IHaveNoName

Those spirals really mess with your brain - those susceptible to motion sickness should not stare too long, particularly at the first image. Nice effect although I'd want to do something to clean up the black pixels around the edges of the spirals.

Thanks for the explanation but how and why does that happen, apparently, just with cut and pasted web sourced images and not others which, surely, would have provoked far more posts?

So this is a genuine PDN issue then? I ask because the pasted image colour and some other things seemed a bit unusual to me. I think I found the original image via Google > Images using the search "red apple transparent background PNG". The blue apple also looks like it has been additionally cut and pasted at some point too. Whatever is happening that is not the inverted colours. As I expected the actual inverse colour of the apple is cyan and of course the highlight areas invert to black. So whatever is occurring it is not a colour inversion it is recolouring of some sort. It looks most like the kind of result you get using ZK's Manual Color Correction plugin if you sample the apple red and use primary blue as the secondary colour. Colour change is not unknown problem when dealing with images that have transparency. Different graphics programs react.........ummm.......differently. But in this case it is just the background that is transparent so why is a 'solid' red apple when pasted into PDN displaying as primary blue? I'll be interested to find out what caused this.

Wouldn't a solution be simply to create the desired template then send a shortcut to the desktop and/or start menu replacing or used alongside the default PDN shortcut? You would then have the choice of launching either as required. Apart from having to create and store the template its no different to how you launch PDN normally either from a desktop or start menu shortcut. I use a similar shortcut to template 'workaround' for Windows Wordpad which otherwise, annoyingly, always resets to the default font/size, line spacing and paragraph indent every time it is launched.

A copy of what you're trying to apply the 'shine' to posted here would be a help. There are many ways of adding highlights to make an object look reflective if that is what you are trying to do.

I not been able to recreate that problem. Whatever resolution you chose in Resize should save and be applied to all layers when you click OK. What version of PDN are you using?

Using 8 bit makes the files smaller but dos not seem to help with the display quality when used for medium sized icons. That's where the 'problem' is with PDN: just the medium size icon display. For the games controller icon I'm using if you use the Large/Extra Large icon option the PDN ones display as well the dedicated icon program's icons. But even if you use a single 256x256 PDN icon image for a desktop shortcut icon or Medium icon size in WE the 96x96 one from IcoFX looks better. And when you use an icon group file 256, 128, 64, 32, 16 WE will chose to use the 64x64 icon size for ^ those purposes which displays poorly in comparison to the other 64x64 one. As described, if you include 96x96 in the icon group it will use that by default. I've also just discovered that, a bit strangely, if you also include 72x72 in the icon group (another size not offered by PDN) it will use that by default instead. Even then that displays better than a 256x256 only PDN icon for medium sized icon use.

That's what I thought too. The default PDN settings apply AA so I tried with/without for the creation of the master 512x512 image. I also tried using the AA Assistant plugin at various settings and neither made much difference as regards the display quality of the final .ICO. What I have found is that if you save the master 512x512 .PNG as a 256x256 .ICO only using PDN (by default it saves as 32x32 and 16x16 8/32bit so remember to untick those), apply AA Assistant to that and save again only as a 256x256 .ICO it does marginally improve the PQ for Medium size icons display. But that is not to the extent that you can't see the 96x96 one created by the dedicated icon creation program displays better.

Just want to thank the guys here for those icon creating tips. I tested it out on a games controller I image I've made from scratch (based on the PS1/PS2) using PDN. I used a 512x512 canvas then saved it using PDN's .ICO save options. It was then saved again as a .PNG and converted to .ICO by IcoFX. These are obviously massive enlargements but the difference in quality is obvious and that translates to when they're actually in situ as desktop shortcut icons. But the advantage I did not expect was that when the icon groups for each were saved the other program had offered 96x96 32bit as an additional size option along with 256, 128, 64, 32, 16 32bit so I added that just as an afterthought. For whatever reason Windows chose to use the 96x96.ico for the desktop shortcut, Medium icon, Tile and Content display whilst the PDN one used the 64x64.ico instead. I tried a PDN generated 128x128 only icon as a comparison and the 96x96 was still visibly superior on the monitor with the resolution I'm using. But what is, somewhat, interesting is that if you select the Large or Extra Large icon display options in Windows Explorer the differences virtually disappear. In Small, List, Detail icon sizes the icons look pretty grotty whatever you do. It is really only at the medium icon display size I use where the quality difference is significant. The question to ask is what is the other program doing that PDN is not at this size and is there any plugin or settings that can be applied to PDN to improve the icon picture quality for these display sizes?

