Talk:CinePaint

"Rejecting" GEGL
"The CinePaint developers chose to follow on from the work in Film GIMP rather than wait have rejected the GIMP library GEGL, and have opted for a less complex system. As an additional simplification, images will simply be stored in linear arrays instead of the complex tiled format used by GIMP."

The implications of this paragraph are highly contentious, I will do my best to explain why. Filmgimp was a branch of GIMP and rather than trying to reintegrate it into mainline GEGL was considered as a better long term solution. However Filmgimp worked well enough that it was put into use rather than waiting for GEGL. As of 2006 GIMP does not yet use GEGL. The Cinepaint developers chose to continue the work on Filmgimp and it is too subjective for Wikipedia to imply this constitutes actively rejecting GEGL rather than continuing to incrementally improve an imperfect but working solution. I saw no way to rephrase the paragraph in a suitable objective manner so I moved it to the discussion page. Horkana

Agreed this hits my intention to work on the CinePaint project. GEGL was allmost a non issue for CinePaint. If it would have been in life at 2002 already, things would possibly look different now. But it was not, and so filmGIMP and later CinePaint continued and evolved. As well GEGL is just one engine and to discuss and compare such is out of the scope of this page. For a comparision see Boudewijn Rempt's article. KaiUwe in 2007


 * According to http://prokoudine.info/blog/2011/08/on-cinepaint-gimp-and-gegl/, the same people who started the Filmgimp branch, started the GEGL branch (sounds like a refactoring if I ever heard of it). My interpretation: GIMP was branched to do some 16bpc work, then the branchers tried to make a library so that mainline GIMP could use that work, then stopped working on it, and the branch was picked up by someone else and renamed Cinepaint. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.191.60.249 (talk) 06:54, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

main competition is photoshop?
wouldn't it rather compete with premiere? Family Guy Guy 05:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

No, as CinePaint states on its web site it is not a video editor. It is used solely to retouch single images. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.40.23.126 (talk) 15:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Broken References
The second reference link (http://software.newsforge.com/software/04/04/19/1837246.shtml) appears to be broken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.55.88.19 (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Other OSes
There is a CinePaint version for Windows. Sadly, it's 0.17 and not the latest version. ;( JWhiteheadcc (talk) 13:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

CMYK
The statement that Cinpaint supports CMYK-images seems to be a bit far fetched. In the Image menu one can choose between grayscale and RGB. Also have a look at the color selector in the screenshot; no CMYK there either.--78.49.230.0 (talk) 22:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Irix
The mention of Irix under Main Features is not very factual. Cinepaint hasn't built on Irix in many many versions, and I don't see the developers making any efforts to support that "old, dead architecture."

It appears that they want to take the credit for being "cross-platform" but don't want to do the work required to make that true. 210.22.142.82 (talk) 03:48, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on CinePaint. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070807080947/http://cinepaint.bigasterisk.com/CinePaintDocumentation to http://cinepaint.bigasterisk.com/CinePaintDocumentation
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091229042746/http://film.gimp.org/gimp.pdf to http://film.gimp.org/gimp.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:01, 7 December 2017 (UTC)