this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
342 points (91.1% liked)

Mildly Interesting

27627 readers
327 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nefara@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Krita, definitely, though it's still not as complete in capability it's a much better analogue

[–] thal3s@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 weeks ago

Seconded. Krita is significantly easier to use then GIMP.

[–] black0ut@pawb.social 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Krita is mostly for digital artists and digital painting, while GIMP is more for image editing. They aren't made for the same purpose, even though both can do simple stuff from both worlds.

[–] lyrial@anarchist.nexus 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Except easily drawing circles on GIMP's part.

[–] black0ut@pawb.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeahhh, I never understood that. It can't be that difficult to make a circle tool, right?

To be honest, I don't know how difficult it would really be, and I know it can be done with plugins. I also know it's not a tool that you end up using that much with the more advanced workflows (I myself haven't really needed it in a long time), but it would be nice if we had it.

[–] Zwiebel@feddit.org 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Isn't krita for painting and photoshop for photo editing? Does krita do RAW, color grading and such?

[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

yes they are two different use cases.