Thanks for the replies, very helpful ideas. BTW it's not just PDN's .ico save option that produces these inferior quality results. I've tried with Irfanview which I've often used as a format converter in the past before gravitating to PDN - very similar results. It seems to be the Medium sized icons, whatever resolution they use, which are applied to Tiles (folder view), default desktop Folder and Shortcuts too where the problem is. The example below is typical: Extra Large and Large (Windows Explorer folder view) look great but when you use the default Medium or Tiling folder view the quality drops off a cliff. These are enlarged from the actual Medium folder view display size but you can clearly see the difference despite the custom one being saved as an icon group by PDN in exactly the same resolutions as the original's ico groups: 256, 128, 64, 48, 32 and 16 all 32bit of course.

I have edited and created a lot of icons for an old games console using PDN but those have mostly been PNG/JPG 256x256 thumbnails. I have made also made quite a few 128x128 icons in a custom format for the same console. So I know what sort of subject matter works at those resolutions on a 480p displays. However when I've tried to translate that knowledge to the creation of PC icons, in particular for desktop shortcuts, I must be making a mistake somewhere. I've made some icons which I am happy with but they've all been relatively simple. When I've tried with more sophisticated or detailed designs either my own or online sourced, no matter how good the original quality, when they're converted to .ico (saved using all the icon group size/bit options) the resulting file, when applied to a shortcut or folder, looks ............ rubbish. Even quite simple flat designs, basically b/w clipart with no shading, shadows or reflections, display badly. Saving just as 128x128 32bit or just as 256x256 PNG both display equally unsatisfactorily. I've used Resource Hacker to extract icons groups from programs to customise them using PDN. Even at 24x24 resolution the icons groups often used to display in File Explorer looks good with quite detailed subject matter crisply displayed. But when I open them, usually working on the 256x256 PNG, customise it and then save as .ico using PDN the resulting icon, when applied to a folder or shortcut, looks notably inferior to the original even when I've done nothing more than alter the hue. The irony is that when you use the delete option the Y/N dialogue box displays the customised icon in its fully glory - sharp and detailed. So what am I doing wrong? Any ideas?

I've actually had problems with the plugin myself so I'm probably not the best guy to answer. However I will: the install is slightly more complex than usual: you have four files to install: two to the root of the PDN folder ie. straight into the main PDN folder. The others two go into the "FileTypes" folder which should be adjacent to the Effects folder. It may be it is not created by default if you do not have it. So you might have to make it for yourself, as shown. NB. That plugin's readme says that any other existing SVG plugin's content must be removed. There is something odd though in that if you actually click on the link for the latest version, under the Moderator's Note, you're sent to the Git Hub page for the 0.3 Alpha version. That is just a single DLL you put in FileTypes. If you do then you can open SVGs no problem but there is no Save/Save As: SVG option. The link to the plugin lower down with the four files to install is the one I first tried too but, even though I'm pretty sure I installed it correctly I had display issues with the test SVG I used. It needs someone who knows more than I do to explain. But none of this actually helps Yoo who can't actually find the original image file now. Presumably it was been cached by PDN which is why it can attempted to be opened but the actual picture, however it was saved, is missing from the "images" folder where it was thought it was saved. This seems like a weird case because even if the original image being worked on was a SVG and somehow it was opened by PDN if either Save or Save As was used then it should have saved as one of the supported image types eg. default.pdn, in the folder intended. I hope installing the SVG plugin allows the image to opened and saved correctly but I'm not confident it will.

I'm not sure how this could have happened because without the SVG plugin you can't even open a SVG let alone save it as one with PDN. So unless Yoo added the .svg extension where did that come from? If the SVG plugin is installed and it was saved correctly then it should open. Something is not right or we do not have all the relevant information. Still if it is saved as another format then Eli's solution just to remove the added extension could work.

