Krita is not advertised as a pixel-art editor and doesn't really try to be that either. I'm not sure it's really fair to compare Krita to Aseprite, actually.
Aseprite doesn't have more features than Krita, but if we're talking exclusively about sprite animation then I think it is better still for having the right features for the job opposed to simply having more features. They both have pros and cons so it's hard to say one is more favorable when it will basically come down to circumstantial necessity and preferences. You may want to simply grab Aseprite and give it a try for yourself and refund if it really doesn't suit your preference. Aseprite is ready to go as soon as you open it and imposes limitations that help you think with the right mindset for pixel art, IMO. does Krita have an animation preview for while you work on the animation?Īside from animation, the thing is Krita offers more of a paint-studio workspace - so you'll have filters and tool options and brushes that unquestionably surpass Aseprite's features, but most of those features do not necessarily help when trying to make organic pixel art either (they kind of get in the way by offering too much). You've got onion-skinning and playback speed.
Layer management across multiple frames can be clunky in Asperite, I guess - but otherwise I think they are pretty similar. That alone is a giant time-saver and reason enough for me. AFAIK, Krita can not easily import from a spritesheet or export to a spritesheet or manage an existing spritesheet - which is the first notable difference to me, since Aseprite is for spriting and sprites typically are set up as spritesheets or tilesets.
I use Krita for drawing, sometimes - but I'm not super familiar with the animation toolset.
0 kommentar(er)
