GIMP vs Krita: Which One Should You Use?

Short answer: pick GIMP if your work starts with an existing photo or image that needs editing, and pick Krita if your work starts with a blank canvas you intend to draw or paint on. Both are open-source, cost nothing to download, and run on Windows, macOS, and Linux — but they were built for different jobs, and the gap between them is wider than their shared price tag suggests. GIMP is an image editor: retouching, selections, compositing, and batch work. Krita is a painting studio: brushes, tablets, comics, and frame-by-frame animation. The honest answer for a lot of people is both — edit the photo in GIMP, paint over it in Krita — and this comparison tests each app on the job it claims to own.

How I tested this: I downloaded the current Linux builds of both apps from their official sites — GIMP 3.2.8 (a 234 MB AppImage from gimp.org) and Krita 5.3.4.1 (a 364 MB AppImage from kde.org) — launched each one on this machine, and confirmed both reported versions match their download pages. I then checked every feature claim below against the official GIMP 3.2 and Krita 5.3 release notes and documentation, and verified every link in this article returns a live page. A full brush-feel painting session needs a graphics tablet and a desktop session this machine does not have, so where a claim rests on the official documentation rather than something I clicked through myself, I say so.

GIMP vs Krita at a glance

If you want the verdict in one table, here it is. The sections below test each row instead of just asserting it.

What is the difference between GIMP and Krita?

GIMP — the GNU Image Manipulation Program — dates to 1995 and has spent thirty years becoming a general-purpose raster editor: open an image, change it, export it. Its current stable release is 3.2.8, released November 2, 2026, and the demand is real: the official download page records 1,441,137 downloads of that release across all platforms in its first ten days. The 3.0 release in March 2025 made filters non-destructive, and 3.2 added non-destructive link layers and vector layers on top. GIMP is licensed under the GPLv3 and runs on Windows, macOS (11 Big Sur or newer), and Linux.

Krita started inside the KDE community in 1998 as a painting application, and it has never tried to be anything else. Its current release is 5.3.4.1, released October 7, 2026, from the 5.3 generation that shipped in February 2026 alongside the experimental Qt6-based Krita 6.0 — the developers still recommend 5.3 for production work. Krita is also GPLv3 and runs on Windows, macOS, and Linux; the desktop download costs nothing, while paid versions on the Microsoft, Steam, Epic, and Mac App Stores fund development. Both apps appear in our roundup of Photoshop alternatives, but that roundup treats them as interchangeable, and they are not.

The difference shows up the moment you open each app. GIMP opens with tools arranged around the image you brought in: selection, crop, heal, clone, color. Krita opens with tools arranged around the stroke you are about to make: brush, stabilizer, assistant, canvas rotation. Neither workflow is wrong. They answer different questions, and the rest of this comparison is about matching the app to the question you actually have.

Which is better for photo editing?

GIMP wins this round clearly. Photo editing is selection work, and GIMP’s selection, masking, and retouching tools are deeper: fuzzy select and select-by-color, paths that become selections, layer masks with an edit-mask workflow, healing and cloning, and the full Levels and Curves color tools. The 3.2 release added a Vibrance filter that saturates selectively while protecting skin tones — the kind of small, practical addition that shows up in real retouching sessions. Filters now apply non-destructively to channels and layer groups, and an empty layer group set to Pass through mode with a filter on it works as an adjustment layer, so a color grade stays editable instead of baked in.

Krita can crop, resize, adjust levels, and paint over a photo, and its filter layers and masks are genuinely non-destructive. But its toolset points at illustration: the selection tools are thinner, there is no equivalent of GIMP’s healing workflow, and batch work is awkward. If your job is cleaning up forty product photos, GIMP finishes first. If your job is painting over five reference photos to make concept art, Krita finishes first — and that is the pattern for this whole comparison.

Two practical notes. First, neither app is a RAW developer: GIMP opens RAW files through darktable, RawTherapee, or ART plug-ins, so pair it with a dedicated RAW app for serious photography — our Darktable vs Lightroom comparison covers that side. Second, GIMP’s background-removal workflow is one of its most-used photo jobs; we tested four methods in our GIMP background removal guide, and the Select Subject plus layer-mask route is the one to learn first.

