Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Ken Springer wrote:

On 6/9/13 10:54 AM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:
On 06/09/2013 12:00 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 6/9/13 8:11 AM, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
The Linux magazine ”Linux Format” compared image editors in their
LXF171 issue. The combatabts were GIMP, Inkscape, Krita, MyPaint and
Pinta. MyPaint won the user interface round, but was worst in a few
categories, such as text support, user interface customisability,
multimedia and animation. ”Winner” was Krita, then Inkscape, Gimp,
MyPaint and Pinta.

To me, this is muddying the waters of what an image editing program is.

Image editing means manipulating a bitmap at the pixel level. Those
would be Gimp, Photoshop, etc.

Inkscape is a vector drawing program, such as Corel Draw and any CAD

Totally different animals, and to compare them in one test is, to me,
wrong if not bogus.

Well, you need both pixel and vector based graphics packages.  Yes they
are like comparing apples and oranges, but both are needed in your list
of graphic editing packages, along with some people needing CAD and
Visio/Dia diagramming packages.  I also would include a good photo
stitching package.  I use ICE on Windows [free from Microsoft], but I
have not looked into one for Ubuntu.

Agreed on all points. Although I'd say a good bitmap editor would do the stitching just fine if you choose to take time to do it. I used to do that with scans from a hand scanner in my Atari computing days.

But, to compare them? That would be like calling a Kenworth and a Ferrari racing cars. LOL

can you clarify this for me - suppose I have a set of purposes, e.g. altering color, inserting text, cropping, what have you; is it unreasonable to compare 'different animals' in respect of ease of use and quality of results in relation to specific ends like this?

(btw I compare apples to oranges all the time and indeed I prefer one to the other. I don't call them both 'citrus fruit' though, I do call them 'fruit' or food (actually, breakfast).)

why can't we compare "different animals" according to specific ends?


The problem is finding an easy one to learn and use that has all the
need features you might require.

This applies to any piece of software, not just graphics software. But you have to take the time to research other options, work with them enough to see which is the best tool for the job, and then use that tool.

I'm doing a personal research project that will result in something printed, just not sure what. To get everything done, Writer and any other word processor I've ever used, just plain sucks. Scrivener, OTOH, is looking super promising. At the moment, the printed output is the current concern. I've just been using it for the last two weeks, not constantly of course, but I am impressed. And no, I'm not doing a movie or stage script. LOL

That eye opening situation with Scrivener, now makes me want to try out LyX.

Paint Shop Pro 5 was that for me, but
it would not install on Win7 Home Premium, which came with my laptop
[but will install on Win7 Professional].  Been using PSP5 for something
like 10 years.  PSP X5 is not as easy to use, since the company wanted
to compete with Photoshop since version 8 or 9, so the learning curve
started to increase.

We all have our specific needs and ability to deal with the learning
curves of the different image/graphics editors.  Some are good, some are
bad.  Some are easy but not many features, but some are feature rich and
hard to use.

There was a version of GIMP called GIMPshop that was a "hack" to try and
make GIMP easier to use.  I think it was a Windows only package though.

Felmon Davis

Things will get better despite our efforts to improve them.
                -- Will Rogers
To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.