NinthDesertDude

The plugin pack above contains a plugin called Switch Gray to Alpha, which makes every pixel transparent according to how white it is. White becomes completely transparent. In other words, it turns black lines on a white background into black lines on a transparent background...this is great for preparing drawings to be digitally colored or worked with. Then you can make a layer beneath with whatever color you want, and merge down

Ooh, does that make this the first obscure bugfix since releasing version 5?

The brush in PDN 5 is circular. The brush in older versions is more square. That means the brush strokes everywhere that uses the newer brush engine will be softer in version 5, for the time being. Eventually there's some plans to add more arbitrary brush shapes.

You learned it today because it just became possible with paint.net 5 itself. (Someone should add that to the manual, though.)

You didn't get whatever that is from the website, promise. You probably have malware interfering with your computer or something else going on. Whatever it is is only on your side, and unrelated to PDN

Awesome work, Rick! Reminds me I need to actually finish updating my plugin for v5.0, sooner than later

Oh, right. Whoops. Carry on

Title says all. This is in both beta version of PDN 5 and 4.3.12. Repro: - open paint.net and switch to the shape tool - hold down left mouse button and start dragging out a shape. Do not release - press and release the alt key while left mouse is still held Alt key isn't assigned to anything in the tool, just an interesting quirk I guess.

Finally narrowed this one down by accident. This only repros with the portable version of paint.net. I uninstalled PDN and dragged the files from the portable version to an empty paint.net folder in the normal location, then after that images were suddenly taking up to 10 seconds again like this post describes. I just removed that and reinstalled via the normal setup and it works. Now I wonder if anyone else can repro the issue in the current portable version of paint.net.

Oh for sure. But if it's been exactly 13, that's the same year I started using paint.net.

This is great news! About time the world comes to their senses and abandons photoshop in favor of paint.net. We've been waiting 2 decades for them to realize this feature 😛

I don't see any lines only on the left side. I looked at it both unzoomed and at 6400% zoom in paint.net. There is a faint semicircular line at the seam of the pants in BOTH sides of the picture, more visible on the right side, which is what it seems the arrow is pointing at. If you don't see it on the right-hand side, check your monitor's color profile settings and make sure the brightness is up. It's very much there.

There are multiple things going on with that pattern: - perspective - deformation to match the surface - reflectivity In order to recreate this pattern, you will need to start with a simple checkerboard pattern. I recommend creating it without being at an angle, just a perfectly normal horizontal and vertical checkerboard. There is a plugin for that, use the plugin index to find those. Remove as much of that pattern as you need and keep it on a transparent layer by itself. Then you will probably want to apply perspective. Use Ctrl+Shift+W (rotate/zoom) to do that. If that's not good enough, search for perspective plugins because they do exist (I remember one called quadrilateral correction). Easiest to do when the checkerboard is on a layer by itself so you can see how close it is to the perspective shown in the picture. Just try to emulate the perspective here and ignore that it's not matching since deformation isn't done yet. Now you want to deform part of it to fit over the car surface. I'd recommend getting a plugin called Grid Warp for this, though I think there are some alternatives, I'm pretty sure grid warp is one of the best ones. Grid warp uses an unrotated grid to do its warps, so that's why I recommended not rotating the checkerboard pattern ahead of time. You'll want a sparse width/height. Fiddle with it, hopefully you get something decent. Ok, now go ahead and rotate the pattern. Clean up the edges as needed, etc. You should have it placed on the car surface where you want and hopefully shaped reasonably well. Now you want to do something so it's not a completely solid color, so it's a good time to introduce a little bloom (basically a brighter version of the checkerboard color) on top of the checkerboard. You can do this reasonably using magic wand since the checkerboard (even rotated) is still reasonably easy to select. (Tip: if you want to be more exact, you could keep an unrotated copy of it, select that copy, and then press M, M so you're editing the selection itself. Rotate the selection itself to match the rotated checkerboard. This will preserve the edges significantly better. Then move the selection itself over the actual checkerboard you're working on, and press M to return to editing the image in the selection.) Once selected, you can apply brush strokes with a large brush radius and low opacity at 0% hardness. It's even lighter if the center of the brush is well outside the actual selected pixels. Just apply it with whatever settings you need to sort of replicate that chromatic effect (it's very subtle in this picture, so it shouldn't be too difficult). Cheers!

The problem here is the dev doesn't know when the user saves the file. Until it gets saved, the layer can't be changed to match. In order for this behavior to work, paint.net would have to track which layer is the original layer and if its name has ever been changed, because the only layer safe to rename is the original, and it can't be renamed if it's deleted or renamed by the user. Some other things to consider are how it handles special characters in filenames and long filenames, how this behaves if the user renames their save file or performs Save As, and how it interacts with conflicting future features e.g. having a custom "new document" with whatever settings the user wants. Definitely doable, but not sure if it's worth the effort. Rick generally has enough on his plate right now, so it probably won't happen or at least no time soon. Thanks for raising a suggestion, though.

Use the brush tool and draw on a layer below the emblem to create irregularity in the shape. Use the same color as the glow so it matches. Probably want to thin the glow on the original layer in a few places by using the eraser tool, too

(I'm currently on a different computer which is working fine right now.)