Which is better for digital painting and drawing?

Krita wins this round by a wide margin. Painting is Krita’s home ground: more than 100 bundled brushes, 18 brush engines covering pixel, color smudge, bristle, sketch, hatching, particle, deform, and a MyPaint engine, four smoothing modes including a stabilizer, and 11 drawing assistants for perspective, ellipses, and vanishing points. The canvas controls — rotation, mirroring, wrap-around mode for seamless textures — are built for people who draw for hours. Tablet support with pressure, tilt, and barrel rotation is central to the app, not an afterthought.

GIMP can paint, and 3.2 improved it: the MyPaint Brush tool moved to the newer version 2 API with 20 new brushes, the tool now respects canvas zoom and rotation for more dynamic strokes, and a Gain slider lets you offset pen pressure or simulate it with a mouse. There is also a new Overwrite paint mode aimed at pixel art. But the painting workflow still feels like a capable guest in an editor’s house — the brush engine is one tool among many, the canvas controls are thinner, and there is no stabilizer culture. If drawing is the main job, Krita is not slightly better; it is a different class of tool.

One honest caveat: brush feel is the one claim in this article I could not test hands-on with a tablet on this machine, so the brush comparison above rests on the official documentation for both apps — Krita’s feature list and GIMP’s 3.2 release notes — rather than a timed painting session. The version numbers, download sizes, and launch checks are mine; the stroke-by-stroke feel is documented behavior, and I have flagged it as such.

How do the brushes actually compare?

The numbers tell the story. Krita ships 18 brush engines, each a different model of how a stroke behaves — a watercolor engine that pools, a particle engine that scatters, a deform engine that smears. GIMP ships its own brush engine plus the MyPaint Brush tool, which after the 3.2 update carries 20 new brushes in the Dieterle tag group. Both support pressure sensitivity and custom brushes, and both let you install more.

Where they split is intent. Krita’s brush editor exposes the engines’ internals — size, opacity, flow, texture, and masked-brush dynamics per stroke — because its users tune brushes the way photographers tune lenses. GIMP’s brush options are simpler and faster to reach, which suits quick annotation, masking, and cloning more than sustained illustration. If you have never tuned a brush in your life, GIMP’s simplicity is a feature. If you have a favorite brush preset you guard like a recipe, Krita is the only one of the two that speaks your language.

Which handles text better?

Krita, since version 5.3 — and it is not close for layout work. Krita rewrote its text tool from scratch in 5.3: text now edits directly on the canvas instead of in a floating dialog, with wrapped text, text flowing inside shapes, text following a path, full OpenType support, a glyph palette for alternate letterforms, and a Text Properties docker with more than fifty editable properties. That makes Krita genuinely usable for comics lettering, poster titles, and text on curves — the jobs illustrators actually need text for.

GIMP’s text tool improved in 3.2 — the on-canvas editor can be dragged out of the way, common shortcuts like Ctrl+B for bold now work inside it, and outlines support centered and outer directions alongside inner — but it is still a caption tool, not a layout tool. There is no text on a path, no text in shapes, and no wrapped-text flow. For a quick caption on a thumbnail, GIMP is fine. For lettering a comic page or setting a poster title on a curve, use Krita.

One limitation worth knowing on the Krita side: its text lives on vector layers, which suits lettering and titles well and long copy poorly. Neither app is a page-layout tool. If the job is a multi-page document, that is a different category of software entirely.

Can either one animate?

Only Krita, in any practical sense. Krita has a built-in animation timeline with keyframes, playback controls, frame management, onion skinning, and audio support — a real frame-by-frame 2D animation workflow for hand-drawn shorts, GIFs, and storyboards. It is the reason animators recommend Krita over GIMP without hesitation.

