This might be an unusual question, but can anyone explain to me how brushes work in different programs?
Why won’t CSP brushes be compatible with Krita? Photoshop with Krita/etc.
Is it because of the code itself, or is it because of the file type?
If it’s the code, is it just too different? Are the programs too different?
If it’s just the file type, then why is there not a converter like there is for normal files?
It confuses me and while this isn’t about bugs or anything, I would like an explanation.
Thank you for reading and let me know if this doesn’t belong in here! If it’s possible to code, then maybe a brush converter would work? I don’t know. I find that eyeballing brushes to mimic them is confusing, especially since Krita is a much more complex program than what I was working with before (MS Paint > Medibang > FireAlpaca).
CSP seems to have a lot of brushes on the internet (Toyhou.se, deviantArt, etc) that I adore, but I cannot afford the program just yet, and the updates being locked if you do a one-time purchase irks me.
The apps you mentioned each use different brush engines. Sometimes there is a bit of compatibility but usually the best you can get is to import the brushtip (usually a png file) and use it with one of the native brushes.
Have you looked at Krita’s brush editor? It’s very powerful. You can make almost any kind of brush you want. On Krita’s YouTube channel there is a series of videos explaining how to do that if you’re curious.
PS - There are tons of Krita brushes you can download. Really, tons. Here’s a great place to start:
There’s not one standard way to create a brush engine. There are different implementions, some are more powerfull, some more efficient, some more compatible. Developers all try to get the best for their software solutions and therefore they are coded differently. Even when the settings look similar on the outside, how the engines process inputs can be a lot different and results are different even when you set up the brush preset the same.
In addition there’s legal stuff like software patents and licenses that can prevent a software to make an implementation the same, even if the developers really wanted to.
My completely non-techy contribution to that question:
The developers probably want you to use and/or buy THEIR product, that’s why. They may have spent a while developing their stuff, maybe put a license or copyright on it, and don’t want it to be easily interchangeable with other programmes. Like Photoshop, for example, super expensive and advertised as all singing and dancing - why would they make their brushes and stuff easily available to use with any other programme out there. That risks you loving their brushes, but not buying their product and just installing their brushes elsewhere.
That’s exactly what I mean. They want you to buy THEIR stuff, not be able to use their brushes in a different programme.
That’s the first thing that came to my mind anyway.
