digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at tirania.org

A promising GIMP alternative

tirania.org — Paint-mono is an open-source port of Paint.NET, most features are now functional.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • niallabrown, on 12/23/2007, -4/+68I think Krita has more potential to be a gimp alternative.
    • xaogypsie, on 12/23/2007, -1/+12Honestly, krita has potential to go farther than just a gimp alternative. 16bit support, clean interface, etc - I have used it for a few things on a professional level more successfully than the gimp. I respect gimp, but without 16bit support, exr, hdr, etc, its use is fairly limited.
      • niallabrown, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3Same here. I use it for professional work and I find it is actually very capable.
    • smek2, on 12/23/2007, -13/+2Krita is part of KOffice, so, uhm, no!
    • kleverness, on 12/23/2007, -1/+7Yes, Krita 2 looks very promising :)
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 12/23/2007, -1/+8Paint.net doesn't support layer effects, and Gimp only supports some of the effects that Photoshop does.
      Also no vector support. At all.

      Even the sunk ship that was Paintshop Pro is generations ahead of this.

      I like the direction this is headed, but it's way too early for them to start bragging.
      • gigatwo, on 12/29/2007, -0/+0It depends what you mean by "no vector support". GIMP can export it's paths into svg files and can also import SVGs as raster images. If you were referring to Paint.Net, then yeah. It sucks like that.
    • KAMiKAZOW, on 12/23/2007, -0/+7Gimp and Krita have different scopes, even though their functionality overlaps to a certain degree. Krita aims to become a full blown painting application (painting as in Corel Painter, not MS Paint) with image editing capabilities as "side effect". Gimp's primary goal is to be an image editing app.
  • openguru, on 12/23/2007, -31/+11Paint.Net is the reason why I still have Windows in my machine.
    • spaceman84, on 12/23/2007, -21/+7Hardware support, Photoshop and games should be the reason for having Windows still on your machine. Paint.net is garbage. But then again, so is GIMP.
      • zwaldowski, on 12/23/2007, -1/+17But then again, we don't all have $600+ dollars laying around. Y'know, for fun stuff like Photoshop.
        • lazyrussian, on 12/23/2007, -12/+8But we all do have BitTorrent :)
        • Tippis, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1No-one ever pays $600 for PS.
          You either get it in bulk (i.e. cheaper) through work (or, if you're self-employed, buy it through your company as a work tool, i.e. a deductabel) , or, as a private person, you get one of the many educational deals, for somewhere between 50–80% off. Adobe likes to extend and maintain their market just as much as MS, so they'll throw heavily rebated copies at you at the slightest provocation.

          Sure, technically speaking, those educational packages can't be used for commercial purposes, but if you're in a situation where you need to do that, it falls back on the company buying it for you.
        • newwatch51, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2Seriously. I have far better things to spend my money on. Gimp is a bit more difficult, but I can usually figure out how to do what I want to do.
      • anjinash, on 12/23/2007, -0/+7I'm a hardcore Photoshop fan and have not yet seen any compelling reasons to switch to anything else... BUT both GIMP and Paint.Net have shown an enormous amount of potential and are far from what I would consider "garbage". For free and opensource projects, they are amazing and come in handy when working on older hardware. For Paint.Net, there's something to be said for a lightweight but powerful image editor to open when you need to do a few quick crops and resizing instead of loading the mammoth that is Photoshop.
  • lovekudu, on 12/23/2007, -12/+11Looking forward to Paint.net, but not until they provide packages.

    Ubuntu 7.10 still uses Mono 1.2.4. I'm not going to remove such an an important part of my system (a lot of my apps use mono) just to try Paint.net.

    OTOH the GIMP UI revamp is just around the corner...
    • Remmy, on 12/23/2007, -9/+12There is next to nothing that relies on Mono installed by default in Ubuntu. Nothing system critical anyways. Not that I am complaining about Mono being buggy, resource intensive, and slow. Oh wait.... I am.
      • burty89, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2Yet (assuming you actually use Ubuntu) you use python apps all the time...
      • patpi, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1"There is next to nothing that relies on Mono installed by default in Ubuntu."
        gnome? -> Tomboy, F-spot, banshee:>
    • sq377, on 12/23/2007, -1/+5No metapackages demand mono, but the packages fspot and beagle do. You could also install an updated version of mono without breaking the other utilities.
    • jasutton, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2Mono 1.2.6 is currently in Hardy (8.04), and if you add the deb-src lines for hardy to your /etc/apt/sources.list file, you can use apt to build the source package on Gutsy (I'm doing this as I type this). I'll post back if it fails for some reason.
    • jasutton, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1After installing Mono 1.2.6 from Hardy's deb-src, the only way I could get the Mono Paint source to compile was to go into SystemLayer/Shell.cs and comment out the line "using System.Xml.Linq;" as this doesn't seem to be in Mono 1.2.6 (it's probably in Mono SVN, which Miguel is working off of).

