Jump to content

Rick Brewster

Administrator
  • Posts

    20,659
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    378

Posts posted by Rick Brewster

  1. It sounds like you're working with some old documentation, possible going off of Dennis' old article about writing plugins for Paint.NET v2.1. Things have changed since then.

    1. You need to specify EffectDirectives.SinglThreaded as a parameter to the base Effect class constructor.

    2. If you specify SingleThreaded, then these will be thread safe because your effect will only ever be executing on 1 thread at a time. Otherwise, you must not use them in your Render() method, as GDI+ will complain loudly.

    3. You should be using the overload of Render that takes an array of Rectangles, a starting index, and a length. No Regions.

    4. You shouldn't have to worry about "using" the threading model of Paint.NET. Everything is set up for you automatically. If you are having problems it's likely because you are incorrectly assuming things about the way Paint.NET is calling in to your Effect.

    The effect system is designed such that Paint.NET will call your Render() method to tell it to render a specific region of the output surface. You must NOT render anywhere else in the output surface.

  2. A clickbable / interactive tutorial would be pretty sweet. But the whole app? Hmmm okay I'll dump PDN 3.0 dev work and spend the next two years building a web page. No, I don't think so ... no thanks :) (I guess it really would be Paint ".NET" in that case though, ha!)

    And I just don't believe it would be very useful anyway. "Wow I have a paint program ... but it's in a web browser. And it's really slow. Why is it using 100 MB of memory for a 800x600 picture? And most of the features I use aren't there. Where does this file get saved? Argh it takes 5 minutes to upload/open my 7 megapixel camera pictures. Goodness!" I think a web page image editor would be best focused on uploading an image, cropping/resizing, and sharing ("hey mom look at my picture ... just click on this http link"). And if I'm not mistaken you can already do that on some websites.

    Web page apps have their purpose -- just look at Hotmail or Gmail. They provide the functionality that many people need for casual to medium e-mail use. The omnipresence is also nice, as you can access your e-mail from almost anywhere. For professional use though, something like Outlook w/ Exchange Server is much better, for many reasons.

  3. If I'm right with that, then that Tolerance bar is in the Paint Bucket options. Does this then mean that the Paint Bucket, Magic Wand, Clone Stamp, et cetera all have their own Tolerance settings?!

    No they don't have their own copy of the Tolerance setting. That would be very confusing or frustrating :) We show whichever toolbar settings are applicable to the current tool, and hide those which are not.

  4. I voted Yes because it's kinda true sometimes.

    We use GDI for font rendering in v2.6x. This has a "sharper" look than what you generally expect from an image editor. This usually looks great for UI, but not for pictures. Sometimes it looks like it isn't anti-aliased, although if you zoom in you can see that it is ... but just barely. At large sizes fonts tend to not be anti-aliased at all, which affected me when doing some Segoe UI text at size 1376 (I'm not joking here :)).

    v3.0 will have the ability to use "smooth" or "sharp" text rendering, with the default being smooth. "Smooth" employs GDI+ for the rendering. It looks great, too.

  5. Yeah I think this was brought up very very recently in fact. In fact, it's in the post right below this one ("Move small selection").

    The technical explanation is that, like you said, the hit-testing is performed based on where the cursor is "on the image". We don't currently have a consistent system for keeping tracking of floating point coordinates in document space. Anyway, I'm planning to fix it for 3.0, it catches me all the time when trying to resize small selections.

  6. Yeah, people pay website owners, etc. to put an ad on their site, they pay a couple cents for each time someone clicks on the ad, right?

    The specific details are dependent on the arrangement, but you get the idea.

    Anyway, given the choice between charging users for Paint.NET, or accepting donations and showing an ad in the setup wizard, I've opted for the latter.

×
×
  • Create New...