Joshua Lamusga

Members
  • Content Count

    347
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Joshua Lamusga last won the day on November 12 2018

Joshua Lamusga had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

228

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Washington State
  • Interests
    Many and varied.

Recent Profile Visitors

3,884 profile views
  1. And make sure that tolerance is set to 0%. This is better than using a plugin.
  2. Krita used to have this feature, but they didn't like it and got rid of it . They use masks now, which can get the same end result, but is much more effort in my opinion. In any case, you could consider Krita for a lot of features that PDN doesn't have; I now use both in my workflow.
  3. Thanks everyone! @LionsDragon Painting minerals is hard because of the way light interacts with crystals, I can only imagine it's much harder than using semi-transparent layers in PDN . Of course if that's what you want to do, I can't complain because minerals are awesome and hey, it's something new to work on. I just -finally- got a drawing tablet to play with, borrowing it from my friend, and it seems quite a lot more likely that I'll be able to draw reasonable things: This is done in Krita (so I won't be sharing other sketches directly here). No references, second thing I drew with the tablet and I have no idea what a wyvern should look like. I'm thinking its body is too long (I left the right side of the body not-quite-finished anyway). But this is excitingly better than what I get myself with pencil and paper. Since I have a drawing tablet for the time being, I'm hoping I might be able to add pressure sensitivity support in Brush Factory in PDN. No promises on when, though. I realize there are multiple APIs (Window Ink is the common one, but there's little standardization so Wacom, Huion, etc. have a lot of specialization) and I might need to have more than one. The UI for the brush dynamics would need a full update anyway to support mapping the values. Food for thought.
  4. A drawing of quartz with goethite inclusions from March 2018, just using my imagination here. I wasn't sure about the matrix for the goethite, so I made some dark, uncertain and metal-heavy matrix. The edges of the quartz may look weird, especially the hanging face at the top-right. The quartz face is supposed to be incompletely grown there. This was an interesting one to do because I had to mimic the index of refraction, which I did at the seams where the faces meet (it's intentional). I think it's interesting anyway. I haven't been active for some time except for a ghostly vote here or there; I was busy on other things. So here's a 5-minute tree from June 2019 in a cartoon style I haven't done yet. Forgive me
  5. It's nice. The zoom icon in the lower right-hand corner can be toggled on and off when at 100% zoom with no apparent effect; maybe it should just display the icon without dotted lines if zoom is 100% regardless of when the user toggles it. That would be a clearer design because at 100% zoom, you are viewing a 1:1 ratio, and pretty clean in code I'd imagine.
  6. Wholeheartedly agreed. I'd give 4 attempts, maybe with a warning it will result in a temporary lockout, etc. Don't forget that Avada brings up that the email address isn't accepted to log in, which is important if true. For usability. We could tighten it down to one attempt, theoretically, and permanently lock out the account on failure until an admin intervenes. That's the most secure solution, but is it good? I'd say not. I'd even go as far as to agree that 3 is too few. You can read more about it; this source has a variety of answers, one of which includes 3 attempts with a 5 minute timeout on failure, and that's for logging into a user account on an operating system; surely more important than this site: https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/73565/how-many-atempts-should-you-give-a-user-before-invalidating-his-password. So weigh on it critically from both a security and usability standpoint. Probably someone will chime in that it'll be looked at or not in scope, that's fine. Just want to make sure it's known.
  7. Isn't it twice as good to just bucket fill the background in black, select that and delete? Increase tolerance as necessary, but still it's a single step. Boltbait's suggesting a plugin you'd have to install (granted -- it works well for this!) and AndrewDavid's suggestion requires recreating the red outline. Having other ways of doing it is one thing, but really only if it competes, right?
  8. Fill the background in black. Use the magic wand to select it and delete. I don't know if you want to get rid of the black between letters like the BS and AN, but you would do those tweaks with an eraser.
  9. Copy a slightly larger section, paste on separate layer, fade the bottom edge using a gradient in transparent mode. Or keeping it as is, use clone stamp to carefully copy over the center line and hope it comes out okay.
  10. Free-form selection operates the same in both programs. Paint.net requires pressing M to switch to the move tool if that's what you want to do after making a selection. Otherwise, they affect pixels the same. Paint.net also allows selecting fractions of a pixel if Selection Clipping Mode is set to Antialiased selection quality. I suggest reading about the basics of paint.net. This link goes to Selection Tools, and everything else is on the top menu bar: https://www.getpaint.net/doc/latest/SelectionTools.html
  11. Vectors are a series of math expressions, but they can be rendered to the screen as raster images, which is what you've seen if you ever saw a vector image. That is, if you make a 1-pixel circle in a vector program and you see it, you already have a raster representation of it. So of course a raster program can create fine circles.
  12. Alternatively, hold Ctrl and press + a few times. A default setting to open images to fill the visible window space would be a solid option to implement, but it would be up to Rick.
  13. Paint.net is hardly the tool for animations, so I'd expect it's just not supported. Googling "loop my gif" gives sites that look like they do it; why not try one of those. https://ezgif.com/loop-count