GIMP is not a suitable replacement for Photoshop no matter how hard the GIMP developers try
I don't agree with this. In fact it's the opposite: the problem with GIMP is that the devs are incredibly insular and opinionated and they just don't care about what their users think. Getting a non-trivial patch into GIMP is so difficult that most of the effort towards a better GIMP usually dies as an unmaintained fork in github. I'd seen the mailing list and I'd almost prefer editing articles about the USSR in Wikipedia to contributing to them.
On the other hand you have blender, which does pay attention to their users, and is in a middle of a virtuous loop in which it keeps getting better, which affords it more funding for more testing and more developers that make it even better, and it's quickly becoming the artistic 3D modelling programme.
Edit: In the 2D space I have a lot of hope for Krita: even though it's not meant to be a general purpose image editor it already has a lot of features that GIMP has been promising for decades and might end up replacing it at this pace.
Blender is an example of doing things right. IIRC, it worked better than... Maya...? to where it overtook. GIMP simply does not beat Photoshop in doing things better (and the workflow is worse, IMO) to where "just use GIMP" is a fools suggestion.
GIMP's only claim to fame was "GIMPshop" which got co-opt'd, because it actually attempted to match the UI of Photoshop.
I'm not talking the development here, I'm talking simply in terms of product replacements a lot of Linux "alternatives" fall short. GIMP was the first one that came to mind because of the "Photoshop stops Windows users from jumping to Linux" meme.
Well, that's the thing: They have to try and unfortunately, they aren't.
That's not to poo-poo their efforts: They aren't a 500+ employee development house, obviously. But in terms of workflow, features, UI, etc.: GIMP falls far short in comparison to Photoshop.
Krita might do it, if they go the Photoshop route, which they aren't (and for good reason).
In the 2D space I have a lot of hope for Krita: even though it’s not meant to be a general purpose image editor it already has a lot of features that GIMP has been promising for decades and might end up replacing it at this pace.
I use Krita for my... "art"... it suits me perfectly, and the linux build runs very well....
but i cannot for the life of me get my tablet to work right on linux, tried every solution on google, and it still isn't as good as it was straight out of the box on my windows partition
I don't agree with this. In fact it's the opposite: the problem with GIMP is that the devs are incredibly insular and opinionated and they just don't care about what their users think. Getting a non-trivial patch into GIMP is so difficult that most of the effort towards a better GIMP usually dies as an unmaintained fork in github. I'd seen the mailing list and I'd almost prefer editing articles about the USSR in Wikipedia to contributing to them.
On the other hand you have blender, which does pay attention to their users, and is in a middle of a virtuous loop in which it keeps getting better, which affords it more funding for more testing and more developers that make it even better, and it's quickly becoming the artistic 3D modelling programme.
Edit: In the 2D space I have a lot of hope for Krita: even though it's not meant to be a general purpose image editor it already has a lot of features that GIMP has been promising for decades and might end up replacing it at this pace.
Blender is an example of doing things right. IIRC, it worked better than... Maya...? to where it overtook. GIMP simply does not beat Photoshop in doing things better (and the workflow is worse, IMO) to where "just use GIMP" is a fools suggestion.
GIMP's only claim to fame was "GIMPshop" which got co-opt'd, because it actually attempted to match the UI of Photoshop.
I'm not talking the development here, I'm talking simply in terms of product replacements a lot of Linux "alternatives" fall short. GIMP was the first one that came to mind because of the "Photoshop stops Windows users from jumping to Linux" meme.
I'm not saying the GIMP is wonderful, I'm saying that if the GIMP developers actually tried, it might as well become more popular than Photoshop.
Well, that's the thing: They have to try and unfortunately, they aren't.
That's not to poo-poo their efforts: They aren't a 500+ employee development house, obviously. But in terms of workflow, features, UI, etc.: GIMP falls far short in comparison to Photoshop.
Krita might do it, if they go the Photoshop route, which they aren't (and for good reason).
I use Krita for my... "art"... it suits me perfectly, and the linux build runs very well....
but i cannot for the life of me get my tablet to work right on linux, tried every solution on google, and it still isn't as good as it was straight out of the box on my windows partition