Up until now I've been primarily using Photoshop to draw. Though recently I was thinking about moving to Krita.
Testing out new software for drawing was quite overwhelming, but Krita is painfully slow and I'm not sure why...Drawing was perfectly fine for the most part but when I tried importing an unfinished artwork from photoshop in the form of a jpeg image even adjusting the opacity would literally crash the software.
I tried unchecking the "OpenGL" box as i saw was recommended but that didn't seem to fix anything...

Any help is appreciated, thank you.

We'd like to help you, but the problem with slowness issues is that we really need to have an very good idea of what you are doing. It might be a bug or something.

What we need...

1. All the information you can give about the image that caused the problem. Pixel size, color depth, etc.
2. How much RAM you allocated to Krita in settings->configure Krita->performance.
3. What kind of PC you have, how much ram, cores, system, whether you have security software that might be interfering.

Then we can try to see if it's a bug by reproducing the situation on our own systems, or suggest a workaround.
As long as we don't have extra information, all I can point you to is https://docs.krita.org/KritaFAQ#Krita_is_slow

Which version of Krita are you using? Also, make sure you are not using the 32-bit build of Krita...

(On an unrelated note, I cannot imagine anyone wanting to transfer an unfinished artwork, with the intention of continuing work, with a jpeg image...)

1, The image is fairly large, The exact pixels in the Jpeg format are 16560 x 12960 The canvas size in photoshop was in centimeters, 230 Width and 180 Height. I made it quite large to have better resolution zooming in and even photoshop takes a little longer to load up than it used too.

2, Currently the Ram settings in performance are %50.00 in memory limit (8157 MiB) %2.00 percent in internal pool (163 MiB) and %2.00 in swap undo after (160 MiB)

3, My computer functions on Windows 8.1
-I have an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4790 CPU @ 3.60GHz Processor
-My installed memory (RAM) is 16.0 GB
-My system type is a 64-bit Operating system, x64-based processor

And I should be using the 64-bit version of Krita, knowing my pc runs on a 64-bit processor I wouldnt have chosen otherwise unless by mistake. My Krita version is v 3.3.2
Hopefully this information is sufficient. Also I was only using a Jpeg image because I wanted to trace the original Lineart and start over that way, I wouldnt want to finish it entirely over a Jpeg either...Thank you.

In my personal experience, that is too high of a size (with 300dpi) for Krita to "chew" on that hardware, I still don't know for sure if that is a hardware relation problem, I have a phenom six cores at 3.6ghz and 16gb ram (75% for Krita since I don't do anything else when painting) with krita installed on a sdd, and in order to paint comfortably with probably a couple of filters and a few layers (ten or so) I have to use 7000px or less per side. my perfect performance comes with anything under 5000.

Now saying that, those sizes are already big, not sure if you going to print large scale (posters, banners, etc.) otherwise a 5000 looks rather good on a 50 inch tv screen, not to mention an average monitor (unless you are super pixel picky ).

Again I'm not sure if this is krita only related or a combination of software/hardware issue, haven't try PS for more than 15 years, thus can't compare, one only suggestion is to open a smaller size in Krita, import the picture as a layer and do the line art from there.

Well I figured it was the size of the picture, though even with the freehand brush once you go beyond a certain size it begins to lag. Though it has to be a pretty big brush, up to 600 or so pixels I guess, but it also depends on how fast you move the brush of course.

Got any recommendations? When I used Photoshop I made the canvas bigger to adjust the resolution when zooming in, otherwise zooming in would be pixelated...Krita being entirely new to me I'm not too sure what an appropriate size would be for a good appearance as well as performance...

Thanks!
oh, and how exactly do I import the picture as a layer? Back in Photoshop I just went to File-Place and selected it off of wherever it was on my computer...

That's a tad big indeed: it's over 800mb just for the image data. Add a couple of layers, the canvas representation, and you're talking about amounts of memory that's just saturating your CPU's memory bus.

