Crazy Man Dan

With all the little hair tendrils, I really don't think there is any "easy" way to do it. The Alpha Masking method is the better quality way to do it, when compared to the aliased Magic Wand alternative. I'm a big proponent of Alpha Masking for cutouts (which is probably why I made the tutorial ), but it can get difficult. When you look at the actual cut out tutorial (which also had hair in it), you can read in the detail of step three that the mask for the example took well over an hour to create. So yeah, it's not easy, but if you're wanting the highest possible quality result, I'd suggest putting the time in.

Well, you could duplicate the layer, then cut out the goat on the top duplicate, then run the effects on the original background layer, which would leave the cut-out goat on the duplicate layer untouched. The problem is the goat would still be on the original background layer, so if you blur it, you'll blur the background goat around the foreground goat. It all depends upon the type of effect you're going for, I suppose. The results described above may be acceptable in some cases.

The main problem with that cutout scheme is that there will be a goat-shaped hole in your grass layer, and there will be a land-shaped hole in your sky. If you use the Mask method, you'll most likely end up with lines of semi-transparency around the cut-out sections (since the mask is anti-aliased, the anti-aliased bits will overlap each other, and unfortunately, a 50% transparent pixel overlain atop another pixel of 50% transparency does not result in a completely opaque pixel). To get around this you could use the Clone Stamp to extend the grass on its own layer inward to cover over part of the hole left by cutting out the goat. Removing the goat won't show the grass behind it, so you'd have to make your own to fill the area.

Really, it depends upon what you plan to use the image for later. If you want to save a completely lossless version with layers intact for editing later, then .pdn, Paint.NET's native file type, is the way to go. If you're planning to use the image you just saved as a piece in a compilation later (say you cut a person out from a background and want to put them in a different picture), then PNG is the best choice. PNG saves a flattened (one layer) image while preserving the original color (no color approximation for compression like JPG), along with support for transparency. I'd also suggest using PNG for any image you want to keep at the best possible quality for storage on your own computer - the file size is usually noticeably larger than the same image saved as JPG, but the quality is better preserved and hard drive space is cheap anyway. If you're planning to use the image as a Desktop background, then JPG is the best choice. Windows doesn't fare well when a PNG is set as the wallpaper. If you're saving an image for a website design, I'd suggest JPG or PNG. The web does support GIF too, but I just don't like the format - limited palette and dithering for interpolation - and I've found that usually the file size saved by going with GIF over one of the others is negligible. And really, those are the only formats I use: .pdn, .jpg, and .png. TIFF and TGA are also quality formats that support transparency, but I've really never used them. The few times clients have sent me TIFF files, I've found the rendering to be inconsistent - TIFF stands for Tagged Image File Format, and developers love making up their own "Tags", so I've had more than a few problems trying to open up TIFFs from Photoshop in anything else and having them look right. TGA, I've just never needed. So really, there is no "best" file type. The format you use will depend completely upon what you need it for. Those listed above are the ones I use for common application, and you're free to try them if you wish.

Nope, no contests or anything - it's all completely unofficial. I'm just saying that if there were an option to get that design on a white shirt, I'd totally get my Credit Card ready. ( Technically, I wouldn't, because I have my credit card number memorized - I like memorizing long strings of numbers, like pi. No I don't have a problem... >_> )

Forgive me if I have to disagree completely, simple, but I have to disagree completely. The only possible beef I could see is that it's not the established Paint.NET logo font face - the permissible tolerance for this depends mainly upon the company. Since Paint.NET is electronically distributed freeware, the name itself is far more important than the font in which it's given - anyone can Google the text "paint.net" and find the program. Aside from that one possible concern, it's artistic, eye-catching, highly (and consistently) stylized, and modern, something I think would be perfect for a tee-shirt. It's distinct enough to be clear but interesting enough to not look out of place alongside my Haste the Day or Project 86 shirts.

Hey wolfen, welcome to the forums. You used the Search first, which is a great start, but if you'd check The Rules, rule number 1 asks that you also check the Popular Feature Requests thread before making a feature request. And, sure enough, Layer Folders are in there, second from the bottom. Now, since they're in the Popular Feature Requests thread, no one has posted about them in some time, which is why the built-in forum search probably won't find it (its indexing was cleared in the move from PHPBB2 to PHPBB3, and any existing posts at the time of the swap weren't re-indexed), but there is an external search engine at searchpaint.net that does in fact find the answer to your question (there's a link to it in The Rules as well ). So, as the Popular Feature Requests thread says, Rick wants to get them in, but it'll require the framework changes he's making for 4.0 before it could even become a possibility. Since it's in the Popular Feature Requests thread already, and Rick already thinks it's a good idea, no further discussion is really needed, so I'm closing the thread. Please make sure to check out The Rules as linked above, and when in doubt, use the searchpaint.net search engine - it's run by Google, and everyone knows Google is awesome. (As an aside, a feature like this would require actual integration into Paint.NET - the PDN effects architecture doesn't allow plugins to touch the Layers window, so it would have to come in the form of a program update, not a third-party plugin.) Again, welcome to the forums, and I'm sorry to have to close your first thread. Thread Closed

Feather is a Plugin for Paint.NET. It adds an effect under the Effects menu. There's another way one could go about it as well, one that offers more control and greater blurring distance, which requires two of BoltBait's plugins, Transparency Adjustment and Gaussian Blur Channel. This post contains both the links to the required plugins and the explanation of how to achieve the desired effect. Best of luck!