      After starting paintdotnet, the main toolbars at the top are missing, as is the ruler. I also wasn't able to open up jpeg images (though I could open PNG and GIF images). Help->About crashes the application. So, to sum up, it's quite unstable, and even if you did install Mono 1.2.6 to use it, it wouldn't be worth it (yet). :)
  • keyo, on 12/23/2007, -10/+40Looks quite ugly to me. GIMP is all I need, the interface just agonizes me though. I'd be nice to see krita come along too.
    • sq377, on 12/23/2007, -0/+34Some of the new concepts for gimp's ui are gorgeous though.
      http://bp1.blogger.com/_wmx3OgdATU0/Ru0CWfvRJEI/AA ...

      Check out their blog : http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com/
      • DarkDx, on 12/23/2007, -0/+6omfg I want that softglow plugin
      • ahvi, on 12/23/2007, -0/+6Wow thank you for that link. That interface design is absolutely stunning. I hope they go with something like that.. and soon.
      • goatrandy, on 12/23/2007, -11/+6NO. The 'new' concepts, are still OLD concepts. Until they they get over thinking that their one unique style of user interface is 'the' path, and learn to deal with the sad fact that Microsoft has defined the user interface, they'll always be an 'alternative'.

        ***** 'em. They're so hell bent on doing things their way that they've forgetten that 99% of new Gimp users take one look at the un-intuitive, hideous, and non-functional GUI and throw up right before throwing the Gimp out.

        ONE application should have ONE window. Deal with it. Don't just make three of them translucent, assholes.
        • sq377, on 12/23/2007, -0/+7That's quite harsh, I used to do alot of graphic design with photoshop, and switched to gimp. I hated it for a while but after I got used to it's interface I started to like it. I stopped using photoshop entirely, and now all I use is gimp. I still prefer that they would make it a choice for the user to make the windows floating or docked.
        • fluoro, on 12/23/2007, -0/+8goatrandy: So why not do some mockups and contribute some ideas to GIMP's UI team rather than sitting around bashing it on digg. I mean, that's the point of it being open source right?
      • Rammsteined, on 12/23/2007, -4/+3While that interface looks nice, and has some good features, I'd much rather use the GIMP if it had a true MDI interface, I can't stand having the tool windows overlapping the image I'm trying to work on.

        It'd be nice to see them making an interface similar to MonoDevelop which lets you dock tool windows on the side of the screens.

        And yes, I agree with goatrandy, but without all the swearing.
      • mrgono3, on 12/23/2007, -1/+2dude tabs would rock in photoshop. hint hint any adobe developers
      • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -2/+1way to rip off apples HUD interface
    • SuperSloth, on 12/23/2007, -2/+5It's ugly compared to *GIMP*!?
      • sybesis, on 12/23/2007, -2/+3yes
      • fluoro, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3It's not particularly ugly on Windows. But as cool as it is that it's running on Mono's WinForms implementation, sorry but Mono WinForms apps look ugly as ***** on a Linux desktop. Maybe they'll make it integrate in the future though.
    • charlietuna, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5Yep, the gimp interface remains a mystery to me as well.
    • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -2/+2That GIMP blog is idiotic
      proof:
      http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/179/gimpidiotsy ...
  • baalzebub, on 12/23/2007, -27/+19no thanks, mono is evil from microsoft's lapdog migeul de izaca...
    • stalefries, on 12/23/2007, -6/+12This coming from a guy called "baalzebub"
      • nixfu, on 12/23/2007, -2/+9What a better authority on all things Microsoft....we all know there is a connection there.

