If Natron was to be merged in Blender, then 90% of Blender or more would be pure bloatware for specialists only looking for a compositing software. Natron is targeted towards professionals and people who specialize in compositing. The reason Blender has a compositor is to enable the user to be able to do basic effects and tweaks to their renders before exporting them or to create small and light composites.
#Natron vs blender software#
It wouldn’t make any sense to merge a specialized software into a generalist one.
#Natron vs blender code#
To merge Natron into Blender, the source code of Natron will have to be completely rewritten to match Blender’s source code and standards.
Both of them have their own place in the pipeline. Both Blender and Natron need to be their own separate software.
Natron is designed with only one part of the VFX pipeline in mind, which is compositing. What that means is that Blender is designed as a complete CGI and VFX pipeline software. This should be easy, both to explain and to understand. That is the reason the BF won’t be supporting not just Natron, but any project other than their own, at least at the time being. As the Blender Project grows, it becomes costlier to maintain and develop, and therefore, their funding goals always keep growing. Sure, they’re getting a lot of funding from the community, but all that funding is provided by the Blender Community to be used for development of the Blender Project. The BF also isn’t in a financial state that would enable them to support third party projects. Furthermore, when contacted with the question of supporting third party projects, the BF always states that their purpose is to support the Blender Project only.
#Natron vs blender free#
The sole purpose of the BF is to support the Blender Project and to keep it free and open source. Now moving on to the Blender Foundation (referred to as BF hereafter). (EDIT: I got this part wrong because I forgot that Natron code is already GPL) For setting up a foundation, the source code must be bought from the mentioned entities. Natron’s code is owned by Inria and the original developers. The reason is that Natron doesn’t have any foundation, organization or accounts to enable reception of financial support. I’ll talk about the second one first since it also covers why Natron can’t currently get financial support. The second one is: “Natron should ask the Blender Foundation for support” The first one is: “Natron should be merged into Blender” I’m just trying to convince you to think on both sides of the spectrum.įor those who aren’t aware of what I’m talking about, there have been two specific topics that have been popping up every now and then in the community that have to do with Blender. I’ll make it clear right now that I’m in opposition to that, and that’s what this post is about. So the thing I want to talk about is the very “hot” topic in the community about merging Natron into Blender or getting support from the Blender Foundation. I’d like to start this topic by stating that this is not a rant, but rather my opinion which I’ve based upon some common sense.
0 kommentar(er)