Then. even if you're working for print, you do not need more than 300 dpi for a color illustration, 600 dpi for line art. At 300 dpi, and A4 image is 3508 x 2480 pixels; there are no color printers or print shops that will print color at a higher resolution, so all that detail won't be visible. If you want to print something that's about 2 by 2 meters, the print shop will reduce resolution a lot, so even then you don't need that many pixels.

(I know, I'm guilty of this too... I started working on a project of my own and choose a too high and wide image -- and then even decided to put them in landscape and stitch two images together on an A4; but there's nothing in the world that can actually use that resolution: I need to scale down the 30 or so images in that project...)

I wasn't really intending on printing anything, and I'm somewhat unfamiliar with these formatting acronyms but it's nice to know since looking it up let me know what ppi and dpi mean XD.
What I was really making was just a concept art piece, is perhaps 5000 Width x 4000 Height too much?..

mathewc wrote:I wasn't really intending on printing anything, and I'm somewhat unfamiliar with these formatting acronyms but it's nice to know since looking it up let me know what ppi and dpi mean XD.
What I was really making was just a concept art piece, is perhaps 5000 Width x 4000 Height too much?..

David Revoy recommended that you'd use a resolution that allows you to work at 50% zoom, so for concept art, that's dependent on your monitor.

Though I prefer to work up real close when I need too, either when it comes to cleanup art or creating small details. But getting too close creates a very pixelated view not ideal for making small details...
Is there a way I can help that? I've tried setting the canvas too different sizes and resolutions but zooming in still gives me a very unappealing viewpoint. With Photoshop zooming in would create pixels which was when I increased the canvas size making them dissapear, until I zoomed in TOO much of course. But that was fine since it was never the close up I'd ever find myself working in personally.

Edit: I might be mistaken as the jpegs image quality I was testing this on wasn't all too great.

Well, a jpeg always loses image information. If you want to zoom in and in and in -- then you need to consider working in vectors. I do know what you're talking about, I also sometimes feel that working in pixels doesn't give me enough resolution, compared to my pen and ink style of working, but, well... That's the medium. It's no use putting in detail that cannot be reproduced or seen. With pen and ink, I'm also not working on a 2 by 2 metre piece of paper.

Pity, well I suppose I'll just haft to grow accustomed to that then perhaps.
Thanks.

mathewc wrote:Though I prefer to work up real close when I need too, either when it comes to cleanup art or creating small details. But getting too close creates a very pixelated view not ideal for making small details...
Is there a way I can help that? I've tried setting the canvas too different sizes and resolutions but zooming in still gives me a very unappealing viewpoint. With Photoshop zooming in would create pixels which was when I increased the canvas size making them dissapear, until I zoomed in TOO much of course. But that was fine since it was never the close up I'd ever find myself working in personally.

Edit: I might be mistaken as the jpegs image quality I was testing this on wasn't all too great.

Just a couple of things here, I don't recommend you to work on jpeg's ever, your file should be a native Krita file, that would keep all information you put on it, (layers, filters, etc) when you are happy with it then export it to what ever format you need, (jpeg, png, etc.) this means, don't open jpeg's and start working on them, make a new krita file, then just drag and drop the jpeg's you want on it (like sketches, line art, etc.), or go to Layer>Import/Export>Import Layer.

Now, if you have a jpeg lineart and want to use it, make sure your file has a good resolution (specially scans of hand made lineart) for them to become "usable" on the digital realm.

Another setting you need to be aware is the color space, as 16/32 bits would require more processing from your pc, I'm myself am fine with 8bits which goes really fast on my box, also the stabilizer can delay a bit the brushes depending on the values given, and ultimately, there are some complicated brushes that will take a bit of time to render, but the majority will work just fine.

I use, as mentioned 5000px per side, and have no issues with it while feeling the speed, look at the pict in my G+ post, zoom on the eye, for a jpeg is not that bad, a least I can't see too much pixelization on zooming https://plus.google.com/+CriolloakaRJQu ... 9oUeiLPDdt
Hope the tips help you to enjoy the program much better