I will no longer be able to assist with development nor debugging actual issues with the software... Quite juvenile behavior from the devs. It stemmed from this issue where the devs continuously argued in public by opening and closing an issue. Anyway, thought I would keep y'all apprised of the situation, since these are the people maintaining the software you are currently using.
I have GIMP and Photoshop installed and have at all times for well over a decade. I literally only use GIMP and I use it nearly every single day. Photoshop does some fancy stuff that GIMP isn't as good at, but as far as basic image editing? Give me the lightweight FOSS client with a sleek minimalist UI that's been the same for ages over some bulky corporate offering that loves to move things around and change its appearance just to look new.
I agree that Lemmy is a mess, but GIMP is the wrong target for this post. It's fantastic.
I'm not kidding anyone. I might not have the same needs or standards as you do, but I absolutely do prefer GIMP and use it over Photoshop. Yeah, there are limitations. I didn't say it was a better program. Yes, it can be kind of annoying to have to make changes to text. And yes, if your work flow requires you to have these tools it probably isn't a solution for you.
But frankly, people don't all need to do things the same way. I'm sure you're capable of producing something that looks better than much of my output in half the time and have a much more efficient workflow. Cool. But that doesn't mean I'm some kind of imaginary non-person because I actually enjoy using GIMP.
Why on Earth does that make you angry? It's literally not even any of your business.
If I used a different kind of paintbrush than you, would that matter? Literally who cares?
Krita sounds cool and I'll probably check it out, but chances are very good that I continue to use GIMP in addition to whatever else I might find useful simply because I like it and I'm comfortable with it.
Why in the world should that make anyone angry? It's okay for people to like different things.
I mean, personally, I make a lot of layers and save my work a lot, and I make use of the undo/redo stack. Again, like, it isn't perfect, but I used to do pixel art in the Palace editor. Like, maybe my standards just aren't very high.
I've been working on game assets using GIMP and it's been totally sufficient. But like, maybe Krita could add to my workflow. I'm not opposed to the idea of tuning my work flow to get better results. I do have concerns about spending excessive time learning new environments for only marginal benefit considering how wide my net has to be, but if it's a big time saver it might be worth it.
I edit photography and for serious work, I agree with you. The FOSS lover in me really, really wanted to like GIMP but I find myself just having it there, taking space most of the time. For light work and simple touch up work GIMP is fine, but if I already have Ps or hell, even Lightroom fired up, then I might as well used those for quick fixes as they exist closer or are part of my regular workflow. Guess the issue seems to come down to if you are willing to pay for the software. If one wants to spend $0, or one has light-use needs, then the use case for GIMP increases. But if you need more professional software, then you are likely to just pay for the industry standard for the extra features.
That is not to say that GIMP is useless, which is what I think some people may be thinking. I have been meaning to look at Krita, if only due to curiosity for a while. So thanks for reminding me.