  • krystalo, on 12/23/2007, -26/+7Paint.net > Paint Mono > Gimp
    • BoneheadFarker, on 12/23/2007, -7/+6Here...you dropped this from the front: Photoshop >
  • chugger1992, on 12/23/2007, -4/+91I thought GIMP _was_ the alternative.
    • noahhoward, on 12/23/2007, -4/+19Exactly, so now we have an open source alternative to an open source alternative that never quite hit the level of the original.
      • ahvi, on 12/23/2007, -4/+4That seems to be how most of open source is working these days. Perhaps if some of the teams out there were to consolidate a little, such as the Compiz and Beryl team combining to form Compiz Fusion for example, we'd be further along as a whole. I'm not complaining though.
        • HonoredMule, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2Software development tends not to scale well or easily (even, to a lesser degree, with open source). But, when open standards are used and interoperability gets the focus it deserves, software development DOES diversify well. And that's how everybody wins (except the greedy anti-competitive types).
          • ahvi, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1I definitely understand the concept of diversification as an underlying factor in the success of Linux, but what I'm saying is that there will probably never be completely open standards with all the successful companies out there using proprietary technologies. Gimp for example is a wonderful alternative to PS but it still lacks many features included in PS. The Synergy displayed in the Compiz and Beryl projects combining could definitely equal something greater for Gimp and many other projects out there.
          • HonoredMule, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1Your view seems to be based on your perception of one particular merger as a huge success, but I question that view. Compiz Fusion is a little better than Compiz or Beryl separately, but that has more to do with it simply being more maturely developed and polished. Also, they really weren't even trying to do anything particularly different from each other. That's extraordinarily rare. Then you offer examples of software held back by proprietary technology...but they aren't. GIMP, for example, isn't held back by inferior technology, but by patent law forbidding them to match Photoshop's features (like CMYK support).

            I think if you look across a broader history of open source development, you will see precious few examples of this "Synergy" or projects that have been or could be successfully merged in a way that produces a net benefit, for either the developers or users. On the other hand, forks and independent operations that bring meaningful enhancement to existing projects are virtually countless. (Examples: xorg, gimpshop)
    • phoomp, on 12/23/2007, -0/+15That was my thinking. All GIMP needs is a decent front end and I'll never look at Photoshop again.
      • fluoro, on 12/23/2007, -0/+6Same here. I'm not a hardcore photo editing person, though. People tell me about some cool features that Photoshop has that GIMP doesn't have, but so far they haven't been things that are critical to me. GIMP is extremely useful for amateur photo editors like myself, but the UI is not really intuitive and doesn't work well for those of us who don't invest a huge amount of effort to understand it.
    • platypibri, on 12/23/2007, -1/+5I gave up on the GIMP a long time ago. Did it ever achieve CMYK support? That and the ability to run 3rd party PS filters would make me take another look.
      • Spr0k3t, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1Go take a look at the plugins you can get for gimp. Both are now available.
    • jasz, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4that's right... GIMP is really good... it _IS_ the alternative to proprietary graphics editors... it just needs some more work...
      still, it's good to see competition in the open source arena...

      I just hope the GIMP team feel the heat and start listening more to their users..
  • reddevil3, on 12/23/2007, -9/+32GIMP is better than Paint.NET imo. Granted I haven't used Paint.NET that much but it just doesn't feel as if it has that many features.

    Just fix that GIMP UI please.
    • kingofpenguins, on 12/23/2007, -9/+4Gimpshop.
    • eclipse007, on 12/23/2007, -2/+26Paint.NET is somewhere between MSPaint and Photoshop/Gimp , it's good for people like me who do not have much expertise to use Photoshop or enough time to learn it, but at the same time need something more than MSPaint.

      Paint.NET at its current state does not compete with Photoshop or Gimp and it was never intended to do so.
      • Atomic1fire, on 12/23/2007, -8/+4Think of it like this
        if Paint was a ipod and gimp was a desktop computer
        Pant.net would be the UMPC inbetween
        • Atomic1fire, on 12/23/2007, -8/+1Not to say that Ipods are crappy
          let me refraise that
          if paint was an ipod that just played music videos and showed pictures
          and Gimp was the desktop computer which was higher priced and designed for gaming or something
          Paint.net would be the Umpc
          which could run pc programs but was just about as portable as the ipod althought with bigger screen size
          Im puting it in terms of
          Ipod>umpc>desktop
          paint>paint.net>gimp
          (Im avoiding the ipod touch because that could do more then an ipod
        • phazon88, on 12/23/2007, -4/+1Other way around.
          desktop>umpc> Ipod
          gimp>paint.net>paint
        • kahrn, on 12/23/2007, -1/+2You're stupid.
    • grumpyrain, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2Actually, as someone who uses both (primarily GIMP), neither is better than the other. It is like arguing whether Word is better than Notepad. They are different programs designed for different audiences. Once the .NET libraries have been cached, Paint.NET loads in under a second, whereas GIMP takes a minute to load all the plugins, and GIMP really needs to standardise some of its windows (start by getting a proper resizeable preview panel in all its filters). A new name wouldn't hurt its cause either.
  • kingofpenguins, on 12/23/2007, -11/+7What about Pixel? It is feature rich like photoshop and runs on more operating systems. Too bad it's not open source though. You also have to purchase it, but I hear that it's really worth it if you need the features.

