) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @09:58PM (#16683539) Journal
        Yes, it did. For the longest time The Gimp was bound by "that'll be in 2.0, using Gegl". Gegl languihed for YEARS, before recently resurfacing but still not done - not even close. This is one reason the project was forked into Film Gimp, now CinePaint [cinepaint.org].

        Personally, The Gimp's interface gave me fits and I found it very hard to work in. Since I on't use it every day, it isn't something I was willing to put a huge effort into learning. Krita is much more "natural" to me and had a much shallower learning curve.

        KDE integration is more than just a theme and a K-name. That would have been almost impossible with The Gimp.

        Finally, there is the name "Gimp". It means "lame" or "handicapped", which was a totally stupid thing to call a program. Yes, I know it is an acronym, but ut was a stupid idea none-the-less.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by metamatic (202216)
          Finally, there is the name "Gimp". It means "lame" or "handicapped", which was a totally stupid thing to call a program.

          Oh, I don't know, that's pretty much how the UI makes it feel.

        • A gimp is a midget or dwarf used for homosexual purposes.

          You didn't want to know that, did you?
        • ---
          Finally, there is the name "Gimp". It means "lame" or "handicapped", which was a totally stupid thing to call a program. Yes, I know it is an acronym, but ut was a stupid idea none-the-less.
          ---

          Because Krita is a better name. At least gimp has one clear and universally known pronunciation and doesn't look like a word cobbled together from Czech and Klingon.

          L
        • It was named after the Gimp in "Pulp Fiction", which was popular at the time that the software was originally released. I thought it was a stupid name then, and it's still a stupid name now. It's just that idiot geeks have made the realization that "I can call my own product anything I want, and people will have to use that word! Let's call it something really stupid! Won't that be funny?"
          • Which has always amazed me about the name sticking so long. Within six months of "Pulp Fiction" being released, a conservative Catholic woman of my acquaintence made the statement, "you used to be able to stop at people's house and ask to use the phone if you had car trouble, but now you don't know if they've got a Gimp in the basement or what!" At that point, any lingering questions about whether they were making fun of the disabled, or trying to make people squirm with that name, were pretty much settle
        • By the way I just found this on the web.. a little outdated, but fairly interesting and promising:

          OpenUsability Sponsored Student Project: GIMP

          OpenUsability is proud to announce the offering of a series of sponsored student projects. As the first project, the GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP) has been chosen. We are looking for a student in usability or interaction architecture who wants to work on designing the user interface for the next generation of GIMP.

          If you are a student of usability, user-inter
        • by darkwhite (139802)
          What stupefies me is that hundreds of people have complained about Gimp's UI to the developers, which means a massive silent fraction of its potential users are probably uncomfortable with the UI, and yet for many years the developers did nothing and most tried to argue that the UI is superior and we just don't get it (one suggestion that resurfaces constantly is that I should use a separate virtual desktop for Gimp). This is remarkable hubris.
      • I don't see how this kind of replication of effort best serves the adoption of Linux on the desktop in the long run.

        The goal IS NOT to get Linux adopted on the deskoop. The goal is to create an image processing component for an office suite. This is Free Software, where developers are Free to do whatever the fsck they want. If it means Aunt Tillie ain't going to be using Linux this decade, so what?

        You don't like it, start funding development on the stuff you want developed. Whines don't spend in this commun
      • The one thing Krita cannot - run on Windows, wheras Gimp does.

        That one feature is enough for me, as we have several computers in my family, and not all of them run Linux. Yes, it is installed on the Linux box.

        • The one thing Krita cannot - run on Windows, wheras Gimp does.

          I imagine you're going to be looking forward to the Win32 port of KDE 4, then...?

        • by Fred_A (10934)

          The one thing Krita cannot - run on Windows, wheras Gimp does.

          From what I've heard of the experience of Windows users of Gimp, running it in Windows doesn't seem to be all that great anyway. Judging from the common complaints it seems to really require a Unix style of window manager. So while it may run on Windows it doesn't seem to be all that usable (compared to the native version).

