Paint.NET is a (very) small paint application that is currently making the ’rounds around the blogosphere.

A few thoughts.

* its about 3 MB: pretty small for a windows app, until you recognize that it needs a .NET framework, which is 20MB and is a pretty slow install. Since .NET (as I understand it) is a library of functions that a program can use, the ‘3MB install’ is a bit misleading

* its fast: this is true; it loads quickly (ONE MISSIS — *) and it closes quickly. It uses not a heck of a lot of resources as well.

* there are tutorials: man, the existence of tutorials are so important it cannot be overestimated. Not only do the tutorials show you how to do “stuff”, but it also illustrates what the program is capable of

* its limited: if you’re used to Photoshop, there’s a learning curve, as I’m learning myself. There are quite a few things that are similar (layers), and others that are not (no blending options?!)

Now, I’m talking from the point of a ‘web designer’, and not a photoshopper here (so I’m not going to talk about “RAW” capability — although it has none, or the ability to get rid of red-eye and so on).

But the more and more you go through the tutorials, the more you begin to wonder — is Photoshop making me “lazy”? Because to do relatively easy and “built-in” functions such as a gradient fill in and shadows take multiple steps, or require separate scripts(!) to do transparency tricks. Answer: “no”. Rather, Photoshop has gone through multiple iterations to include a few really useful tools … that Paint.NET doesn’t seem to have (correct me if I’m wrong here, folks).

As with all things in life, there’s a trade off here – but for relatively simple tasks, once you’ve installed the .NET framework, its a quick program to do some quick tasks. Because its limited in other features, I wonder whether or not its worth the while to change tracks and learn another kind of program if you’ve already got Photoshop.

I think the real usage of this program is in doing small tasks, perhaps repetitive tasks that don’t require the horsepower of Photoshop or GIMP. No sense in using a Buick to swat a fly, as I always say. For example, personally, I’ll be using it to create my smarmy captioned photos that accompany my posts … but, uh … little else. ;)

Paint.NET — its not Photoshop, but its not trying to be either.

UPDATE: Not sure if its because I’ve installed hundreds of fonts on my PC, but any time I try and change the “font” it S-L-O-W-S down to an unimaginably boggy pace while it loads them up. Hmmm … Paint.NET goes to one thumb up.