Why can't open source programs like Gimp and pant.net be as good as Blender?

Why can't open source programs like Gimp and pant.net be as good as Blender?

Other urls found in this thread:

blender.org/features/projects/
blender.org/user-stories/visual-effects-for-the-man-in-the-high-castle/
blendswap.com/blends/view/85771
youtube.com/watch?v=xYiiD-p2q80
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Implying Gimp isn't already good

>open source
You answered your own question

Because the blender foundation actually uses blender to make games and feature-length animated films. Apparently none of the GIMP developers ever try to draw a rectangle in their own program.

Blender is open source as well retard

Blender was originally a proprietary program. The company ended up in misery and they open source their product.

why X is better than Y, there are both letters !

No corporations support, I guess. They just use Photoshop instead.

Is Blender one of the best examples of an excellent open source project?

Yes, it's even better than every commercial piece of software in that sector.

If you ever had to work with 3DS Max, you know what real pain is. To put that into perspective:
Think of the comparison between Photoshop and Gimp, with roles reversed and far further distance between both.

paint.net has not been open source for years now.

tfw literally the only reason blender is good is because it was born as a closed source project

Then why does /3/ love 3DS and Houdini?

>Gimp
GIMP UI/UX devs are complete idiots.

I cant open bvh files on blender

the solution is to stop using shitty software that creates bhv files then.

I'm not much of an artist, but I'm guessing because they're used to it? I prefer wings3d since I'm retarded and only ever need shitty looking boxes.

I think Krita's pretty great.

Which would be worse? Sticking with the same shitty UI or changing it every other week?

>Which would be worse? Sticking with the same shitty UI or changing it every other week?
nice straw man.
how about fixing it and improving it every week?

My point is that there's a trade off. If they try to make the UI better then they're going to piss old people off because of baby duck syndrome. If they keep the UI the same, new people will get pissed off because of baby duck syndrome.

Gimp works fine for me. I never got the hate for it. People don't understand that not every program can be the industry leader. But gimp can do anything photoshop can do.

Who care about pissing off a thousand users if it brings in 100,000 more?
By that logic, nothing would ever improve.

>Because the blender foundation actually uses blender to make games and feature-length animated films
One shitty animation that looked like something from 2006

>But gimp can do anything photoshop can do.
You're a moron. Shut the fuck up. GIMP can't even do what CS3 can do let alone the latest PS.

>Who care about pissing off a thousand users if it brings in 100,000 more?
Because Chesterson's fence is a bitch.

Keep talking out of your ass.
blender.org/features/projects/

It's kinda retarded how many features Blender has.
You can probably use it everyday for hours and still would need years to master it.
I mean, just the video editor in it alone is miles beyond anything else free, and that's just a bonus feature, lol

Gimp is so shit that no good developers want to improve it.
Blender has a really different workflow with others 3D softwares (a really cool and flexible UI), in contrary Gimp is shit and try to be like Photoshop so there is no reasons to use Gimp over Photoshop, the only pro of Gimp is the price and the privacy ofc.
I think it would be possible and really interesting to improve blender to be a full painting/image editing.

I'm interested in this topic. I've been thinking about making a specific program that there is no open source equivalent but I wouldn't want to make it so shitty that it ends up in meme threads as another example about how open source software is so shit.

>I mean, just the video editor in it alone is miles beyond anything else free, and that's just a bonus feature, lol
I must agree, it has some quirks but at least it works properly.

After you figured out the Blender window system and mandatory keyboard shortcuts that is, a bit hard to get into or when you didn't do stuff in Blender for months.

Don't try to copy a proprietary software and try to create a good UI.

>Because the blender foundation actually uses blender to make games and feature-length animated films

Really? Has there ever been a commercially released animated film that was made with Blender? Like something I'd see in a theater, or could be rented on DVD or Blu-ray or something similar?

No? Then nobody really cares about it being open source or free because the real professionals in the animation industry either use professional software like Maya or SoftImage or something else or they instead write their own software to get the job done ala Pixar's RenderMan suite because everything else can't do it the way they need it to be done.

Blender is ok for what it is, but as for serious professional animation work, nobody uses Blender except people and small agencies producing barely noticeable content that never really gets anywhere.

Max is easy to use, is the most popular and most supported program, and it has the largest variety of extensions. You can say it's the "can't go wrong option", and even if there are some things it could have done better, there's nothing you can't really do in it either.

