Gladi8or2

Why would you want to have so many fonts? Imagine you would have all the fonts from http://www.dafont.com, that are around 8500 fonts. (1) It would slow down your system immensely. I don't know how long it takes to load a font, but I believe loading 8500 fonts will cost a disturbingly long time (2) At 70kB per font file, and in general 2 or 3 font files per font (bold, cursive, etc.), this is almost 1.5GB of fonts. Personally, I know better uses for my bandwidth and storage... (3) If you use 2 new fonts every day, which is very unlikely, you will need over 11 years to use all these fonts. (4) Don't overestimate the importance of fonts. Everyone involved in graphics editing or webdesign will tell you the same: having too many fonts in one image/website gives an unprofessional impression. Moreover, you can do almost everything with the basic fonts you already have. In the maybe 5 years I've been doing things like this, I have downloaded maybe 10 fonts (like 1 gothic font, 1 eroded font, 1 lcd-digits font etc.).

I cannot wait for my laptop to be delivered, so... I know I cheated, it's not entirely pixel art :wink: I should probably add more shadow etc, but I'm too lazy

Okay, my German isn't very good (although I learned it three years in school), so I'll give it a try with pictures... This is how a transparant sphere would look like: But the force field is not a sphere, but just a shell, so it would look like: As you can see the darker part is on the outside, not on the inside. Now for the forcefield you can do the same but with a color you like. @BoltBait: I guess that's the most useful phrase in German

It looks more realistic if the outline of the forcefield has a higher opacity than the middle part, since it is a shell and not a filled sphere.

First, if this is implemented, I would like to have the possibility switch it off. I don't like computers telling me how to write. Second, ever thought about people who don't speak English? Are you going to implement a spell check for French, German, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Japanese, Swahili?

Nope!

Then I must have misunderstood your question. Excuse me. I'm not a native English speaker

Rejoice! This is a popular and therefore planned feature for version 3.x0! More of this can be found in the "popular feature request"-thread.

Welcome to the forums, carpoxx. Here you can read more about adding pictures in your post: http://paintdotnet.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=6270 This will probably also solve the blurry problem, since you have to compress the picture a lot if you want to add it using the built-in attachment function of the forum. Anyway, I like it. It's... original.

Hi AngelOhhSeven, Welcome to the forums! This link will probably help you: http://paintdotnet.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=6270 edit: In the future, you might use http://www.searchpaint.net. It's a very useful search tool and a lot better than the built-in search function of the forum.

Draw a white box in a new layer. Lower the opacity of that layer to the desired value (layer -> properties). Is that what you mean? edit: damn, too late What he said!

At the moment I'm working for school :wink: , but tonight (I don't know where you live, here it's almost 2pm) I'll try to finish it. Especially the inside, the lighting on the sphere is something more basic, and shouldn't give you a lot of problems.

I've noticed that after deleting a selection, the selection itself disappears. Most of the time I find this rather annoying, since I have to delete the same selection in three or more different layers. Can this be changed, or can anyone explain me why it is better to remove the selection?

What I have on the sphere already: I know the lighting isn't perfect, it's more about the shape.

Yes! SearchPaint.net couldn't find it :shock: Anyway, you see in that tutorial that it's the hart of the sphere is what's the hard part...

I believe there was a tutorial about this once, but I can't find it anymore. Anyway, I've played around a bit, and the sphere is quite easily created with Shape3D, but the inside is a lot harder. I'm still working on it

mods? and please guys there are also people that do NOT have English as mother tongue

Hey, it works, thanks!

This is bothering me for a long time: why isn't there a more precise way to zoom in/out a layer than with the slider? For the rotate en pan you can go as precise as you like, but if you want to zoom you have to go in steps of +/- 5%. Or is there a workaround for this? Thanks!

This is going to be the hardest voting EVER :shock:

(yes, I'm in a skyscraper mood ) CITIC Plaza in Guangzhou, China

http://www.zdnet.be/downloads.cfm?id=76688 (in Dutch) (Sorry for the sloppy translation, I'm not so good at english...)

World Trade Center:

Skyscraper: