IHaveNoName

I'm really confused now as to where the problem might be. There must be some misunderstanding going on here because nothing makes sense. Emilee Weir does still appear to be saying that she has PDN v3.36 installed but states that it came from the official download site. That I just can't understand. If you go there it clearly states the latest version is 4.2.9 so how v3.36 was installed..............................I won't even guess. I've not installed PDN on a PC with an older than Win7 OS for some time but if I remember correctly the installer won't even run if the OS is incompatible ie. Windows XP with anything later than v3.5.3. Even if it does install it will not work. The question to ask is indeed what HyReZ has just posted about confirming if v4.2.9 is installed or not. If not has she actually tried to update whatever her PDN installation version is to v4.2.9? We should also ask EW to post a screenshot of her PDN version running just to be certain along with one or more of those old problem PDN files, as Pixey suggested almost a week ago, so they can be tested to see if they are corrupt or not.

So your post (hah!) to the wiki was meant to be ironic. That's a good example of what I meant about understanding when something is intended to be ironic and the words not to be taken at face value. Lets be frank, online it is difficult to tell sometimes. Indeed, over sensitivity is a serious issue, you get my stamp of approval.

I'm thinking that the intended irony of my last post may not have been understood by everyone here. But in the future it will be a serious question - there are people being born today who will never see or buy a stamp. I think I've used three stamps in the last three months and that covers Xmas and two family birthday. I've just stopped the last of of my regular paper bills as all my payments/transactions are now done online. The last time I received normally stamped rather than pre-paid and usually junk mail, was at Xmas.

What's a postage stamp?

My concern too was that they might be corrupted for some reason rather than simply incompatible with later PDN versions. Attaching one or more of them here is indeed a good idea. If PDN was updated in 2019 as described it could not have been from the official source and must be suspect. PDN v3.36 was released in August 2008 as RB said earlier. On 8th August 2019 it should have been v4.2.1.

This is really a default icon issue and one reason I do not let any third party program take over as default for all similar file types. Windows makes it awkward to revert back to the default Windows Photo Viewer (or whatever it is called now) for a specific image file type. In fact once any program is associated with a particular file type, like images, Windows does not provide a mechanism for reverting it all back. You have to go into Control Panel > Programs > Default Programs > Associate a file type.......... and laboriously change each extension's association. There are programs out there that do it the more logical way ie. listing all the extension associations for a particular program so you can unassociate them individually, in batch or all. That will also remove it from right click mouse context menu; very useful if you've accidentally set completely the wrong program as default at any time. It will remain an Open With option otherwise. In this case the Windows in-built association tool actually should be fine as there is only one image file type involved. ColinK has specified just .jpg but the separate .jpeg extension will need to changed too. BTW sometimes Windows will not revert back to the original icon. Windows has a number of image file type icons that may be applied and you may have to use the Change Icon option under Properties and sift through Windows DLLs and other files to even find the original icon. For whatever reason they are not all neatly located and applied from a single location. This happened to me on one occasion when I installed an update to another graphics program which mistakenly (apparently) had the option for it to be used as the default to open all image file types pre-ticked. After I eventually undid that I found all my Bitmap image files, which I do not use that much, were displaying a completely different Windows Photo Viewer icon. I had more time wasted searching for the original icon but it was eventually found and replaced.

It would be a good idea to find out first what OS she is currently using. She has also started this thread to find out how she can open those old PDN files. The last thing she'll want to do is install a new version which, as you said, won't be able to open them. If v3.36 won't open them either and the latest version can not be persuaded to then there are three obvious thing to try:- 1). Online converter: I found one quite easily that says it will convert .pdn files to other graphics formats. No idea if it will work with older .pdn files but worth a go. Of course if the image is layered all that will be lost and may itself affect the success of the conversion. But worth trying. 2). Uninstall the current version being used with a proper uninstaller like Revo not just the inadequate Add/Remove Programs facility which is known to leave PDN leftovers which can interfere with new installs. Then install an older version from the time those problem PDN files were actual created. Check Properties and it should show you when it was first created*. Now find an old PDN installer for that time from somewhere like FileHippo, FileHorse etc. Earliest genuine download installer version I've found is v2.1 from 2005. However there is a question: did Emilee Weir actually open those PDN files back in 2018 because if she did then there must be some other issue with them not opening. *If they were copied files from the old laptop, as seems likely, that date will be when they were copied not when the original files were first created. This brings up several new problems because if she is remembering correctly and it was PDN v2. something there are going to be system compatibility issues now. It might work if the compatibility settings are adjusted but I do not rate the chances of that highly. 3). Possible solution to all this is to install a Virtual Machine (VM) running Windows XP and install the old PDN version on that. This also means she would not have to uninstall PDN on the host machine at all and could update it as recommended**. Unless RB can come up with another solution this seems to me to be the best idea. If she is running Win7 Pro, Ult or Enterprise then XPMode is a free to use install designed for just these sorts of reasons. You still need to install a VM first and that can problematic as the CPU used must support hardware virtualization. **I say could not should because if she has more recent PDN files created by v3.36 those may not open on a newer version of PDN either. I know for certain that PDN files I made using v3.53 (the last WinXP friendly PDN version) on my now dead WinXP laptop still open on v4.1.5 because I've just checked. Those files tested are from 2015 but since I was using the same set up and PDN version from 2010 onwards it should mean any PDN files I may have from then should still open correctly too. But if a PDN version from 2008 can not open a PDN file made only three years earlier (v2.1) then using a VM may be the only solution if the online converter does not succeed.

Maybe I've misunderstood the problem but I'm not sure why the OP used an online converter. With Adobe Reader (Free) you can extract any image yourself - right click and use Select Tool, then outline the image area you want and use the Copy option to copy it to you clipboard. You can then open it in PDN and save the image in whatever format you want. With Sumatra PDF, which can be downloaded as both an install-able or a portable versions, it is even simpler. Just right click on the image and you'll get a copy option which again copies to the clipboard which can be used in the same way.

The accompanying installer.dll was not unpacked when the main installer.exe was launched - perhaps that is the explanation as to why the plugins are in the Effects folder but not working. Nah, I was wrong - just tested it on a substituted in empty Effects folder and even if the installer was launched using Windows Explorer from inside the zipped file it still installs them correctly and they work*. Uninstall likewise. * All tested and function as intended (Win7 64bit PDN 4.1.5). So, agreed, dherrs' problem must be something else. But what? Win10 + newer PDN version? Somebody should check that in the same way.

It looks to me if dherr maybe hasn't unpacked the zip file first. The Vandermotten pack comes in a zip file which has to be unpacked before you can install it. Clicking on the zip file will usually just open it in Windows Explorer unless you have an integrated zip manager. That shows you the contents and you may not realise it is not actually unpacked. Anwendung is German for Application and that is how Windows Explorer describes files like that when you use it to view the contents of a zip file. The point is it is not unzipped. Use 7Zip or Windows built in unzipping tool to unpack it correctly to a new folder/desktop/wherever and then try running the installer.exe. The DLL can be anywhere on the PC but best to leave it where it is.

I realised that the distances were wrong later. Aligning to the inside angles of a roughly equilateral pentagon clearly does not produce the positioning required. To get the outer icons equidistant from the centre icon and its two neighbours is more complex than I thought. They need a 72 degree radial separation (360 divided by 5) so I had another thought that it could simply be achieved by aligning the centre icon using the plugin mentioned and the outer icons all aligned horizontally centred above the centre icon at the preferred distance in separate layers. My idea was then to place each icon around the centre icon by rotating its layer either 72 or 144 degrees clockwise/anti-clockwise as required, using the Layers rotation tool. Works and was quite easy and quick to do using the tools mentioned but the distances and the centering still are not right so I'll leave it to those here more adept at resolving such geometrical problems.

I think all that should be necessary is to use the Vandermotten's "ObjectAlign.dll" part of:- I do not understand exactly what the OP is trying to do but if he is trying to put the mask icon in the middle then that is where he should start. Centre that using the plugin mentioned then in another layer simply use the Shapes > draw shape outline tool > pentagon to draw a one as an alignment grid. Then just re-position the other icons in their existing layers to touch the edges at each angle of the pentagon. The only problem I can see is that if you use the alignment tool the central icon will not be equidistant from the other icons. It will be centred on the canvas not the pentagon even though the pentagon itself is centred. But once the outer icons are in place it is simple to merge them all into one layer and shift all of them up or down the canvas to suit. This is a quick, very rough, example of what you should have, before shifting either the central icon down or the five outer icons group up. Ignore the background compositional grid (Red Ochre's plugins) I thought it might be useful but in this case it wasn't. However a vertical centre line would have been useful for the top and central icons. Those two are really the only placements where you would actually benefit from the use of the alignment tool. Once all aligned just delete the background layer with pentagon and grid.

Refer to this guide:- https://boltbait.com/pdn/InstallingEffects.php I'm thinking the very last part of that guide about unblocking DLL files that come from another PC may be relevant here.

You can just drag and drop too ie. open PDN and open another window where your desired image is located, put the cursor on the file, left mouse click and hold. You can then move the cursor over to the PDN window and simply release the left mouse button and it will copy and open the image in PDN. You will actually get a self-explanatory Drag & Drop dialogue box first before it opens. Some people forget about drag and drop and whilst there are some files/programs that do not support it generally graphics programs do. If you have both PDN and the image's location windows open already it is arguably the quickest way of doing it.

^ I think it very likely it is just that simple and the file is named xxxxxx.jpg or xxxxxx.pdn (is not clear which) and that is not the actual extension. By default Windows hides files real extension. In the first case, which is the most likely, it will default save type .pdn but Windows will display it with a JPG icon and report an error if you try to open it with Windows Picture Viewer. Same with PDN too but you should see an error message box with details which indicate a file type error. Interestingly I've just tested this and what may happen is that the additional .jpg naming will be treated by Windows as the extension and it will also be hidden or missing. Fixing it is simple but only if you change the default Windows View settings to show the actual extension and change it. Otherwise I'm not sure of an easier alternative as the display name may not now include the problematic .jpg naming addition. Sorry to mention it but IrfanView will recognise problems like these if you try to open them; it provides an immediate simple renaming option and will still open it anyway.

In future prevent the need for that tool by using a purpose designed uninstaller like Revo. That uses any program's uninstaller or, as in PDN's case when they do not have a one , the basic Windows add/remove program tool. But then it will search for and remove leftovers ie. registry entries, Program Data and AppData files/folders which are the usual cause of these reinstall problems. It also puts in a restore point before doing anything which means you could always roll it back if you wanted. Doing that yourself ie. manually putting in a restore point before uninstalling a program should be standard practice anyway.

Just minor criticism but I understand a bit where the OP is coming from - I've always found it odd that at the top of every forum page or at least the forum home page there is not a more clearly indicated link to the main Paint.Net web site (https://www.getpaint.net/) I know there is the link in the Forum > Information topics on the forum home page (3rd one down: Official Paint.NET website) but that is not where you'd normally look first as a noob is it? You'd expect there to be a simple Download link in the paint.net header on every forum page. Not just for the main program either but also the plugins index with direct downloads not redirection to forum threads with links to the plugins contained, somewhere, amongst the posts. That would mean anyone doing a search using Google or whatever who was directed to a forum topic (more likely than being directed to the home page) would have a direct link to the PDN downloads and plugins from that page. It is surely a sensible marketing strategy for bringing in more users. A tutorial menu link on every forum page header would also be a good idea too.

Are you sure they're thumbnails and not just large or extra large icons? I assume it is treating the cloud drive, not unexpectedly, as a separate drive and the default display setting for any new drive is to use icons. So could be two things either the simple file view option chosen for that drive or the more general Windows Explorer settings:- To change specific drive file icon settings for the page you're on right click in an empty space and use the "View" context menu options. To change general Windows Explorer settings:- https://windowsreport.com/thumbnail-previews-not-showing/

Did not know about that useful plugin tool ^. Doubt it will resolve the OP's problem but after reading all about it from the links Pixey supplied I installed the plugin files and filter all seem to be working perfectly with PDN. Thanks for the information.

It depends on the sort of corruption/damage the file has suffered. If all the detail is there you should be able to get some improvement but if half the picture is missing - like that caused by a partial copy or move failure I do not think PDN is going to be able to fix that. But in forums like this there are people with wide knowledge of graphics in general who may be able to suggest a solution so it is worth asking about. But without seeing the image or one with similar corruption it would be unlikely anyone here will be able to help. You have to prepare for the possibility that the picture may be unrecoverable. If you get no specific help or suggestions that work I suggest you Google "repair corrupt JPG" as there are free programs and online tools available which may fix the problem. This is just one I found straight away, no endorsement, never used it but is the sort of thing I'm talking about:- https://www.disktuna.com/software-to-repair-corrupt-and-damaged-jpeg-files/

You need to post an example of an image with this problem as an attachment so the experts here can see what you're actually talking about. Font name and details eg. point size etc would no doubt be helpful too.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/troubleshoot-extensions-themes-to-fix-problems

As said it does depend on what he is actually wanting to do this for - if for example he's trying to provide photographic proof of a Customs' label, invoice, payment ID etc, which is not easily legible in the picture he has, then he can, indeed must, not use a substitute font. That is a given. But if this is non-critical then using a more legible font of the same type ie. LCD/LED/Dotted/Pixel, is a viable option.

Personally I'd take that other approach HyReZ suggsted - more tedious and no guarantee of success but I'd be looking to find an exact match for the font originally being used and redo the text, perhaps in bold for extra clarity. That Dot Matrix font linked too seems to match some letters, like the lower case "j" but it does not match the numbers and clearly not the same font that was used. So you'll have some very tedious searching to do if you do need an exact match and there may well be no exact match if that is a custom font. TBH I think that font and the Dot Matrix one are horrible and if the purpose is not critical I'd be looking for a similar font that is actually more attractive and more legible. EDIT: I've just done a quick font search of several hundred free and commercial fonts and whilst there are dozens similar none is a perfect match. The best I found are not really any closer than HyReZ's Dot Matrix suggestion. The problem is the best match for letters are not even close for the numbers and that does raise the possibility the original font itself might be custom or simply two different fonts used for each purpose.

I agree with some of those ideas ^ but belatedly adding this complaint/suggestion to a 5 year old thread and expressing it in a way that can be read only as criticism isn't the best way to make friends and influence people here or anywhere else for that matter.