          Not that I've ever tried running it in anything but native Linux so I'm not really familiar with the current state of the

      • by MORB (793798)
        I don't see how this kind of replication of effort best serves the adoption of Linux on the desktop in the long run.

        Sometimes things needs to be rewritten because the existing code base just cannot be extended in any sensible way because of its architecture.
        Actually, the Krita folks probably learned from the design mistake of the gimp code base to avoid to fall in the same pitfalls, so in that sense they would have reused knowledge gathered by the gimp project.

        I firmly believe that iterative development is
  • Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Overzeetop (214511) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @07:21PM (#16681807) Journal
    Okay, so I've never heard of it. Not unusual - there are lots of killer apps out there I've never heard of. But, um, how does it stack up to the other "'fully-loaded raster graphics workhorse'" programs out there. More importantly, what are those others. ATTFA, MS Office Picture Manager isn't one. Okay. So it must be more like...um...anything in the article...no.

    Okay, so where does it fit in the Photoshop, PaintShopPro, GIMP arena? Is it simpler, easier? More powerful (it is a fully loaded workhorse, after all)?

    Maybe this is just a "hey - all you guys with the old Krita - there's a new .x version now". Which is fine, but really front page news?

    So, is this really sliced bread, or just a little bump in the feature set of KOffice?
    • Powerful, yet still easy to use?
    • by Tsuzuki (442471)
      Photoshop, Paintshop Pro and GIMP all tend towards the photo editing end of the spectrum. The natural media tools are what look really interesting... the main programs in that category would be OpenCanvas and Painter. I don't know about you, but that CPaint link got me all hot and bothered.
  • Hidden Gem (Score:4, Informative)

    by NereusRen (811533) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @07:23PM (#16681837)
    When I first heard of Krita, I was surprised to learn that I already had it as part of the KOffice package! It quickly replaced The GIMP for my "basic advanced" image editing needs, since it offers a similar type of functionality but:
    • Fits my theme, since I run KDE, and
    • Manages to restrict itself to a sensible one window, with sub panels and panes that can be moved around within the window, or floated without losing focus on the other windows.
    Can you tell what I didn't like about using The GIMP? :-) (Aside from system-specific bugs that I wouldn't blame on their developers, but still gave me trouble).

    You don't hear about Krita nearly as often as The GIMP (or, of course, Photoshop), but it seems to be a great alternative. I can't speak for graphics professionals (not being one myself), but it gets the job done for what I need to do. I look forward to this new version, and I hope development continues on this hidden gem of an image editor.
  • GIMP gets a bit irritating after a while. Yes, they've made great improvements on the UI with 2.3 but it's nice to try something fresh sometimes...
  • Impressive (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TheViewFromTheGround (607422) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @07:37PM (#16682029) Homepage
    I've been poking around with Krita 1.6, and I'm impressed. The Krita developers seem to have a much better understanding of how a simple-yet-effective FLOSS raster graphics app should work and look like. The GIMP has always seemed too complex for the casual user, but too shaggy and feature-poor for the serious graphics person.

    The Krita developers are doing a laudable effort to grow their application carefully and intentionally, just like the Scribus has done, adding high priority features and implementing them well (Krita's new layer-groups implementation worked very well for me without getting in the way).

    If it continues this way, Krita is likely to grab significant mindshare from the GIMP.
    • If it continues this way, Krita is likely to grab significant mindshare from the GIMP.

      It depends. Now that Qt for Windows is free software, when does Krita come out on Microsoft Windows?

    • by Abcd1234 (188840)
      FLOSS raster graphics app

      Who the hell puts graphics on their dental floss?

      BTW, yes, I realize what FLOSS is supposed to stand for... I just think it's one of the most idiotic acronyms yet invented. :)
  • Tried it (Score:4, Informative)

    by nagora (177841) on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @07:41PM (#16682069)
    Summary:

    Very slow and clunky. Ugly as sin. Memory use a-go-go. Irritating KDE-style one-click interface for the file selector. Indispensable for its ability to handle CMYK and 16+bit.

    I don't need it often and I'm always glad to close it afterwards, but until the Gimp handles 16bit at least for its working space, there's no way to live without it and do photo-manip under Linux.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      1. I think you mean "nice KDE file selector": I know I detest the GNOME one... So, in short, that's subjective preference.