    http://www.kanzelsberger.com/pixel/?page_id=12
    • Haiz, on 12/23/2007, -1/+8The good thing about GIMP is that it's free, so getting an alternative that you have to pay for isn't really an alternative.
    • Phlosten, on 12/23/2007, -1/+4Pixel is buggy as all hell. You are probably better off with The GIMP. I love The GIMP simply because it runs as fast as anything on older systems which I still use. Unlike Photoshop which is now the supreme king of bloatware. I am much more productive with The GIMP.
      • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -2/+3if your more productive in the gimp your not doing real design work
        • podgey22, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2Learn some grammar before you try and take people on, fool.
          *you're
    • KAMiKAZOW, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5Have a look at Pixel's development history. While it costs 30 bucks, its development progresses with the speed of a turtle with a broken leg.
      Pixel is at version 1.0RC3 on QNX since 2005, on Windows it's currently at 1.0 Beta 7, and if you look at http://bebits.com/appver/2168 you'll see that this program (it dropped the "32" from the name over time) was at version 0.99.8 in *2001*!!
      Despite the fact that this app costs money, you'll get no guaranty that your platform will be supported in the future. Sometimes you wait two years for a small bugfix release.
  • chaloobe360, on 12/23/2007, -14/+43And why exactly do we need to have a GIMP alternative?
    • SuperSloth, on 12/23/2007, -4/+29Because GIMP's UI sucks donkey balls, and the GIMP team has been too slow fixing it.
      • brownspank, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3*needs to remove mental image of GIMP mascot sucking donkey balls*
        • newwatch51, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1same hear. that never would have occurred to me unless you mentioned it though.
  • Patogrande, on 12/23/2007, -3/+44Someone needs to fix Gimp's UI, and I'll be happy
  • Schneckehaus, on 12/23/2007, -1/+33I just wish Adobe would sell Linux ports of their software...
    Gimp can't compare to Photoshop for productivity, but Windows really slows down my productivity, and dual-booting takes time to switch between OS's.
    If I could get some better editing/design software on my *NIX OS's I would gladly ditch Windows for good.

    In a perfect world I would have Ubuntu with Adobe CS3. I could get so much done, and so much faster.
    • MillenniumX, on 12/23/2007, -7/+0Adobe actually used to sell a Linux version of Photoshop, but that was a long time ago.
      • ratsg, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4No, there was a Unix version of Photoshop. The 3.x versions were the last released. I believe that Sun Solaris and SGI Irix were the supported operating system.
        • newwatch51, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2I don't know about Solaris, but I do know that they did release a port to Irix.
          • ratsg, on 01/01/2008, -0/+1if I have ever been certain of anything, I am certain that there is/was Adobe Photoshop for Sun Solaris.
    • ThyLabyrinth, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4Honest question: isn't it possible to use PS with Wine or some other emulation layer under Linux?
    • fuzzynyanko, on 12/23/2007, -6/+2Why not buy VMWare and use either Windows or Mac OSX?
    • jay667, on 12/23/2007, -1/+6Or get VirtualBox.org for FREE instead of VmWare
    • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -6/+1no designers use linux, and they're not going to sell many licences for a community that will just use photoshop to make crap logos for open source projects
      • Schneckehaus, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2I'm a designer and I primarily use Linux, so bugger off.
  • macaholic, on 12/23/2007, -2/+31Gimp is extremely powerful, if only we could get that promised ui update... hint hint...
  • mrmorris, on 12/23/2007, -6/+2Nice port, looking great!
  • exspasticcomics, on 12/23/2007, -7/+4why does anyone need an alternative to gimp? if you think the UI for gimp is ugly use gimpshop or something- once you figure gimp out it's like mad-easy to do anything you want with it.
  • brwright, on 12/23/2007, -11/+8Paint.Net is great for Windows, it's perfect for those quick edits. It's one of the main reasons that keep me away from Linux.
    • bmnrocks, on 12/23/2007, -2/+6Quite sad if that is one of the 'main' reasons that keeps you away from Linux.
  • tufftugg, on 12/23/2007, -1/+5I find gimp very good, and robust. I have done work on gimp that Graphic Designers thought I used Photoshop doing it. If it was wimpy, then the UI would be easy.
  • rockets, on 12/23/2007, -23/+39MONO is Microsoft's trojan in Linux. In a few years they are goign to claim all sorts of patents violations and try to kill it. Don't use any MONO-based product.
    • morphir, on 12/23/2007, -12/+7I agree.
      Tomboy uses mono
      Gnome-do uses mono
      and now paint.net