I documented an issue with settings not persisting (when changed from the Settings menu itself) a few months ago. I think there is a bug somewhere. (Though on a re-read I'm not convinced the OP was talking about that)

Maybe there's a miscommunication. What I'm saying should be all you need to get it to work:

How to do this in either Krita or Paint.net (since you asked over there first) At 100% hardness in paint.net (or using a hard brush in krita), make a circle At 0% hardness in paint.net (or using airbrush brush in krita), at the center of the circle, click a few times to make it more transparent. Just change the radius a bit to give the outside a thicker opaque ring like you have here In paint.net, you can alternatively fill a circle with a solid color, then use the gradient tool in transparent mode with the radial pattern. It's basically the same thing, but slightly more complicated way of doing it. But on Krita you were asking about replicating this pattern, basically That's a more interesting question in paint.net. Here's how I would go about it: - use the ellipse tool (press O, O and then make sure ellipse is selected) with shift held down to make a perfect circle. At whatever width you want that to be. Make sure it's in outline mode - use ellipse selection (press S, S, S) to select the inner circle (just make sure the ellipse includes the whole part inside the circle. You can have the edges fall anywhere inside the thick outline you drew earlier with the ellipse tool) Ok, so you should have a thick outline and selection constrained to just the inside of the circle + part of the outline. Now just take the usual brush you use at 0% hardness and try to click it evenly around the circle so it creates this pattern. The circles should be large enough to reach from the outline to the far edge seen in the screenshot here. You'll get more of those little shapes that look like triangles based on how close the circles are. The closer, the more of those little triangles you end up with. It also affects how opaque it is, so make sure to try a few different opacities until you get one that's close to what you want here. Alllll that said, we definitely need to know if it has to be at even intervals (mathematically), because that's something only a plugin is probably going to do well. Or maybe clever use of the Fragments effect... @EmbraceSmallcan you answer that?

You could just copy a thin rectangle of pixels near the edges and put them over the rough edges so they're nice and straight. Or take Pixey's edge blur approach and copy all the modified edges to some layer that you run AA's assistant on since you wanted those edges to 'blend' better.

Here's an alternate way to do things using the image you gave. It only works when the lines are on a transparent layer and not frequently overlapping. Make sure you get BoltBait's Bevel Object plugin from his plugin pack to start. - Run the plugin with a depth of 1, strength of 1, black highlight & white shadow colors, and don't keep the original image - Do Adjustments -> Brightness / Contrast with a contrast of 100 and a good middle number for brightness. I chose 52 - The lines should be black and white. Use the magic wand tool to select one of the colors (I selected white), in flood fill mode, and then delete that color

I do believe I mentioned a plugin intended for this problem, I would take a look (I guess it might not work after reading through the thread, it looks very hazy)

There are plugins that generate a palette from an image. You'd want that. I have no idea how it might sort the colors, but if it sorts them at all then it would be sorted by alpha first by default, since PDN palettes are ARGB colors (A = alpha) This one sounds good: https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/117823-make-palette-plugin-v10-february-15-2021/ Here's the plugin index to find others https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/15260-plugin-index/

Value = (100.0f + Value) / 100.0f; Value *= Value; It uses Value / 100 because that gives you the ratio They wanted to square that ratio without decreasing it, so they added 100 to match the denominator so that the minimum possible value is 1 It looks like they want to use this ratio as the strength for the contrast effect, so 1 = no change Red = (((Red - 0.5f) * Value) + 0.5f) * 255.0f; Green = (((Green - 0.5f) * Value) + 0.5f) * 255.0f; Blue = (((Blue - 0.5f) * Value) + 0.5f) * 255.0f; The way this is written, they are expecting that the RGB channels are already floats in a range from 0 to 1. I can tell, because they multiply by 255 at the end (which is the max range of these channels) and they never divide. So by that logic, I also know that 0.5f is meant to represent the midpoint of the channel range. The way increasing contrast works, is that it pushes values away from the midpoint. So what they're doing is: 1. take the current value of the channel, which is between 0 and 1 inclusive 2. subtract 0.5, which is the midpoint of the channel's range 3. Multiply by the strength ratio of the contrast, aka Value (the key here is that if the channel value was under 0.5, it's now negative, and so the value decreases when you multiply it by a number that's greater than 1. Remember that Value has a minimum possible value of 1...now you're seeing the effect! If the channel value was > 0.5 to begin with, it will increase. So this is the key effect: push values that are under the midpoint further to 0, and push values above it further to 255. 4. Multiply by 255 so the channels are no longer in a range from 0 to 1. They can be rounded and cast to byte in a range from 0 to 255, as expected of a paint.net plugin. But there are a few funky things here, to me. First, it's easy for this to go out of range. The smallest value of a channel (0) and the largest value for the Value variable (2) will produce ((0 - 0.5f) * 2 + 0.5f) * 255 = -127.5 which is WAY out of range. You could clamp that value between 0 and 1 before multiplying by 255, but it feels like the algorithm is just wrong in some way, here. And I'm not sure why they need the strength of the contrast effect to be quadratic (by squaring it) in the first place. Hope this helps!

These settings are all in Dynamic Draw as well. Opacity is #11 and Size is #14 below, and you can use Add Brush Images (#5) to upload ABR brushes, if they can be read (hopefully) The brush images to choose from is #4 and custom brushes you add appear near the end of the box Density is #3, but you'll have to turn off the checkbox (#2) to mess with it Min. Draw Distance (#1) is also related to brush density and useful for long distances between each stamp of the brush The airbrush behavior is Horizontal and Vertical Spray (#6 and #7) Let me know if you have any trouble. Here's the Documentation for full details on everything