On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 05:51:00AM +0000, Ryan Stark via gimp-developer-list wrote:
> One question to ask is why are Procreate and Photoshop so popular with
> digital painters and Photoshop wasn't even originally designed for this?
> One major reason for this is the way the internal textures to the brushes
> are handled. Photoshop isn't even super fast for painting but this feature
> gives lovely brush textures. Clip Paint Studio does this but it does it in
> a crap way.
>
I will note in passing that top-posting on developer mailing lists
is generally regarded as bad form (on user lists it seems to be less
unacceptable, although still a PITA), and even gmail can be beaten
into shape for that. But these 'digital painters' will need to
speak up for themselves on either the -dev or -user lists before
anyone will pay attention.
Meanwhile, the gimp developers have made vast progress in the last
year, for which I thank them (even if I don't agree with all their
decisions re importing raw photos ;) : there are few developers, and
they do not have infinite time to work on whatever interests them.
I will suggest that this thread is a distraction to them and will go
nowhere unless you are either willing to provide code, or to find
someone whom you can sponsor to produce the code.
I hope I will speak for most people here when I say that I don't use
Photoshop and I had never heard of Procreate until you mentioned it.
As a user of libre software, to me they appear to be irrelevant.
ĸen
--
Take three of these a minute for four minutes. Don't take with
alcohol or you'll grow an extra head.
-- The Doctor
_______________________________________________
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