      they are all blacklisted in my repo. Because my linux has never had any trojans, and neither will it in the future.
    • Rammsteined, on 12/23/2007, -1/+7Don't they loose out for not pushing the issue from the start? If I remember correctly, patents become void if the patent holder doesn't protect their patent.

      Does anyone know?
      • fluoro, on 12/23/2007, -1/+8I think that applies to copyright law, not to patent law. You're not required to do anything in particular with a patent. You can hold a patent and allow it to be used/implemented royalty-free.
        Either way, it's totally ***** to be paranoid about Mono like this. rockets and the idiots digging him up need to do a little research before they spread FUD. See what Microsoft's Jim Miller has publicly said: http://web.archive.org/web/20030424174805/http://m ...
        • grumpyrain, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2And whether you like it or not, a ***** of business apps are now written in .NET managed code. This is for a variety of reasons, Visual Studio is one of the best IDEs available, .NET developers are easy to find and you get a pretty good ecosystem of tools surrounding it. Projects like Mono remove a barrier of users of those apps in considering Linux. I think that is a good thing.
      • trogdoor, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5That's trademarks, not patents ( it's the reason why thinks are now "Manipulated using Adobe™ Photoshop™ Software" ).
  • bootle, on 12/23/2007, -21/+37Do not support mono. It is a hook aimed at the mouth of the open source community. At the end of that hook is a line leading to a fishing pole. MICROSOFT's fishing pole...
  • bonlebon, on 12/23/2007, -4/+10Anything related to paint.net has no use at all. Gimp has way better documentation, support and awesome features.
  • DonCarcharo, on 12/23/2007, -7/+15It's a shame OSS is plagued by such bad names and shoddy interfaces.
    • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2and they go on about how good it is for schools because its free, err how can a school use a program called the gimp
      • samthurston, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1why would they not? It's a freaking acronym. That's almost like asking how a school for the blind could use "windows" or a catholic school could use "unix"... only some 1990's sense of political correctness could make such a weak connection.
  • ProfessorApe, on 12/23/2007, -10/+2seriously. OSS is a good example of why NOT to design by committee.

    [quote from exspasticcomics] once you figure gimp out it's like mad-easy to do anything you want with it. [/quote]

