Inkscape is for vectors... I mean, why not... BUT, that's like using blender for pixel art. Sure you can and there's a point, as in animations, a spaceship top down view for instance. You export it as png images in 32x32 resolution, no anti aliasing, orthogonal camera/projection... https://www.spriters-resource.com/resources/sheets/24/26756.png But then you'll likely still need to rework it at pixel level, hence, the need for a proper bitmap editing tool
It's really a shame that you can't select multiple layers at once with gimp, and move them for instance, you end up having to circumvent that, evidently, by doing dumb stuffs
That's a very photoshop feature. What it sounds like, to me, is that you learnt how to edit images in photoshop— and only now want to use something free. There's plenty of free transparency-supporting bitmap software out there, to choose from. Blame whoever invented software patents. It's totally not like using Blender, btw: it's not that drastic.
Inkscape's vector capabilities make it ideal for pixel art: you can customize the grid, palette, resolution, spacing, etc. You change a few basic settings, and it turns in to the perfect pixel-art workstation. I take it you might literally mean images meant to be rendered by 8/16-bit environments— in which case, my only comment is: blood from a stone, man.
I've started with photoshop decades ago (7.0), and gimp is a photoshop rip off, people pretending otherwise are delusional. And where gimp sucks is when it tries to pretend otherwise... Coming up with the lamest concept as "alternative".... Such as the selection features, among other things
I mean gimp team tried to reinvent the wheel and made it square in a nutshell in order to pretend they aren't like photoshop, it's obvious, and that's lame
You can select multiple layers in krita btw, photoshop like, so it's not about copyrights
Photoshop is the gold standard period, there's no fucking debate
And I've been using gimp for what? 10 years now, roughly, I use linux since a decade also, I build my own OS based on a debian minimal server thank you very much
And no, if you think pixel art is just exporting vectors to low res png you got everything wrong my friend. And no I won't resort to making vector squares to mimick bitmaps that's lame, that's like mimicking pixels with cubes in blender, that's total retard approach
I build my own OS based on a debian minimal server thank you very much
I dunno why, but this comment really reminded me of the navy seal pasta.
I mean gimp team tried to reinvent the wheel and made it square in a nutshell in order to pretend they aren't like photoshop, it's obvious, and that's lame
This much we can agree on. I never really cared for gimp; always tried to get in to it, and pretty-much learned how to do anything it's capable of. But I just can't shake the feeling that it's akin to typing out messages in Morse-code, when there's a perfectly good smartphone sitting right there (photoshop).
You can select multiple layers in krita btw, photoshop like, so it's not about copyrights
True; there goes my benefit-of-the-doubt guess, I guess.
Photoshop is the gold standard period, there's no fucking debate
Absolutely; but we're talking about free alternatives, yeah?
And no, if you think pixel art is just exporting vectors to low res png you got everything wrong my friend. And no I won't resort to making vector squares to mimick bitmaps that's lame, that's like mimicking pixels with cubes in blender, that's total retard approach
See, there's a fundamental miscommunication going on, here. From my initial reply, I thought you were simply making "8-bit style art"; not literally making super tiny bitmaps to render directly in to, what I can only surmise is, the framebuffer itself. In this specific case, yes: my approach is a bit like shooting a mosquito with a cannon. If you're making games like Bro-Force or Starbound: I still, resolutely, stand by my opinion. Vectors are infinitely scalable and mutable: there's a benefit to that.
(post is archived)