      2. Ugly as sin? That's probably a function of your KDE theme. Redhat/fedora STILL deliberately mangles KDE to look and work like ass. Never use a kde package built by redhat or fedora...

      3. Slow and clunky? Well, I dunno. Certain things do seem plain slower to process than the gimp, but only things that kind of interrupt workflow anyway (filter application). Less mature code -> les
      • Yup, Redhat/Fedora screws KDE/Qt. I do a lot of work with Linux using companies, and I can always tell who is using RH/FC and who is not. Everyone's tastes are different, but if they start bitching about KDE's performance, flicker, memory, etc., then they're invariably using Redhat or Fedora.
    • by Simon80 (874052)
      Irritating KDE one-click style file selector? You can change that in KControl, and if you hate it that badly, maybe you should figure out how to.
  • After one month of Kubuntu, I just couldn't take it anymore. Krita was just too... unnatural. I'm not a graphic artist (far from it), but when I picked up the GIMP I was able to find out how to do things by using common sense.
    Krita felt really clunky and slow, and the buttons were never where you thought they should be. GIMP is the superior open source tool IMHO.
  • I must be a complete idiot when it comes to KDE apps. I normally use Gnome, but I thought I'd try Krita out. I did a 'yum install koffice-krita' and it installed normally. I tried to load up a photograph in Krita, but I could not figure out how to do it. I tried 'krita somepic.jpg' and that didn't work. I tried a File->Open and that didn't work. Can someone that is a KDE expert tell me how to use a KDE app?
    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 01, 2006 @08:06PM (#16682371)
      Well at work, I am force to use fedora, and I also wanted to use krita, and I also couldn't find how to save or load png/tiff/jpeg (and I am a krita developers !), the simple answers is that they have hidden the filters in koffice-filters (an optional dependency, how can you consider jpeg/png/tiff to be optional ?), but sadly koffice-filters depends on other koffice application, so if you wanted krita only, you are screwed :)

      And as a longtime KDE user and contributor, I strongly suggest you to avoid Fedora if you want a good experience with KDE.
      -- Cyrille Berger
      • I installed the filters and it does indeed now load up jpeg's. It's kinda lame for it to ask me what filter to apply when loading the jpg. Shouldn't it just know the file type?
        • I installed the filters and it does indeed now load up jpeg's. It's kinda lame for it to ask me what filter to apply when loading the jpg. Shouldn't it just know the file type?

          KDE is modular. And so Krita is. Krita uses KDE for all the low level file handling: import/export/save/load included. KOffice people said that many times: they have managed to bring up so powerful application suit so quickly only because of great KDE framework. It allows them to concentrate on the job instead of low level stuff,

      • Well at work, I am force to use fedora, and I also wanted to use krita, and I also couldn't find how to save or load png/tiff/jpeg

        Well, I use straight-out-of-the-repository Krita on Fedora Core 6, and "File->Open->double-click on JPEG file" worked perfectly for me. I suggest you go find your system administrator and give him a kicking.

    • by zecg (521666)
      Gentoo has jpg as a USE flag for Krita (I always check them out and always do USE="-arts" for KDE apps). I don't know about Fedora, though... Maybe it's time for a distro change?
    • by EvilIdler (21087)
      There must be a library missing or something in your OS. Krita opens any common format just
      fine here.
  • Krita is fine but I wish they would do some more work on the object based graphics program, Karbon, it has some great features that the others programs don't (making a large drawing and priting it in tiles) but it is sorely lacking some very basic stuff also (import of bitmap obnjects like in Inkscape and OOo Draw). Oh and providing ANY instructions for it would be a big bonus too.

    I just don't do just plain bitmap graphics all that much.
  • Swedish coincidence? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by wilper (103281) on Thursday November 02, 2006 @03:08AM (#16685429) Homepage
    "rita" is Swedish for "draw". Add the KDE K to get "Krita", which means "crayon" in Swedish. A coincidence?
  • From the article: "Nevertheless, the vision is for Krita to be more about creating images than about manipulating them."

The moon may be smaller than Earth, but it's further away.

Working...