GIMP’s animation story is layers-as-frames: put each frame on its own layer, export as an animated GIF, and the layers become the frames. It works for a simple loading spinner or a blinking banner, and it is the honest limit of the app. There is no timeline, no onion skinning, and no audio. If animation is more than an occasional GIF, this round is not a contest.

Which is more non-destructive?

This used to be GIMP’s weak spot, and the 3.2 release mostly closes it. GIMP now has three non-destructive layer types — text layers, link layers, and vector layers — each with a Rasterize option you must deliberately toggle before destructive edits, and a Revert Rasterize that undoes them. Link layers work like Photoshop’s linked smart objects: drop an SVG logo into a composition as a link layer, edit it in Inkscape, and the GIMP composition updates live. Vector layers let the Path tool create shapes with editable stroke and fill. GEGL filters apply non-destructively to layers, groups, and channels, and stacking filters on a pass-through group recreates the adjustment-layer workflow.

Krita’s model is different but equally non-destructive where it counts: filter layers, filter masks, and transform masks let you stack adjustments and transforms that stay editable, and its clone and transform tools respect the same approach. The practical difference is emphasis — GIMP’s non-destructive work centers on layers and filters for editing, Krita’s on masks and transforms for painting. Both are good enough now that non-destructive editing should not decide the purchase — there is no purchase — but it should reassure anyone who remembers GIMP 2.10’s destructive filters: that era is over.

What about Photoshop files and formats?

Both apps handle Photoshop files, with different strengths. GIMP imports PSD files, reads more PSD layer styles than before (Drop Shadow, Inner Shadow, Outer Glow), imports Photoshop Curves and Levels presets from .acv and .alv files, loads .pat pattern files, and — new in 3.2 — exports PSB large-document files, which it could previously only import. It also exports JPEG 2000, and vector layers export to SVG and PDF with the vector information intact.

Krita opens PSD files including text objects — improved in 5.3 — and exports PSD, with native files saved as .kra. It also supports JPEG-XL and Radiance RGBE HDR images, and its HDR painting support improved in the same release. GIMP counters with a broader archival format list, including APNG, Seattle FilmWorks photos, PlayStation TIM, and Dreamcast PVR textures — the kind of coverage that matters if you rescue old files. For iPhone photos, note that GIMP 3.2 added AVCI import, a HEIF variant; if your files arrive as HEIC, our HEIC to JPG guide covers the conversion step before either app.

Neither app is a complete Photoshop replacement, and both would tell you so: GIMP lacks Photoshop’s AI selection and content-aware tools, Krita lacks its photo automation. What they replace is the subscription for the specific jobs each one owns.

Which runs better on your computer?

Both run on Windows, macOS, and Linux, and both are free downloads — but they are not equally heavy. GIMP’s Linux AppImage is 234 MB; Krita’s is 364 MB, and Krita’s download page lists 4 GB of RAM as the minimum with 16 GB recommended, plus OpenGL 3.0 or Direct3D 11 graphics. GIMP is the lighter app and the safer pick on older hardware or a machine with 8 GB of RAM; Krita’s brush engines and canvas features reward the extra memory, and its system requirements say so plainly. GIMP needs macOS 11 Big Sur or newer, and the GIMP team warns that it provides no App Store package — any GIMP on the App Store is a third-party build, so download from gimp.org.

Installation is straightforward for both: download the installer from the official site, run it, and you are done — no account, no activation, no trial clock. Krita also sells paid versions on the Microsoft, Steam, Epic, and Mac App Stores; the software is identical, and the payment goes to Krita’s development after the store fee. That is the only money either app will ever ask you for.

Which should you choose?

Match the app to the medium, not to the marketing. The table below is the decision in one place.

The combination deserves a final word, because it is the workflow the two projects quietly support: GIMP added export for Krita’s .kpl palette format in 3.2, and both read each other’s files well enough to hand work back and forth. Edit the photograph in GIMP — retouch, mask, color-grade — then open it in Krita and paint the parts no filter can make. That is not a compromise pick. It is the strongest free graphics setup available, and it costs nothing to try.

Frequently asked questions