Houdini has been shilled a lot lately, but perhaps for good reason, it's quite powerful if you can get your head around it. The problem is that while it can power through complex tasks, simpler things are actually harder to accomplish, much like trying to trim your nails with lawnmower. As a result it's better left for stuff that all the other programs tend to struggle with, namely large and complex arrays of instanced geometry, whether it's procedurally generating an entire city block, or massive explosions, or stuff being washed away by water, or all of the above at once. But if you just want to model guns and robots all day long, you can't go wrong with Max, or Maya if you're more masochistic.

I recently had to switch to 3ds Max to streamline the whole import/export .fbx for UE4 stuff and I really think that Blender is superior in a lot of aspects. Blender is truly the best to ever come out of open-source-software. Shit like Gimp, LibreOffice and whatnot is miles behind.

>gimp can do anything photoshop can do

Absolutely not.
You'd probably manage to get close results to PS on some simpler projects but not only would it take much longer but also be much more complicated and the fact that GIMP has just way less tutorials and shit means that you'd have to teach everything yourself.

Does GIMP even have functions to edit raw photo files before loading it in the program?

>Don't try to copy a proprietary software
But that's the point of me trying. There is a specific niche that the only software that exists for that niche is windows-only proprietary software and I'd want to try to create a open source alternative.

What program?

.fbx import is still broken like it was in 2011, silly. i remember running three different versions of blender, testing every script addon, which all were broken in a different way ofc, and using Autodesk FBX converter then. not worth the hassle.

There is not a single program, there are many, but they are all windows-only and proprietary.

gimp is good.
paint.net is a waste of disk space.

Probably because 3DS is the industry standard, it's easy to find commercial support for it and it's the software design schools teach the most, so student will shill for it.
It's still a constantly crashing piece of crap.

You can find the same situation in audio editing: Pro Tools is the industry standard, but it's among the worst programs available, but a lot of Audio Engineers have to learn with it and will try to shill for it.

Other way around actually my man.

I wish I could slap you over the internet.

Frankly there aren't a lot of industry-level 3D programs left, Max and Maya are both floundering on the shoulders of Autodesk, Lightwave and XSi are dead, Modo is mostly just a modeling packing, Houdini is fairly application-specific, and Cinema 4D is mostly for motion graphics.
It's pretty much down to Max (better core modeling tools and archvis) or Maya (better rigging and animation tools) as the main editing software for most people. You'll never get hired by anyone with Blender in your resume, so it doesn't even matter, but do feel free to use it for personal projects if you want to.

That explains why it is better than Gimp.

paint.net isn't better than anything. It's a useless toy for mongoloid children.
recommending paint.net is a shill too far.

gimp werks for me

>It's a useless toy for mongoloid children
Yet it's still better than Gimp.

>GIMP can't even do what CS3 can do
No... YOU can't make gimp do what cs3 can do. You fucking no-skills retard.

Not understanding gimp is baby duck syndrome.
Totally different mental defect.

nah its also been super buggy since 2.8 and the GTK issues aren't ever going away.

wtf I hate having the mental capacity to adapt to new ways of doing simple tasks now.

What makes Gimp bad is not the fact that it's different is the fact that it takes a lot more effort to do simple tasks. Which is bad design and plain retarded.

>they didn't steal adobe's workflows so it has to be bad

>Like something I'd see in a theater, or could be rented on DVD or Blu-ray or something similar?
All the special effects of Hardcore Henry were done in Blender AFAIK. There was also a talk at an earlier Blender Conference by some guy who used it to model a bunch of small assets for a couple of big movies.
It's also used in-house by Epic games.

Yes it has to, there's a reason why Adobe has the industry by the balls.

I've never used PS and I still do use gimp (with blender). It's been shit lately, you can't predict whether tools will work as intended 100% of the time so it is growing in difficulty to learn.

blender.org/user-stories/visual-effects-for-the-man-in-the-high-castle/

>UI.
UX > UI

Blender was major dogshit back then. It only got good with version 2.6.

It's still retarded UX, but it's the sort of retarded that's not too tough to get used to. Consistently retarded in the same ways.

It got good with the UI redesign of 2.5
2.61 introduced Cycles which gave blender a huge boost in visibility and credibility.

Paint.net isnt open source, if it was open source there would be linux builds as well and no one would use gimped (gnu image manipulation poz emulator dank)

I thought the UI redesign was 2.6. That's what I meant though.

ever watched james camerons Avatar?
some of those animations/effecrs are made using Blender.
source: some interview with Ton (founder) its on youtube.

So 5% of the blue alien penis was made in blender?

And what a majestic penis that was.

