>>541836
>https://natron.fr/

its not 3dcg

>>541836
I've used an older version.
Was a little-bit buggy, but for composing multilayered exr image sequences together and some grading it worked actually quite well.
Too bad there is no 3d space for more advanced compositing.
But overall i am quite surprised what they have achieved so far.

Nice tool, would use again.

>>541838
If you are an 3d artist and don't use compositing you might be doing it wrong.

>>541847
>If you are an 3d artist and don't use compositing you might be doing it wrong.
....its not 3dcg dude. Its main use is for 2d

>>541847

Half of this board is a bunch of neckbeards who make shitty naked girls or/and shitty mods no one will ever play. You think they know what compositing is, let alone care?

>>541850
compositing is an integral part of the cg production pipeline. ???

>>541853
saying natron is 3dcg is like saying photoshop is 3dcg...

>>541850
And the end result of an rendered image is 2d, your point is?
>>541851
That doesn't change the fact that its useful.
>>541853
Yes.
>>541855
So, texturing is ok, but manipulating the final image is not?
Don't play that stupid semantics game. Yes you are right, and i am too.

Just use AE or nuke, goddamn.

>>541879
<insert same arguments Blendertards use to defend their inferior software>

>>541879
>ae
slow

>nuke
needlessly complex

>>541895
>nuke
>needlessly complex

Are you retarded?

>>541902
no?

>>541908
Well if you think Nuke is needlessly complex, then i really would like to know which compositing tools is not in your eyes.
Natron is a Nuke-clone; its just less complicated because its tool-set is limited.
Flame, Fusion and Nuke are very similar.
If you know one you can adapt pretty fast.

>>541895
Nuke doesn't force you to use any of the complex features, and the node workflow is a whole lot easier to use rather than the ridiculous pre-comp bullshit you have to deal with in AE.