    ... except work (not export) in cmyk color. I might consider switching once that feature is finally added.
    • exspasticcomics, on 12/23/2007, -0/+0ya- there is that one flaw isn't their? but most printers I've worked with don't even want you to send in stuff in cmyk anyways- different apps/filters end up doing weird stuff like changing colors & stuff when opened by different computers (suddenly everything that was blue... IS NOW BRIGHT PINK!!!) instead (& I'm speaking from my own experiences here...) they'd rather you send them the stuff in ye old RGB & do any converting on their end themselves. (& that goes for lulu.com, the local newspaper here in town, 3 different printers I've worked with..etc..) cmyk was supposed to be this great cool thing for printers- but it turned out to have it's downsides. so i honestly could care less what pallet the thing uses- as long as it looks good & does the job. like i said- that's just from my personal experience.
      • platypibri, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2I worked at a print shop. If you sent us RGB, we sent it back. And for my own personal work, I want to make the call about color conversion myself. Not leave it to the printer.
        • exspasticcomics, on 12/23/2007, -0/+0LOL- well 10 years of self- publishing comicbooks & you'd be a first for me. that being said- i've never had any color conversion issues with anybody.- ever. RGB is easy in that regards & cmyk can sometimes be a pain- but this isn't really me saying that- it's me hiring printers- going through all their little notes & stuff-trying to find out how they want me to send in my stuff (so i can try & get the best print job out of them i can..) and continually running into notes asking for stuff to be sent in RGB. what to say? 10 years in & it's really turned out to be a real non-issue for me. (p.s.- not trying to argue or anything- i'm just saying that it doesn't matter to me whether gimp uses cmyk or not..)
          • trogdoor, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1No offense, but your self published comic books probably don't require perfect color when printed.
      • trogdoor, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1The whole reason why you work with / send things in CYMK is so that YOU decide how it is going to look when printed instead of the printer taking your RGB image and deciding how they think it should look. I have also never encountered the problems you described but it sounds like a color management problem rather than a CYMK problem and it's just that apps which tend to use CYMK also tend to use color management as well.
        • exspasticcomics, on 12/23/2007, -0/+0a printer was complaining about that with some else's work.-not mine. i've never have had any color problems with my work. CMYK was designed because it prints colors better & it uses less ink in the process. the software end of CMYK has had it's problems over the years.CMYK was designed for printers- not for me.
  • khoa1708, on 12/23/2007, -7/+0lol an alternative to photoshop also need its own alternative
  • cowsgonemadd3, on 12/23/2007, -7/+3Hey look everybody its another alternative to the alternative!
  • areohbe, on 12/23/2007, -11/+6The best alternative to GIMP is PHOTOSHOP!!!!
  • Subcide, on 12/23/2007, -7/+7The problem with comparing most of these open source graphics editors to photoshop, is that most of them are not made for graphic designers. Comparing something to photoshop is a fairly pointless exercise as its unlikely they are going to be used for the same things. Photoshop will still be used for professional web, print, and photo editing, while things like gimp will be used by the open source community to make logos for their applications or websites instead of paying someone to do it properly. I would love to be able to say Gimp is a great free alternative for the home user wanting to do basic photo editing, but it's not. Its user base is pretty much entirely linux based, and for the home market, something like Picasa has great usable photo editing features.

    I don't know many serious graphic designers who use photoshop because it's 'feature rich'. Most of them use it for very specific purposes, and do very much the same thing with it 90% of the time. The things designers care about in a graphics application are things like Good colour management, Consistant antialiasing, great font rendering, easy to integrate into your workflow process, good format support, etc... Not bevels and lens flares.
    • princessM, on 12/23/2007, -4/+4"paying someone to do it properly"

      Biased much?
    • tardpicard, on 12/23/2007, -2/+3"instead of paying someone to do it properly"
      --some *****

      Obviously you make money "doing it properly", but that doesn't afford you the right to undermine other smart, talented people who don't happen to use the same tools you do. I'm not much one for image editing, but you really come off as a jerk.

    • DestroyFascism, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1Paying some excessively don't you mean?
      Update CS to CS 2 and what do you get for $1200 bucks? A shiny new button and a tweaked system...that's it! $1200 bucks for a frikken button and an even more memory hogging image editor....
    • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -1/+2Subcide nailed it!

      FOSS people should start getting actual graphically talented people to do things properly for them.
      If you look at the Mac shareware scene applications and beautifully designed and have excellent interfaces because they have people who understand interfaces working closely with actual graphic designers, not just some nerd who typed "apt-get GIMPshop" or whatever you guys do to install stuff.
    • Subcide, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1It did come off as a bit arrogant sorry guys. I didn't mean to rip on hobbiests that just like to ***** around with pixels, I was just trying to state that none of these things are in any way a viable alternative to Photoshop.
  • EXreaction, on 12/23/2007, -2/+5Paint.Net really isn't that great for anything more than a simple edit.

    It lacks some of the tools I'd say are required for any photo editor, like a blur tool, etc. And don't go out and say something about being able to use the Blur Effect after selecting a specific area, it doesn't work like a blur tool does.
  • smek2, on 12/23/2007, -5/+16An inofficial mono port of Paint.NET is the alternative to GIMP? Yeah, right.
  • randeepjalli0, on 12/23/2007, -8/+18For anyone who has any questions about developing projects using mono and whether or not it is a Trojan horse, PLEASE read the wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_%28software%29) specifically the part about licensing, "Mono’s implementation of those components of the .NET stack not submitted to the ECMA for standardization has been the source of patent violation concerns for much of the life of the project. In particular, discussion has taken place about whether Microsoft could destroy the Mono project through patent suits."

    "On November 2, 2006, Microsoft and Novell announced a joint agreement whereby Microsoft agreed to not sue Novell’s customers for patent infringement.[9] According to Mono project leader Miguel de Icaza,[10] this agreement extends to Mono but only for Novell developers and customers. It was criticized by the free software community because it violates the principles of giving equal rights to all users of a particular program (see Novell and their Patent Agreement with Microsoft)."