There are some features in Blender which don't exist Maya or 3DS, skinned meshed rigged deformations something. 3D animators use a lot of programs and it's just a tool to create something faster.

Nice to read something from an actual professional then nobodys

If open source is so good, show me one open source loli
Check mate Stallman-fags

Doesn't Blender have the worst UI of all 3D modelling programs? Fits in perfectly with GIMP.

That would be openstreetmap.

blendswap.com/blends/view/85771

Gross

Blender's UI is great. It's just not very beginner friendly. Basically the tiling window manager of 3D software, which is fitting because Blender's UI is a tiling window manager.

>no mention of krita

Good UI, but almost nightmare in term of key control. it's like mouse and keyboard combined when modelling. for veteran user it's very intuitive, though

What's worse? Blender UI or Zbrush UI?

see A lot of it is baby duck and some of it is really weird/bad design but it is very very polished.

Zbrush by far

>Gimp vs Blender
It's actually GNU vs actually working peoples tools.
On the one side you have a bunch of people that have the right dystopian botnet visions but then go the lawyer way by thinking the GPL could really debotnet computing. Also a bunch of lisp spergs who have never written useful software in their life, not to mention finished an OS kernel.
On the other side there are professional software developers and 3D artists that also work in professional settings these days, often with other software. Used to shitty interfaces they made the blender one too modal and inconsistent, but unlike with vim, the actual payoff is huge.

Hope that answers your question. It probably also explains the huge quality discrepancy between GIMP and Krita.

The UI is already way better than ten years ago, but it's still at a point where things can improved. Also they smuggled new antipatterns in like going forwards and backwards in the properties menu to activate outline rendering.

Read about UI and UX design and HCI.
Also, since Blender isn't perfect either (and was way worse before those 3 videos) try to learn from those 3 videos. youtube.com/watch?v=xYiiD-p2q80

Paint net isn't open source.

Retard

Avatar

Along with firefox, Nomacs, almost entire GNU/Linux, SailfishOS, VLC/MPV, etc.

Paint.net is a poor man's GIMP. It's worse in every way.

i would be shocked if the dog logo was made on ps

>paint.net
>its website isn't actually paint.net

>Apparently none of the GIMP developers ever try to draw a rectangle in their own program.
Good to know that the GIMP developers are smart enough not to use an image manipulation program to draw things instead of an actual drawing program.

>gimp is bad
which one of you new faggots started this meme.

Too bad foobar 2k isn't opensource. closest thing too it is Deadbeef, and that uses ugly ass gtk and no built in encoder UI and decent plugins

>firefox

Best browser?

For marxists like yourself, sure.

>blender
>the piece of software with objectively the worst gui ti have ever existed

>Paint.net is a poor man's GIMP.
Paint net is a smart mans Paint.
When you want to crop an image, draw and arrow or something it's the perfect lightweight tool.

You're thinking of KolourPaint

It's really not the worst. It's the most alien maybe. No human could have come up with that shit, lovecraftian controls. It works pretty well once you've got it down though.

Hardcore Henry used Blender for it's VFX, which there was a lot of.

As an avid Photoshop and ex-Vegas user.
I wished GIMP was not retarded and as good as Blender.

Also Gimp community are basically not exist, while blender is everywhere from simple tutorial to actual full education of 3D arts.
Both Blender and Gimp are free, but no one would touch a free shit like Gimp.

>b-but for basic u-use is enough with gimp
And you guys complain why people still used pirated PS instead of Gimp.
The only people that I know who autistacly defending Gimp was only Sup Forums, even most Gimp forum poster still encourage people to used PS for working or complex use.

I don't even think the biggest issue is that GIMP exists, but for GNOME there is literally no working modern ms paint clone.
Many tried like Pinta, gpaint and whatnot and lately there was an announcement on Moronix that somebody pondered writing something like that. As somebody who also did that and saw many GTK applications decay, it may be because GTK just isn't a technology that is a joy to work with.

Wasn't there some version of azpainter for it?

GIMP is fucking shit honestly. The only people that seem to like "GIMP" are people that have no experience using Photoshop for anything practical. Even inkscape works as an alternative to its adobe counterpart. There's honestly so much missing functionality or shit that's ridiculously annoying to do in GIMP, crucial to any sort of graphic design or photo editing work, that it's better to just run a VM or dual-boot for fucking Photoshop. If Photoshop were available on linux, no one would be mentioning GIMP because it's an absolutely shit, subpar application. Meanwhile, blender is so good that it stands well on its own among its counterparts.

Gnome and GTK will just continue to age. The future is Qt.