While I'm certain it has to do largely with the advertisements displayed at the time, on the download page, the distinction is made that Paint.NET is to be acquired via one of the "Download Now" buttons. I don't necessarily agree with the placement of the advertisements there, but it's not my site, and the advertisements are textual - links, not buttons, a common contextual distinction used on the Internet: Now, I agree with you that the advertisements are placed in a misleading area, being the first links after the "Click below to download" message, but technically the message does indicate that a "button" below should be clicked. I don't mean to slight or demean less experienced Internet users, but the Internet is in fact a rather dangerous place for someone who doesn't particularly know what they're supposed to be doing and not doing. Rick doesn't get too much say in the advertisements that are displayed by Google - they are served automatically based upon the content of the page as interpreted by Google's AdSense bot when it parses it - so he can't verify the origin of the advertisements. Nonetheless, advertisements are how the development of Paint.NET is funded, so they're not going away completely. Perhaps Rick would consider moving the ads so they're not immediately after the admonition to click below, but in all honesty, the onus is on the user to know what they're clicking on. There are basic educational to-dos that I live by when I'm on the Internet. The first is: "Never click on the flashing, jiggling banners that tell me I'm user number 999,999." The second is: "Never click on any other advertisements either." Generally, these are good rules to live by. If your friend hasn't had a quick overview on basic Internet safety, the best thing I could suggest is that they download Firefox, then install the AdBlock+ add on, and possibly the NoScript Javascript sandboxer as well. With that simple setup, they will be automagically protected from most of the bad things on the Internet - ads, malicious scripts, and Internet Explorer's built-in vulnerabilities. If the use of IE is a necessity, they could install the IE7Pro add on for Internet Explorer, which includes an Ad Blocker. So basically, while it may not be exactly what you want to hear, what I'm saying is that there's no substitute for knowledge - knowing what you're doing on the Internet is the only way to actually be any kind of safe on the Internet. Being a website developer myself, I realize I'm probably smarter than the average bear in this area, but there are a few simple things that can be done to increase anyone's odds of staying safe - Read before you click, and don't ever click on an advertisement, even if you read it beforehand. I absolutely despise online advertisements personally, but I'm not personally developing a freely distributed program used by millions, so I can see why Rick needs them there. I'm sorry for the experience your friend had, and I'm certain Rick isn't being intentionally deceptive, but high ad visibility is what keeps Paint.NET afloat. Rick will of course have the final say in whether or not the ads move, but remember that the user has absolute control over their browser - if ads are getting in the way or causing confusion, there are add ons for just about every browser I know of (and built-in to Opera, I'll add for Mike and ncfan ) that will override and intercept advertisements, keeping the sites one visits free from clutter. Developers and site owners mayn't be too happy with it (and I have disabled AdBlock+ for getpaint.net, just in the spirit of friendliness), but in the end, it's your browser - you control what goes on in it.

Hey! I was hoping you had a Pictorium thread, 'cause I needed a place to compliment you on your new POD sig-atar combo. I've heard the previews, and the new album sounds pretty awesome.

:shock: ... Thanks for the kind remarks. I wrote the tutorial on how to cut things out the better way, and I'm glad the quality shows. Yeah, I realized I'd forsaken Paint.NET for a while, so I took some time to use it again. It's actually quite pleasant cutting out things with Paint.NET thanks to the Line / Curve tool. In The GIMP, the vector paths are editable, yeah, but it's a pain to stroke each one for the hair bits. Thanks for the comment. Enjoi! There's more! I had it in my mind to make a banner with some of the other acronyms I came up with as alternates for CMD, so there's more inspiration up there. Thanks for the kind words regarding the image. ---------------------------------------- Big update! A bunch of my past work has been uploaded. And no, I don't know why I included the Mustardy thing... >_>

This is a Desktop wallpaper of Carrie Underwood. The original shot of Carrie was an indoor photo from a shoot, and the background is from SXC, so there was a good deal of photo manipulation. Originals: Carrie / Field You can also see this in my Pictorium gallery and on my dA.

Welcome, dear reader, to my gallery. This is where I'll put all my awesome Paint.NET works for you to look at and love and comment upon. My style trends primarily toward photomanipulation, so there'll be a lot of that in your future if you're planning on scrolling down. So, dear friend, look on, read on, and enjoy. I make these for you. Latest Update: Huge update for ya! I put a bunch of my past work in here. The newest piece is everything but :So Small: Desktop Wallpapers Carrie Underwood :So Small: [ starting photos : Carrie | Field ] [ description: view on dA ] Website Designs GetPaint.NET Mock - Black GetPaint.NET Mock - White CMDSketchpad.com Mock - Pyropad CMDSketchpad.com Mock - Galaxipad CMDSketchpad.com Mock - CMDpad CMDSketchpad.com Mock - Some weird mustardy color thing Signatures In approximate chronological order... Avatars There's a bunch more out there, but I haven't tracked them down yet... Other Things Seemingly uncategorizable things I make. Thanks very much for scrolling through my gallery. If you liked a piece, or if you have criticism on a piece, feel free to leave a comment and speak your mind! Happy tails.

