Someone's gotta do the packaging for almost everything you buy at stores. Even in this age of a lot of digital distribution:
If anything, that's how you build confidence, in my opinion.ĬMYK is only for print - but a pro artist is gonna send a lot of stuff to print. It's not about low self esteem at all, it's about bettering yourself (or your project). Blender went form the steepest learning curve to one that's easy to get into, and from one of the worst UX/UI designs to one of the most polished in the industry. I'd say right now they're better than some (if not all) with of most features in terms of UX, especially for newcomers to the industry. Their UI/UX was a joke for years, but they tried switching things upe and learned from the competitors. They're not dominating such a complex market with smoke and mirrors.Īnd maybe Gimp can learne from Photoshop's mistakes too.īlender is an excellent example of the process I described above. So why not learn from Adobe, which probably has the largest team of the smartest UX engineers working for them. The way to doing better is learning from the ones that are good at it already, right? If someone does it better, do it even better, or settled for living in their shadow. It's not a matter of self esteem or confidence. I'm not complaining though, since I much prefer Krita's brush engine than Photoshop, and I've gotten used to Inkscape's quirks. I could do all of this without leaving Photoshop. My general workflow is to use Krita and Inkscape (I used Gravit for a while because Inkscape was having some bugs I couldn't cope with), and maybe do some minor final colour correction/grading in Gimp on the final output. but then again neither is Gimp? I'm not sure what you're trying to say. The alternates I liked aren't complete Photoshop replacements. I realise gimp is free, but there also seems to be a general attitude amongst gimp contributors that they think the UX is fine, while most people (in my circles, at least) disagree with that view I'd like to see Gimp become as successful as krita or inkscape (which had UX issues for years, too) I'm not criticising the people, just this instance of their work, so I hope it inspires them to improve. I don't know how to phrase this without it sounding insensitive, though. Maybe someone put a lot of thought into the gimp UX, but it seems like a wasted effort (or maybe it was just inexperience).
I'd hardly call any workflow I design an engineered one (even if I like this field), when compared to something produced by an UX designer (or a team of them) who specialises in the field. Partially agree with you that every UX is "engineered" but that depends on how far we're willing to stretch that definition in the design domain. I didn't mean to sound condescending, and if I hurt any gimp devs, I'd like to apologise.
0 kommentar(er)
