Photoshop is definitely much faster with big images. But in my testing 17kx2k image with 5 layers, changing the blend mode is about .5s and photoshop less than noticable (.05s or less). Photoshop is using about 250mb, Krita 650mb.
In my testing only thing that comes close to Photoshop in performance is Affinity Photo.
Artrage, MyPaint, Clip Studio Paint (Manga Studio), Krita are all much slower.
I originally used a 4096x4096 with a couple of groups with 10 or so layers in them, but even using a file with 5 layers it’s pretty much the same.
EDIT: I do have an Nvidia card
Yeah, memory usage difference is known, this is because photoshop does all sorts of swapping tricks to push down memory requirements, but they are very obscure, hence why few other programs seem to achieve the same.
It also uses a bit of trickery in regards to painting with large brushes, we’re looking into that first because memory is cheaper than cpu/gpu power 
Okay… We actually have a bug report like that: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=340736. But Tyson was using a big image with a 16 bits floating point (half) RGB colorspace. That means he was running out of physical memory and Krita started swapping. That could still be the case for you: currently Krita’s memory usage is easy enough to calculate: width * height * number of channels * channel size * number of layers + 2.
So… Do you have a 32 or 64 bits Windows? What is the colorspace of the image? How much ram do you have? Do you see the image updating in tiles when changing a blending mode?
Is there a possibility to export all the brushes from Krita 2.8 with their tags? I don’t want to go through all my brushes and tag them again.
Don’t worry, Krita’s resource folder, including the tags, are in a seperate folder than install. You can go to edit->resources->resource folder to find it, even back it up. Uninstall 2.8, install 2.9, brushes should be untouched, if not, go to settings->resource manager->open resource folder, and put the older folder’s contents there.
One little warning: due to the flow/opacity separation, you may need to turn off the flow setting for many custom brushes.
The images I tested were 8 bit RGB,
Windows 64 bit and I always used a 64 bit Krita.
I can see the tiles updating.
8 gigs of ram
That sounds fine… Can you mail me ([email protected]) the file or a link to the file? I just tried with a 16 bits file with ten layers, and there I could see the updates happening, but I was also building Krita in the background… I’d like to dig in. And maybe I can’t find it anything, but then, the next kickstarter’s topic has the codename LOD – or levels of detail, where we’ll be doing what Photoshop is doing, and working on a scaled-down version of the image and caching the rest.
I don’t think this is about a specific file, as I said it was pretty much the same with a file 4k by 4k file created in Krita and with 5 layers just filled with black as with a much bigger one psd created in PS.
Edit: Actually believe it or not, I created a 16 bit image and works observably faster than a 8bit image with the same layer(5 layers filled with color).
The only thing is that texture work in 3D is a lot more than just painting a texture, you also need the means to generate the needed maps such as bump maps, normal maps, specular maps, hardness maps, ect…
I would imagine it would be very tedious to make all the maps by hand (and hand painting a normal map would be just about impossible), so we would need filters, converters, and other tools, to dramatically speed up the process.
The new Krita works great on my Windows 7 system, and when you check my sig, you will see it’s a pretty old machine I am running it on. I do have a lot of memory, though.
I created a A4@600ppi file (about 5000x7000pixels) in RGB 16bit per channel mode. Rather heavy duty - I wouldn’t normally work at this resolution and bit depth.
Results: default regular brushes are fine up to about 500px for default settings. Layers respond well. Compared to Photoshop CS6 things are indeed somewhat slower.
But I also noticed that larger brushes in Photoshop seem to have a very large step distance. A sharp round brush at 500px size looks horrendously banded in Photoshop (unusable), but works very quick. I changed the spacing so that the blending was not noticeable anymore, and although it still painted faster than Krita, it also introduced ugly kinks in overall stroke shape that are quite noticeable.
When I changed the density of larger brushes in Krita the performance was much improved as well, although attention must be payed to the amount: otherwise it looses the smooth look.
But is does become much more responsive, and no kinks are introduced, unlike Photoshop.
More complex brushes lag in either program at larger sizes. That is to be expected - Krita, however, always produces smooth looking strokes, while Photoshop cheats and introduces kinks in the overall stroke shape.
For me Krita on Windows performs really well.
Interesting… I’ve heard that once before. I have no idea why that would be. I just tested an 8 and 16 bit image of that size with ten layers filled with gradients. On my 32 gb nvidia desktop, I can barely see the screen updating, but on the 8gb intel laptop, it does tile a bit. It doesn’t take seconds, though!
Join our forum and bugzilla and let’s have the wishes… We can only code what we know our users want!
Only I generally will only join a software forum if I’m actually starting to use the software (not if I’m speculating that I might use the software in the future). This is the feedback thread, isn’t it?
Maybe it has something to do with an AMD processor? Do you rely on any Intel specific instructions?
I’ve just tested Krita on a low end AMD apu and it works similairly to my 4 core athlon.
EDIT:
So I tested Krita on Linux again. (Chakra Linux and Krita 2.8)
Even without proprietary Nvidia drivers it felt much better(3-4 times faster layer switching)
than on Windows.
The whole program felt much more fluid and usable.
So start using the software, Ace! Krita is awesome!
I would love the features your asking for as well, but it’s absolutely not preventing me from spending time with this awesome tool.
My biggest gripe is that the last time I checked, the text tool was pretty much un-usable. I mean, completely. I couldn’t even get the tool to type text. I clicked in the interface, got a HUGE default font and then couldn’t edit it. I know that Krita is focusing on being an art tool, but even painters need to type and layout some text now and then.
Thanks for all the hard work on this.
It is unfortunate that very capable people and with good knowledges as “Ace Dragon” is so conflictual. If you have participated in this thread requesting these features, we can understand that you are interested in using Krita sometime. Otherwise I do not understand why you are interested.
We are simply asking you to join the bug reporting system and make your request explaining in detail and examples which feature you need. Your request must be in the bugtracker because it is an request for all people and where every Krita user must then be able to find it and participate completing the request or with feedback in the future.
I’m sure it will take you less than 1% of the time you spend discussing in this forum.
Hm… We do use sse2, sse3, sse4 and avx where available. I’m not totally sure – does AMD have avx? If not, that might explain the slowness a bit. We also have some experimental code for avx2, but MSVC 2010 doesn’t support that properly yet.
First: I know we should rewrite the text tool. It’s ghastly. Back in 2006, we thought we were smart and would get an awesome text tool for free if we’d just integrate Krita with its stablemate, the word processor Words. That was a bit of a mistake. I’d like to find time to rewrite the text tool to use SVG + CSS…
That said, here are some notes about the current text tool:
But yeah, give me another C++ developer with too much time and a yen for punishment, and we’ll rewrite the text tool!
My 4 core Athlon doesn’t have AVC, but the 2 core APU has ( but then it’s slower itself)
Still it’s the same instructions on Linux and Windows right?
As I wrote in my previous edited post I tested Krita on Linux once again.
Don’t know what to think about it.