I've always thought it easier (only one hand required) just to use the mouse with the Line/Curve tool - left click to start the line and hold it down whilst moving the mouse pointer anywhere on the screen to extend or angle/rotate the line as required. Release left to end the line. For perfectly horizontal or vertical lines I favour using the Shapes (Square) default outline option instead. Change the line width to 1 pixel and just overlap the sides of the rectangle to create a single line. Alternatively use the Line/Curve tool - left click, hold as before and use the keyboard directional keys to draw the line up/down or across the screen.

With that it is still a two part process and you'll get part bricks at the edges if the volume contained by the border does not match the fill full brick horizontal or vertical dimensions. It works and can be adjusted of course but, particularly if a narrow border is being used to match the brick outline, I think it is easier to do that with the border and bricks in two separate layers as Pixey suggested. More flexible too if for example you wanted to change the brickwork colour but not the border.

I think I understand what Rockchick means. The short answer is that you can not do what you want in one go. If you create a rectangle using the main menu Draw Shape using Horizontal Brick, either Solid or Solid with Outline the brickwork at the edges will be raggedy half-bricks unless the image size is adjusted so that (horizontally) you have full bricks top and bottom. Left and right sides, because of the nature of brickwork ie. alternate layers overlapping the joins in the layer above and below, the edge can not be a straight border whatever you do. It is either alternate square tooth or half bricks like the horizontal. Pixey's solution, just add a solid border as a second layer above the brickwork layer, seems like the simplest and most flexible suggestion to me.

Yes ^ that is how PDN has always worked AFAIK. If you put drop shadows on text written onto a solid colour background the drop shadows will be applied to the background ie. behind the whole image area and therefore completely hidden by the image itself. In the example provide if you untick "Keep original image" the area within the selection box will display as full black (if you're using default Drop Shadows settings). The drop shadows are being applied to the whole of that selected area and only that area. Offset won't work because the working space is, again, just defined as that selected area. All you can do using Drop Shadows is change the selected area's colour and transparency. Anything you want to apply drop shadows too needs to be in its own transparent background layer.

This is a file association issue and IMHO a user should not change the default open with Windows Photo Viewer for any particular image file type except, at least for Windows 7 > animated GIFs where the MS OS designers decided that unlike WinXP the WPV should not support animated GIFs and the default is to open them in IE or your prefrred browser. Great decision. In this case the OP appears to have set MS Paint as the default program for, I would suspect, all the image file types he uses. You can replace that with PDN very simply just as TrevorOutlaw suggests - right click on the image file, select "Open with", click on the "Choose default program................", select PDN which will almost certain be listed and tick the "Always use the selected program to open this type of file". If that is really what you want. You'll be tempted to do this for all image file types and you'll have to do that manually for each one unless you set PDN as the default image viewer and, IMHO, that is a bad idea. I think you can set it as the default image viewer for everything during installation but there's no way to do that in the PDN settings. However being able to distinguish quickly between the numerous image file types using the different icons Windows Photo View applies I find a great help and preferable to using a single image file icon for all types. However there is a difference between just picture viewing and picture editing. If you look at the right mouse click context menu for an image you'll see the "Edit" option at the top. Setting PDN as default for that is a very good idea. Again I think that can not be done via PDN settings and has to be chosen during installation (it may even be the default install setting) but this thread describes the simple registry edit which can be done if it is not set as the default editor already. BTW be very careful when setting up any file type associations or you might be lumbered with ones in the context menu that are totally inappropriate. Another piece of questionable MS OS design is that whilst setting a program as default is simple there are no built in tools to disassociate them. It requires either a registry edit or use of purpose designed third part tools like DefaultProgramsEditor or Unassoc. The latter is Vista/Win7 only.

Yes, the easiest thing is to do once the image is saved as a PNG and you're back on the PDN main screen is simply click the Undo button. As flattening any layers is the last part of the process involved before saving as a PNG the layers will then unflatten and you're back to where you were before you saved the image. I do that all the time when saving work in progress and want to check how it looks as a PNG or JPG. Undo is probably my most used PDN function.

