3 ms·
I tried all of that and they all just suck. E.g. neither pinta nor krita don’t show selection rectangle coords in the status bar. How the heck should I e.g. inv
by wruza 2y ago
I tried all of that and they all just suck. E.g. neither pinta nor krita don’t show selection rectangle coords in the status bar. How the heck should I e.g. investigate screenshot-based automation fails with that? What makes paint.net stand out is that it is a pixel canvas tool with layers rather than an artistic canvas for soft brushes. And at the same time it has all its features easily accessible.
I have also worked as a “designer” in a real typography for some time and know a thing or two about the process (not fully, but count me as sort of an insider). And I can tell you that gimp is only “an artist’s impression” of a graphical toolbox, and that artist is heavily drunk. If you need something like gimp and paint.net/etc isn’t enough, you need photoshop. Cause we’re talking about serious pre-print color management, etc. Gimp is two parts: very poor home graphics editor and very poor industrial graphics manager.
Youtube thumbnails are paint.net 100%. I use that all the time for all my graphics, technical and creative, tried all others, and have no reason to switch, apart from OS requirements.
- hallarempt 2y agoAnd why would, I, as a developer, spend time on supporting "screenshot-based automation" in a painting application?
- wruza 2y agoAs a developer of these apps, you owe me nothing, no need to treat every explanation as a demand. I just chose an app that has basic features like selection coords from the get go and shared my experience on a forum where it might be useful to others. How exactly people are using these coords -- for automation, or pixel arts, or precise composition/aspect ratio, or something else -- isn't relevant, same for other commonly present features.