Jump to content

MXI

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://mxii.eu.org

Recent Profile Visitors

692 profile views
  1. I'm not 100% sure, but looks like it is stored in Windows icon/thumb cache (AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Explorer\*.db) If not by Paint.NET itself then at least it is another trace of the same images. And it looks like this cache can contain some high res images. I found two apps to explore this cache: Thumbcache Viewer (free and open source) and OSForensics (30day trial seems to allow to extract everything needed.) All picture thumbnails seem to be stored in "thumbcache_XXX.db", where XXX is a number bigger than (or equal to) 256.
  2. My take: https://imgbox.com/zjgE42Y1 1. Resize 400% (working in higher resolution might help in multiple ways. The sample was too small); 2. Sharpen max (to make text thicker); 3. Sharpen max (one might be enough, but I found this to be a bit better); 4. Pencil Sketch (tip size max, range min); 5. Resize 50% (still 200% from the source, helps with the next step a bit); 6. Levels (adjust input white to remove as much remaining noise while retaining required details, may also adjust output middle point).
  3. I remember using a multistep processing for this: - convert to grayscale; - invert image; - isolate the background levels in a separate layer (remove high-contrast stuff such as text with Median filter); - substract it from the image; - invert back; - clean up remaining noise with Levels filter (histogram there is also helpful to evaluate the quality of cleanup). I later found that there is actually one existing filter that can achieve about the same effect much easier and faster: Use Effects > Artistic > Pencil Sketch!
  4. Been there, did that. It is definitely a UX issue, not specific to new users. It can cost me some time even if I know that it can happen. I (as a user) can be so deep in my thoughts about the object of my work so I can miss something about the tool. I would definitely love to have some sanity/safety check and save me some time. Although sometimes it can also happen on a layer that is not hidden by checkbox, just completely overpainted by a higher layer. This one might not have any nice solution.
  5. Is there a way to change the color of the grid that is shown under transparent parts of an image? If no then this is a feature request. And I hope a pretty easy one. Sometimes I need to work with small sprites / decals. If I need it to be a white detail on a transparent background - I run into problem - I can't see anything on my image. For example, this render is quite misleading about what is actually drawn: There are workarounds: use different color for a time being and then change it with filters, such as "Invert colors"; add a
  6. I agree about the icon - it doesn't need to be something as stressful as the red cross. But I don't agree about text change. Two "Don't"s will introduce equal amount of confusion. "Cancel" is the standard name for this behavior across all and every applications out there.
  7. I had this issue. The few times when I needed to print something from Paint.NET, I used Levels adjustment to make image darker so it will look fine on paper. I have HP LaserJet P1005 if that matters. Paint.NET provides access to Color Management options for printing, where color profile can be set up for printers, like for displays. Maybe the defaults used in Paint.NET not good for everyone. And apps that have no such setting - get better defaults. If that's the case, then there better be a way to bypass this settings for average people who can't care less about colo
  8. For something as simple as Invert (or even a bit more complex) there are batch convert tools in XnView/XnViewMP and probably other similar apps. Depending on the problem you're trying to solve, ImageMagick might be an option too. I doubt the batch processing has a high priority for a paint application. Although it won't hurt to be able to leverage the power of existing plugins in this way, of course. Reuse the manually created routine in an automated manner, without the need to look for filter analogues. Question to people close to Paint.NET inner workings:
  9. What can be done in plugin now: You select a color and a plugin modifies existing layer to leave only pixels with this color or pixels with any color except this. Of the plugins I have installed, - Unblend by ArgusMagnus can do the latter. - Color Accent by Kris Vandermotten sort of does the former (just desaturates the rest of image). - Color To Alpha (can't see the author) sort of does the former (fiddly controls). Maybe there are more. As for file type plugin, it might be something like existing ZIP plugin, with custom layer splitting logic:
  10. I agree it's tedious. I should've accented this better, or rather dropped the second part of my comment completely. It was a digression from what I wanted to post here. I think this problem, among others, can have a better solution than it is now - through improvements in layers system. Rather than investing developer time into industry-specific system, provide a way for extensions to solve tasks like this in an efficient manner. If extensions will be allowed to produce new layers and blend them back in custom ways, - it will allow to create an extension to sp
  11. Something similar to layers but separate from layers - looks excessive to me. There should be some way to mate this with layers... Recently I had few situations when I needed a way to recombine color layers. I'd love to see the layers tree, and new APIs that will allow custom blending modes and allow plugins to add new layers. Currently it's possible to extract channels one by one with "Extract channel" plugin from Ed Harvey effects pack. Clone the image to three equal layers, extract R, G, B on each layer (non-grayscale to keep color), make additive blen
  12. But it isn't, as I'm thinking one step further already and all of you saying step one is enough. Hearing this from Rick instead of "Nope" would've been reassuring enough for me. But all I got is the same "Clipboard is enough for everyone" story. I consider myself a developer too. I understand there are time and effort requirements in implementing any feature. I can see some of possible technical difficulties involved, and that there are things like priorities and a road map. But nothing bad in discussing possible features and what paths they open for users. Let
  13. You probably don't understand what I'm talking about. Clipboard is a workaround. A common interface you rely on when you don't have a better solution. Selections better be first class citizens in the app. With names. With the ability to keep and share them as a part of the project. Like layers, they are a cross-section of the project, can think of it as an orthogonal one to layers. In-app selections management will let you to provide a refined workflow for sprite sheets, UI kits, etc and spare artists time to figure out their own. Let alone saved time to switch contexts and
  14. I feel like I'm on some Linux users forum and all the best tools were already invented - nothing will ever surpass console and text editor (or even better, console text editor). Why should I build a complicated workflow for the things that I feel can easily be just under one click of a mouse? Granted, for now it's the only way to achieve the goal. But while new versions of Paint.NET are still made, we can shape it to be a better tool. So better look at it with open mind. I don't think this feature will be like fifth wheel or something. It will be a natural ext
×
×
  • Create New...