5 ms·
I've only ever used Krita, really. What features am I missing from photoshop? What is that gulf that I do not see?
by altruios 2y ago
I've only ever used Krita, really. What features am I missing from photoshop? What is that gulf that I do not see?
- dagmx 2y agoKrita is geared towards illustrative work versus photo vs editing/product design. While it can do both, it misses or is behind in several areas 1. Photoshop has a much better template and smart referencing system 2. Photoshop has better photo retouching tools in the form of healing or switching working spaces to tune filters. 3. Photoshop has better image manipulation tools like warping and perspective correction I do really like Krita, and I’ve replaced Photoshop use for illustrative use cases for several studios and individuals with it. So it really depends what you do, but Photoshop just has a lot of little and big things that add up which prevents me switching myself.
- altruios 2y agoAh... so it seems there is nothing deficient for artists. Just photographers?
- starkparker 2y agoYes. Photoshop, which is photo and image editing software for photographers, has more features for photographers than Krita, a painting program for artists.
- dagmx 2y agoThat’s a pretty curt dismissal given that tons of artists paint in photoshop and have for decades. Photoshop is a great painting app that rivals krita for painting. That it does other things well or originated for just photo editing doesn’t take away from that.
- elcomet 2y agoI think you misread the parent. He didn't say Photoshop is bad for painting. He said Krita is bad for photo edition.
- shoelessone 2y agoI don't believe he misread. I believe he felt like the reply to the other users post was needlessly curt or snarky, which I'd agree with.