You can hold the [shift] key while dragging a resize handle to constrain the resize to the original proportions so you don't get any skewing. If what you need resized is the only thing in your image, you can also use the Image -> Resize dialog and check the "Maintain Aspect Ratio" checkbox and set the width value to 360. Image -> Resize will yield the best quality result. Note that a constrained resize of a 660 x 375 image would result in a 360 x 205 final. You will have to crop 55px off the height to get a non-skewed resized version in the dimensions you desire.

Beta software is potentially volatile, in-development software. It is not a final version, and it is not intended to be a final version. There may be bugs in it that the final version won't have, and Rick doesn't want to get bug reports from users still running a Beta version about things that have been fixed for weeks in the final. This also falls under the "Use the latest version of Paint.NET" mantra. As the Beta versions say when you start them up: it's a development version, intended for testing purposes only. If you're not going to be able to upgrade each month, then you should stick with the current stable version.

A ha. Vera-nice. I'm liking Military Green myself...

The Light Rays plugin can be found here: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=5231

If it's not possible to have a completely transparent background, could it be a rounded rectangle? Or maybe some sort of splatter design or artistic frooshies could be used to break up the straight outline. As is, it looks kinda weird - a straight-edged black rectangle outline on a black shirt. See, I usually wear black shirts, so this affects me directly. Overall, though, interesting addition to the PDN universe. I may just have to buy something.

Don't worry about the post title too much. We all make mistakes. Even the emperor himself makes mistakes. I've edited the title to make it more descriptive, so that anyone in the future who searches for the term is more likely to find it. Since your question has been answered, though, and since the answer is already in a sticky, I am closing this thread. Happy PDN-ing!

I'd suggest checking through The Rules. For one, your thread title is vague and nondescript, which is frowned upon (rule #6). For the deuce, it would have pointed you to the FAQ's thread (rule #1a), wherein it reads: Basically, there's just one installer for both. Paint.NET will detect what type of system you're running and optimize itself for your architecture. If you're running a 64-bit processor and have a 64-bit OS installed, you're already running the 64-bit version of PDN.

He mentioned that the part he wants may not always be only 700 pixels wide and 500 pixels tall: I was going through something like this the other day - I installed Google Desktop, and the Photos slideshow widget to keep my Desktop fresh. I copied about 100 images from various directories into one "Slideshow images" folder to be referenced by the widget, but the reduced size of the widget screen and the varied aspect ratios of the images made for some poor auto-cropped display. I went through and cropped the interesting bits into a frame of a fixed ratio, then resized each to 500 px wide to save on disk space (no use having a 2000px wide image just to be scaled down to a 200 px display window). Since the images were anywhere from 1000px to 3000px wide, the width of the "interesting bit" varied. What he's looking for is a script that auto-resizes the image to 700px by 500px after a crop action, since cropping out the desired area may yield one of a larger than desired size. As for you, amether, I'd recommend either using Photoshop or using the shortcuts to save as much time as possible. Click-drag-release-[Ctrl][shift][X]-[Ctrl][R]-700-[Enter]. To save even more time, I just let go of [shift] and [X] and hit [R] to activate resize, keeping my finger on [Ctrl]. If that's still too many steps, then, for now at least, PS is your program.

You can use a selection tool to select the area you don't want blurred, press [Ctrl]+ to select the inverse area - everything around what you don't want blurred, then run the blur on the area you wish to be affected. For greater Gaussian blur control, you could give MadJik's Gradient Blur plugin a try. It allows you to set the blur radius and the no-effect and full-effect distances from center, then smooths the blur transition between the areas. Note that this is a Gaussian blur effect, not a radial blur effect. If I didn't understand what you were asking and neither of those suggestions helped, you could try posting the image result that you're getting and point out the part that you're not happy with. Best of luck!

You know, since you're making the buttons, you shouldn't have to cut them out when you're done. Just make sure you start on a new layer, not on the "Background" layer. Then, when you're ready to save the buttons, hide the "Background" layer, flatten the image, then save the button (as a PNG or GIF). The checkerboard in the background means that area is transparent. Note that if you want to support IE6, you'll have to save as a GIF, or save the button with the requisite part of the background behind it. You can do this by saving as a PNG, opening the page in Firefox, Opera, or IE7, performing a Print Screen, then cropping and re-saving the button with the background area behind it.

Alrighty, this is getting out of hand. Rick has stated previously that he will not be implementing this, and all this theorizing about how "easy" it would be is just going to lead to an argument. Your request has been noted, and if Rick has new information to add, I'm sure he will, but for now, I'm closing this thread.

Sorry, but this has been asked before, and Rick has turned down the idea unequivocally. viewtopic.php?f=12&t=20811&p=106657#p106020