    Basically, part of the Microsoft/Novell deal concerned Mono and the upshot is that Microsoft ONLY guaranteed that they would not sue customers of NOVELL, not LINUX, NOT OPEN SOURCE, NOVELL ONLY!!!!. NO OTHER DISTRIBUTIONS ARE COVERED, IF YOU DON'T USE NOVELL AND YOU USE MONO BASED SOFTWARE YOU ARE VULNERABLE TO MS PATENT CLAIMS.

    It is still early and nothing really important that can not be rewritten uses it, I recommend people blacklist the module becuase it is a MAJOR source of concern.
  • databoy, on 12/23/2007, -12/+5Let me put the commercial world into perspective. In the real world there is one head chef and 100 aspiring head chefs who are told to jump and how high. Each of the 100 aspiring head chefs are competing to eventually become the head chef. In the Linux world there are 10,000 kitchen hands who believe they have what it takes to be the head chef, but in reality they have not even done an apprenticeship to become a chef.

    My point is: if you Google the net, you will find all sorts of started and incomplete open source projects. Someone has already started a graphics manipulation project; if you have programming skills then support an existing project instead of going on an ego trip. Photoshop is where it is because of a team effort and not because some egotistical Linux noob thinks he is the next Bill Gates.

    Anyone who uses Ubuntu as a production machine has more time than intelligence. Production machines require stability; use a professional distro or CentOS which is stable and a Red Hat clone.
    • pcghost, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3Debian FTW! Sorry old habits die hard.
    • tardpicard, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1can I agree on both databoy's and pcghost's comments? I want to, but, can I....
    • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1if you want a production machine then just get a Mac, lets be honest
  • Chupatumama, on 12/23/2007, -10/+8I would rather watch 2 girls, 1 cup on a loop than ever use anything that came from Miguel and his Microsoft jock sniffing projects like Mono.
    I think I had enough when I read him describe OOXML as a a 'superb' standard.

    Go jump off a cliff for all I care. Just dont expect me to be one of the lemmings to follow you.

    As a "Non-Compensated Individual Hobbyist Developer" who contributes to FLOSS projects,
    Id like to give a big F**K YOU to Novell and Microsoft apologists like Miguel.
    I dont like threats nor the parasites that accompany them.
    • sybesis, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1well...you may help me to leave Gnome...while i don't like xfce...fluxbox or kde...:(
      • prammy, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2MIguel has not been with the Gnome project in some time now AFAIK. He is more focused on mono rather than Gnome.
  • Phlosten, on 12/23/2007, -7/+4Anything that is relying on Mono can get filed into the bin. No thanks.
  • samdu, on 12/23/2007, -3/+9But The GIMP is better than Paint.net. Why would I want an "almost" feature complete clone of Paint.net if I can have The GIMP?
  • stainsby, on 12/23/2007, -8/+3Steer clear of the MONO trap. Get that crap out of Linux distros.
    • fluoro, on 12/23/2007, -2/+3Why? That's stupid.
      • stainsby, on 12/23/2007, -2/+2Thanks for your stunning counter-argument. Try reading (the preceding comments) .. reading works "real good".
  • AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -5/+5How can you have an open source of an already open sourced item?

    Paint.NET is open source.

    From their website ( http://www.getpaint.net/features.html ):
    Paint.NET is provided free-of-charge, and the source code (all 140,000+ lines of it) is also available for free under generous licensing terms. The bulk of Paint.NET is written in C#, with only a small amount of code related to setup and shell-integration written in C++.

    --

    Paint.NET rocks, I've been using it for about four months now and it's probably the best free alternative to buying Photoshop.
  • Jordan117, on 12/23/2007, -2/+6I can't stand the GIMP; it's a resource hog and the multi-window interface is painful to use.

    Paint.NET is pretty awesome, though. I just wish it had a blur/smudge paintbrush tool.
  • tyrione, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5Without a doubt KRITA is the FREE ALTERNATIVE to GIMP.
    However, GEGL is to be required in the upcoming Dev Trunk of GIMP:
    http://www.gegl.org/
    http://developer.gimp.org/changelog.html
    2007-12-20 Sven Neumann

    * INSTALL
    * configure.in: require GEGL >= 0.0.14.

