In response to “Lunatique”:
I do believe you’re being too kind. First and foremost, because Corel has a “hobbiest” version (from their website): Painter Essentials 4 - “Transform photos into stunning paintings”.
I have no problem with them adding that feature into Painter “Pro”. I DO have a problem if that is the only part of the program that they are working on, considering the huge number of user complaints re: bugs, and not taking the time to update their GUI to 2009 standards, or make Painter work with modern, new computers and tech.
Re: GUI - I as well no one here has asked them to redesign their GUI to look like PS, or any other for that matter. However, it HAS been agreed on I think unanimously, that there are areas that they should… and if I must say personally…MUST… fix and/or improve upon.
Re: Programming - certainly I believe it is a time consuming and demanding task. However, THAT is their business, just as creating illustrations is yours and mine. We do our utmost to deliver thoroughly professional jobs, at a competitive price. Why should we not hold a software company to those same principles?
As I mentioned in a previous post, when I go through my tool box on my Mac, the ONLY program that stands out as NOT being up-to-date technologically… is Painter.
Corel has shown with it’s other products, that they CAN do a new GUI on an existing core engine… again, see Painter Essentials. Only difference is that they decided to cripple the version, so as to up-sell to Painter “Pro”. From a management and program perspective, a totally stupid implementation, because the GUI in Essentials and Painter are completely different, and will seriously confuse someone when switching i.e. start over learning the Painter “Pro” version.
Good GUI Example: let’s take Pixelmator.
Started in 2007 by 2 brothers. Appears to be about 6-7 additional contributing programmers on their team. In 2 years time, that small team has built a serious, low-cost (~$60,00) alternative to the almighty PhotoShop, that does elegantly, 90% of what a lot people do with PS or PS Elements. 100% Mac native and Photoshop compatible. NOTE: if you don’t know already, Painter was developed first and foremost for the Mac… I believe in '87. Emulating, to an extent, the GUI guidelines from Apple, is not a bad thing for PC programs geared towards the graphics industry and future tech.
Yes, it is apparent that I use a Mac… HOWEVER, some of the deficiencies and inefficient GUI problems, are also on the PC side, where I also worked from '99-2004 (84-99 and 2004-present Mac). It will only become worse, as we have already heard from posters working on Vista 64, soon to be Win7.
Painter the program, is not the problem. It being in the hands of Corel…IS!
Set it free. Sell it, give it away, invite other innovative programmers to take over development… whatever. But PLEASE do not let it die or stagnate, until the day where we can no longer even install it because we are using a post-WinXP operating system and modern, new computer.
We as users have tried to help Corel:
with wish lists; bug fixes, tricks, workarounds and help; volunteer, user-contributed forums for newbies, like this one here, etc. THEY have refused to respect us by at least giving us a stable base to work from (Painter); have NOT even scratched off the Top 10 most posted about bugs and/or GUI problems; and continue to shyster us out of our money for half-baked new “versions”… which in truth are almost always just an “update”… that tend to break more things than it fixes. (Almost 4x what those brothers want for the whole program? - for an “upgrade”?!)
PS: Take a look at the Pixelmator site only as an example… and dream what Painter COULD work and look like… or what those 2 guys could do with the Painter engine.
PSS: Calling John Derry and Original Painter Team: “Remember way back, when you were those guys? Wouldn’t it be great to experience your youth again?!”! Hint-Hint