Paint.Net needs better Anti-Aliasing!

[qwertyuu]

You know, this software is the most useful free software anyone could ever use.

I am fully happy concerning all of the stuff you can easily create with it.

The only thing is: It needs a way better calculation when it comes to selecting and deleting parts of an image, because the current problem is the Anti-Aliasing when it comes to saving your project.

Edited July 24, 2012 by qwertyuu

[Rick Brewster]

Gee, why didn't I think of that. http://blog.getpaint.net/2012/04/08/new-features-for-paint-net-4-0/

[qwertyuu]

Gee, why didn't I think of that. http://blog.getpaint...-paint-net-4-0/

I tried to read those features... but for some reason, the page refuses to load.

Sorry if I repeated one of the upcoming features.

Edit: after waiting a very long time, it finally loaded successfully. I can read that you are going to add 2x2/3x3 render settings.

Can I suggest you to add very high settings? Similar to 12x12? I am very VERY upset at every imperfection in every picture I create and the AA was one of the most frustrating lack there were.

Thanks for thinking about such great features! The upcoming version seems so fresh... Can't wait to try those features out!

Edited July 24, 2012 by qwertyuu

[Rick Brewster]

Haha no 12x12 isn't an option. That would require gigabytes of memory usage for even the smallest of tasks. 3x3 is already very high quality, and the 2x2 option has since been removed.

[minners71]

Why not just use a combination of AA assistant and gaussian blur I recreated the same image as you with no jaggies, I also made it twice the size then resized to 50%.

[Ego Eram Reputo]

Simplest solution:

1. Turn Anti-Aliasing ON.

2. What Minners71 said: Create your images twice as wide and twice as high as you require and then shrink them to the correct dimensions as a last step in your workflow.

[qwertyuu]

That's funny... Only for a picture that would require 3 steps (just putting down 3 circles), I actually need to make 6+ steps to get a SOMEWHAT okay result.

Why wouldn't you add a feature to achieve AA easily, without having to duplicate the time needed. It can also be very mind-twitching since a big project would have us think about trice as much for something relatively easy to normally make.

That being said, 3x3 AA is very low. a 4x4 would actually give a crystal fine result to an artist eye.

[Rick Brewster]

Ok I'm not sure why you think antialiasing quality will hinder "3 to 6 steps". These two are not linearly related in the way you seem to think.

This has nothing to do with how "easy" it would be to add that feature. Don't say things like that, it's very patronizing. Did I not just say it would use tons of memory? Tons of CPU? You would need this 16-core Xeon sitting on my desk to get any kind of responsivness out of the thing. And you'd need all 64GB of RAM if you really wanted to take it up to 12x12 antialiasing. I did try out higher AA levels and there just wasn't much of a subjective increase in quality. Please trust that I've done the diligent investigation and analysis here. If I thought 4x4 was a useful improvement over 3x3, and the performance was okay, I'd be using that instead.

3x3 AA is really not as low as you think it is, and since you haven't seen how 4x4 antialiasing would work in Paint.NET, you really should not be claiming anything about how good it would look. 3x3 means it takes 9 samples, which is going to be better than your typical GeForce's 8x antialiasing.

Anyway you've got your answer, please stop haggling with me over it. Thread Closed.Edit: reopened. I was grumpy. But seriously.

[qwertyuu]

I know exactly how AA works

I've been rendering tons of pictures in the past. A 12x12 AA does NOT use 64Gbs of RAM, since my PC has 24 and could render very smoothly.

Also, a great thing when talking about high sampling is actually make the software GPUwise, so it can render way faster without problem.

3x3 will still give little edges, 4x4 will look clear, that's it.

[midora]

3x3 will still give little edges, 4x4 will look clear, that's it.

Depends on the output resolution and the pixel technology. From my experience I would say 3x3 is fine for > 110dpi on all kind of displays which I know. On a retina display AA for > 300dpi is not really needed.

[qwertyuu]

Edit: reopened. I was grumpy. But seriously.

You are giving me mocking answers, I give you harassing replies.

[Rick Brewster]

Ok then clearly I was correct to close this thread in the first place and should not have reopened it. I was not giving you "mock answers," and now you're being a completely obnoxious and self-entitled know-it-all. Don't be such a punk, or you'll be banned pretty quickly.

Thread Closed