Are we really taking this thread seriously? IMHO it stinks (word chosen specifically) of a rather unpleasantly racist joke. Reading about who AOC actually is makes me even more suspicious about that and action should be considerd to remove this thread and OP from this forum ASAP. That is unless, of course, he can provide a bloody good reason as to why he wants to combine a picture of a cartoon turd with that of a mixed race, controversial US politician.

I think Aleksandr is probably asking about an automatic one stop photo-retouching tool which would typically involve: dust removal, sharpening, colour correction, 'healing' brush etc. Some of PDNs plugins under Effects > Photo might be part way to what he is looking for but most retouching work with PDN is done 'manually' with the provided tools and plugins. There's no all in one solution AFAIK. I'm pretty sure BoltBait's plugins pack includes his dust removal tool. https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/113220-boltbaits-plugin-pack-for-pdn-v41-and-beyond-updated-december-1-2018/

That is a beast of a screenshot and lousy quality too. You can do a much better job just by using the Print Screen key on the keyboard. It copies to the clipboard so you can simply paste it into any graphics program, like PDN, and it'll open. Alternatively use the Windows built in accessory Snipping Tool; both better solutions than any poor quality camera grab. https://www.howtogeek.com/226280/how-to-take-screenshots-in-windows-10/ Later Edit:- As regard the actual problem I think that (2009) thread (now removed) may have been relevant but we'll never know now. The post from Valerie was the important one and the suggestion, as far as I can recall, was that the error message is the result of a broken PDN installation with bits left over that needed removing before re-installation. That is pretty much what was later suggested by toe_head2001 too and it seems was the problem. It is always best to remove programs, particularly those which do not have specific uninstallers, using an advanced uninstaller like Revo or BCUninstaller rather than just Windows Add/Remove tools. They do the same job that second Windows tool does which of course would not be necessary if the first one had done a thorough uninstall itself.

Yes a 60GB HDD/SSD is very small for general use now. I was using a laptop with a 40GB HDD up until 3 years ago and I was always having to manage the free space to keep the ideal minimum: 10% of the HDD/partition size available. From the sound of it you must be way below that for PDN to run out of space. You need to address that as it will affect other programs and the speed of the PC too. I'm getting twitchy about my 120GB SSD on my desktop in that respect. Windows grows at about 4GB /year so that roughly 20GB initial install is now 35GB. Add to that a VM which is almost as big and that's over 50% of the space used and I already have all my data migrated to a 1TB HDD. But with all the programs and the annoying things that 'must' be done on the primary drive I have <20GB free space left now. With a laptop and a small HDD without permanently attached additional storage available, maintaining sufficient free space is an art of compromise. You can adjust the space used for things like the restore points and paging file to a minimum and consider not using the latter or hibernation at all. The hiberfil.sys can easily take up several GBs of space. Another good tool in this and other respects is CCleaner. It can be set up to exclude your most used web site cookies and quickly remove any unnecessary restore points Windows makes automatically. Use it every day at the end of your last session and you'll be surprised just how much junk it will remove, particularly if you've been watching YT videos etc. Using it could free up hundreds of MBs quite easily, likely more than enough for any PDN undo/redo file storage requirements.

Me neither. If the intention is to colour correct the over yellow cast, probably caused by the tungsten lighting in the (cave?) location then there are plenty of ways of doing that. Accurate colour correction, more accurately: conversion of non-daylight sources was always a problem before the digital age - you had tungsten balanced film available but that was balanced for 3200K, what typical professional tungsten studio lighting output. So for other sources, like domestic 60W - 100W bulbs or tungsten halogen spot lights, fluorescent tubes, neon or mercury vapour street lighting you'd still have to use significant additional colour correct filtration as well. Mixed sources were a nightmare. White balancing with digital cameras I thought was supposed to have made those sorts of problems a thing of the past. That photo ^ and the final one in the other thread suggests something else other than just colour correction was intended. But what?

Nice ^. Have I misunderstood the term "hobby author"? I assumed that meant an author of hobby/amateur craft books but what I realise now it probably means is what we'd call this side of the pond: self-publishing or less flatteringly, vanity publishing.