12 ms·

Paint.NET is great, too. It's not open source, unfortunately (for valid if regrettable reasons), but it's free as in free beer. The memory of its GUI makes me s

by krylon 5y ago

Paint.NET is great, too. It's not open source, unfortunately (for valid if regrettable reasons), but it's free as in free beer. The memory of its GUI makes me sigh a little whenever I open GIMP.

npteljes 5y ago
Have you tried Pinta? Filled the niche for me after switching to Linux.
- pndy 5y ago
  Pinta uses an older Paint.Net code - https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta
  - mananaysiempre 5y ago
    Apparently the author was unhappy with someone re-releasing the software while erasing the original credits (multiple times?): <https://stackoverflow.com/a/1693549 https://stackoverflow.com/a/1693549>. Not sure why hiding the source code would help much, but oh well.
- Zababa 5y ago
  Pinta crashes very frequently for me, usually after 2/3 operations.
- pizza234 5y ago
  I did, and unfortunately it's usable only for extremely basic cases. Images of a few megapixels will cause it to crash or hang on selection. Happened so many times that I am forced to use GIMP.
Workaccount2 5y ago
>(for valid if regrettable reasons) Well now you got me curious. Why is that?
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  Paint.NET was open source, but a pirate would download the code, put their name over the author’s, and click build. That’s a very clear case of copyright violation, but the author decided it wasn’t worth the effort (especially if the pirate is in another country). https://blog.getpaint.net/2007/12/04/freeware-authors-beware-of-%E2%80%9Cbackspaceware%E2%80%9D/ https://blog.getpaint.net/2007/12/04/freeware-authors-beware...
- genpfault 5y ago
  > Initially, Paint.net was released under a modified version of the MIT License, with the exclusion of the installer, text, and graphics. It was completely open-source, but because breaches of license, all resource files (such as interface text and icons) were released under a non-free Creative Commons license forbidding modification, and the installer was made closed-source. Version 3.36 was initially released as partial open-source, but Brewster later took down the source code, citing problems with plagiarism. In version 3.5, paint.net became proprietary software. Users are now prohibited from modifying it.[1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint.net#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint.net#History
- angus-prune 5y ago
  The author blogged about it in 2009 [1] TL;DR They used a MIT licence and other people were selling broken, rebranded cashgrab copies without changing things like the installer or crash logs being sent to the author etc [1] https://blog.getpaint.net/2009/11/06/a-new-license-for-paintnet-v35/ https://blog.getpaint.net/2009/11/06/a-new-license-for-paint...
  - beerandt 5y ago
    So why isn't this a problem for other open source software? Or is it? Is it only because of the high demand for a cheaper/free Photoshop alternative?
    - david_allison 5y ago
      It is. It's more than frustrating to have crash logs that don't refer to your code and contain access tokens or similar data because the author of the 'rebranded' software doesn't care about user privacy.
slugs19 5y ago
I use photopea.com. It's a Photoshop clone but loads much faster and works great for when you don't need some of the newest / cutting edge PS features and don't work with large files.
- OneLeggedCat 5y ago
  How have I never tried this. Nice project.
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    Most amazing thing to me is that it is built and maintained by a single developer.
    - basch 5y ago
      and that the entire program is about 2mb. Would fit on an extra high density 3.5in floppy. https://www.photopea.com/api/accounts https://www.photopea.com/api/accounts
- redeuxx 5y ago
  The developer did an AMA. He makes a decent living off it. https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/9urjmg/i_made_a_free_alternative_to_photoshop_that_is/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/9urjmg/i_made_a_free_...

by krylon 5y ago

Paint.NET is great, too. It's not open source, unfortunately (for valid if regrettable reasons), but it's free as in free beer. The memory of its GUI makes me sigh a little whenever I open GIMP.

npteljes 5y ago

Have you tried Pinta? Filled the niche for me after switching to Linux.

pndy 5y ago
Pinta uses an older Paint.Net code - https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta
- mananaysiempre 5y ago
  Apparently the author was unhappy with someone re-releasing the software while erasing the original credits (multiple times?): <https://stackoverflow.com/a/1693549 https://stackoverflow.com/a/1693549>. Not sure why hiding the source code would help much, but oh well.
Zababa 5y ago
Pinta crashes very frequently for me, usually after 2/3 operations.
pizza234 5y ago
I did, and unfortunately it's usable only for extremely basic cases. Images of a few megapixels will cause it to crash or hang on selection. Happened so many times that I am forced to use GIMP.

Workaccount2 5y ago

>(for valid if regrettable reasons) Well now you got me curious. Why is that?

colejohnson66 5y ago
Paint.NET was open source, but a pirate would download the code, put their name over the author’s, and click build. That’s a very clear case of copyright violation, but the author decided it wasn’t worth the effort (especially if the pirate is in another country). https://blog.getpaint.net/2007/12/04/freeware-authors-beware-of-%E2%80%9Cbackspaceware%E2%80%9D/ https://blog.getpaint.net/2007/12/04/freeware-authors-beware...
genpfault 5y ago
> Initially, Paint.net was released under a modified version of the MIT License, with the exclusion of the installer, text, and graphics. It was completely open-source, but because breaches of license, all resource files (such as interface text and icons) were released under a non-free Creative Commons license forbidding modification, and the installer was made closed-source. Version 3.36 was initially released as partial open-source, but Brewster later took down the source code, citing problems with plagiarism. In version 3.5, paint.net became proprietary software. Users are now prohibited from modifying it.[1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint.net#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint.net#History
angus-prune 5y ago
The author blogged about it in 2009 [1] TL;DR They used a MIT licence and other people were selling broken, rebranded cashgrab copies without changing things like the installer or crash logs being sent to the author etc [1] https://blog.getpaint.net/2009/11/06/a-new-license-for-paintnet-v35/ https://blog.getpaint.net/2009/11/06/a-new-license-for-paint...
- beerandt 5y ago
  So why isn't this a problem for other open source software? Or is it? Is it only because of the high demand for a cheaper/free Photoshop alternative?
  - david_allison 5y ago
    It is. It's more than frustrating to have crash logs that don't refer to your code and contain access tokens or similar data because the author of the 'rebranded' software doesn't care about user privacy.

slugs19 5y ago

I use photopea.com. It's a Photoshop clone but loads much faster and works great for when you don't need some of the newest / cutting edge PS features and don't work with large files.

OneLeggedCat 5y ago
How have I never tried this. Nice project.
- jjeaff 5y ago
  Most amazing thing to me is that it is built and maintained by a single developer.
  - basch 5y ago
    and that the entire program is about 2mb. Would fit on an extra high density 3.5in floppy. https://www.photopea.com/api/accounts https://www.photopea.com/api/accounts
redeuxx 5y ago
The developer did an AMA. He makes a decent living off it. https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/9urjmg/i_made_a_free_alternative_to_photoshop_that_is/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/9urjmg/i_made_a_free_...