    * app/Makefile.am
    * app/app.c: initialize the GEGL library.

    For those who have been waiting for GEGL to mature, it looks as if Sven is ready to put it into Trunk Builds.
    http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=500924

    Comment #3 from Kevin Cozens (reporter, GEGL developer, points: 14)
    2007-12-20 18:09 UTC [reply]

    GIMP has added GEGL as a dependency. It is now more important to find and fix
    any remaining memory leaks in GEGL. Raising priority to High.

    This is a huge step for GIMP and will silence quite a large chunk of deterrents made towards GIMP and why it isn't ready for Pre-press, etc.
  • b33b3s, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5I was hoping that the GIMP alternative would be photoshop
  • jabberwolf, on 12/23/2007, -3/+5First thing, lets stop calling it GIMP !!!
    • samthurston, on 12/23/2007, -2/+1what is your basis for this? gimp is a type of lace and also a type of thread for braiding. also a convenient acronym. if the developers want to call it gimp, who are you to suggest otherwise?
    • newwatch51, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Why?
  • AAC6D63, on 12/23/2007, -3/+0GIMP is already a viable alternative to Photoshop - certainly for photo editing / post. I prefer using Photoshop because I'm more familiar with it - but the GIMP has much of the functionality required.
    The problem is that GNU/Linux currently lacks practical support for the colorimetric devices required for color calibrating monitors. Viable solutions to the issue are very experimental. It would be great to see, say, Ubuntu adopt support for calibration and profiling. Then it would only (!) be a question of people writing drivers for the devices. Color calibration is requirement for anyone who would be seriously wanting an alernative pixel editor.
  • abbathdoom, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1What the noobs above me are saying: "Why do we need a GIMP Alternative?"

    What a smart person says: "Because GIMP is sposed to be a Photoshop alternative. If Windows came free with Adobe Photoshop do you think the average Granny/school kid/house wife would be able to use it? No. The average person wants something that will simply and easily correct red eye and resize pictures. At the moment Linux doesnt really have a really good graphics app aimed at house wives and school kids. On windows the killer app for this stuff is Paint.net."
  • DOGPARTY, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1why does it look like a windows application?
    Does that not bother Linux users, I mean if something doesnt look/feel like a mac application then it crashes and burns on that platform
    • samthurston, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1there is no "linux look," per se. Some people have their linux desktops tweaked to look like OSX, Windows 95, Irix desktop or even amiga. many applications within linux have different looks and feels based on whatever platform(s) the developers favor.
  • XaeroVincent, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1Looks nice.

    But until the port is fully-functional, its easy enough just to use the Windows version of Paint.NET from Linux with the "enhanced" seamless terminal server package I put together. The terminal server can either be in the form of a remote machine running Windows or a local virtualized environement with a Windows guest.

    http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=176 ...

    The other choice is to use Photoshop CS2 via Wine. The latest Wine has excellent support for Photoshop.
  • TehEnergy, on 12/23/2007, -1/+2I am a Ubuntu user since the launch of Vista. I use GIMP on there simply because it came installed with the OS.

    From what I can see The GIMP is constantly being developed and improved. In the latest release we have seen multiple new features, some of which are even good enough to rival Adobe Photoshop.

    I'm not saying that new software isn't good, but I think that the photo editing market is over crowded right now. I'm sticking with GIMP for the time being.
  • spltimg, on 12/23/2007, -4/+1Buried for suggesting the use of a mono(.NET) based application. I know there are a lot of good ones but they really defeat the purpose of using Linux.... which is to get as far away from Microsoft as possible.
    • samthurston, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2The purpose of using linux isn't to "run away from microsoft." the purpose is to run towards open standards, and the flexibility of having the source code of your os and applications at your disposal.
  • TuxMaster, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1A lot of the gimp mockup :
    http://www.tux-planet.fr/blog/?2007/09/21/185-the- ...
  • gigatwo, on 12/29/2007, -0/+0Paint.NET has a pretty gui, but the limitations of the program annoy the hell out of me. The system for making curves is about as primitive as it gets, and is nothing like working with paths in the GIMP or photoshop. Granted it's a quicker learn, but the GIMP is much more capable when dealing with complex projects.

    Paint.Net - basic, basic photo editing
    the GIMP - somewhat complex digital image creation (web designs, wallpapers, etc)
    Krita - Print work

    I honestly haven't tried Krita in a while, but I'm sure it's come a long way since I last tried it. CMYK preview is always a plus.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.