Whats your process in collating your brushes for a bundle?

Not the actual creation of bundles…

What i want to inquire is how you go on prepare or create, naming your brushes for the bundle.

Do you choose on your existing brushes?
Do you rename the brushes you want with a certain naming convention?
Any other things?

Just curious, I usually try to save and rename them, but that creates a duplicate brush with just different name. :sweat_smile:

With the new changes in resource management and saving - Is there anything I need to take note of?

I posted a thread to add a feature to search by tag when creating a bundle
And got a response. Might be available in like 5.2 :crossed_fingers:

For now renaming them as a new brush to easily search through the list might be the way to go.


I create a “WIP name” file and when I finish it I make “TAG name” then I clean my disk of WIP versioning related to that name. Of you search TAG you will find all your brushes of that group but you need to find a tag that does not exist but that should not be hard.

Ussualy I import the images when I create the final version of the brush so I don’t need to worry to mess up.

After that I TRY to make a bundle.

Hmm, honestly I am lazy, when I build presets for myself then they get a descriptive name and a consecutive numbering, and should they be based on the preset of another artist or derived from it, the numbering is appended to the original name.
I also put the numbering in the icon, if the preset has a brush tip I also like to include the brush tip in the icon, especially with stamps this way I have the right one quickly at hand when I paint. One look and the search begins. :rofl:
A very convenient solution, in my opinion.



This is how i do it for now, some initial - my description.

I was trying to compile my most use brushes to a smaller pack. Im starting to get annoyed at the extra file in my resource directory. :sweat_smile:

Thank you - I tried assigning tag name and it works quite nicely.

speaking of the extra files in the directory - do you just delete them. The new resource manager is making me worry of just deleting extra file.

Before there are clear backup feature, that clear out those with 000x naming, idk with the current one.
They kinda making me nuts - since i don’t like those duplicate files if i dont need them and while the new resource db points to the 000x file if you update the brush with same name. It almost made me trip when i transferred a brush to my other computer . the name lowkey grates me. :joy:

I kinda want names neat in my files.

Yes I do delete them. but I don’t recommend doing it to no one per say. I have had some weird issues with it. I also miss that feature.

If, in theory, Krita’s GUI was good enough to handle all things you want to do with resources, would you really care how the resource folder looks like?

The new resource system is messy, but we hope to get it nice and tidy from the user point of view in Krita itself. Hopefully eliminating visiting the resource folder at all, even.

There will be… in Krita 5.1, I believe. Sorry for that, but some things had to be cut to make 5.0 possible to release in this decade :wink:


I honestly only do it [visit resource directory] when i transfer a brush i modified to my laptop, or to my laptop and back to my pc. (I spent my weekdays away from home in another province - it become alot more frequent than average) So i just had a which one is which :woozy_face: brush I should port over moment.

That’s nice to hear that it will be back.

I’m actually using 5.1.0 pre-alpha because the mirror on cursor is there and i have switch to using it entirely. [just updated to the latest this morning]

Surprisingly stable with stray bugs that mostly been reported here and there.

Either way, thank you as always for all the hardwork making krita better and better.

That sounds so unlikely and for so many reasons to think otherwise. I should say I think Krita is the most high maintenance for resources and is progressing to become more complex to handle.

One thing I was happy though was that at least versions have numbers now instead of random letters making new names. Happy that got through.

You mean it’s so complex that you would need to open resource folder more often now in Krita 5? Could you tell me why? (There are a few things still planned for future versions, since of course, we have to release 5.0 someday, so I wonder if they would help or not).

I started rambling here in the comment but it’s not useful at all, so I removed it, but there is still one thing that I recommend anyone to read, it explains so much in so many things: The Law of Leaky Abstractions – Joel on Software

1 Like

I don’t know how things will end up being but on the betas I feel I should only edit the in resource folder with Krita turned off unless I want to make a new file. I don’t want to use the resource folder but the issues it gives me otherwise are not worth compared to shutting it all down, because things get stuck in memory even if they don’t exist and rebooted because they have some special connections I still don’t understand. Renaming, deleting and doing backups outside works far better.

That is what I have been doing now on beta 5-2. but I am on python more than making brushes.

Sorry for being off-topic, but this is a great article that you linked to, I haven’t smiled like this in a long time. Thank you!


1 Like

Honestly to me - the reason i keep opening it to transfer is my frustration with the naming and i still yet to grasp how things are change when you rename or overwrite a resource.

With the remove backup going back and maybe a little more polishing on how things go with the resource manager. [bundle creation] i can see that diminishing.

The name in Krita 5.0 is only changed in the database and in the preset itself (because the preset always has a name inside its own file, which is independent from the filename). Renaming creates a new version of the resource. When you export it to a bundle (maybe potentially in the future also just export?), it will have a nice, pretty filename inside of it based on the current filename (exceptions are brush tips, patterns and I think gradients, because we can’t really change their filenames, because some resources still depend on that, I think. But with those, if you know you have some resource that depends on it, it’s better to leave it alone anyway).

So basically, if you rename a resource, it will look renamed all over Krita, but it will still have a filename that suggests the old name. This is also the same reason you currently cannot create later a resource that has the previous name of that resource. For example if you create “Brush A” and then rename it to “Brush B”, and then try to create “Brush A” preset, then Krita will ask you if you want to overwrite “Brush B”, because the filename would clash/collide. That’s a current limitation. Maybe in the future it will be possible to define a different filename for it to work.

It’s often like that, you gain something, you lose something. I think it was worth it though, now it’s more universal and integrated, everything happens automatically, it’s nice to use it from the developer’s point of view as well (when they are not fixing all the new bugs, of course :stuck_out_tongue: ).


Ah that’s make it clearer. So I can just straight up rename the brush and it will save with that filename.

Thank you for taking time on explaining it to me. :blush: I really appreciate it.

If you rename “Brush A” with filename “Brush_A.kpp” to “Brush B”, it will have a filename “Brush_A.0001.kpp” (to keep the versioning consistent if you lose your database or something, that was the idea). However if you export it to a bundle, it will have a filename “Brush_B.kpp” in the bundle (the resource folder file stays as it was) to make it neater.


@tiar You mentioned to me that brush tips are now included in the preset files, so I’ve been wondering - Are patterns also included?

Also - if a bundle is made with presets that use the same brush tip, will that brush tip be included multiple times? If that’s the case, will Krita just show a single instance in the tip browser? :thinking: