sagedavis

Could MKT, or Rick, or someone, change the links from the origional post to use http://mkt.t-cat.biz/pdn/dl.cgi?mode=dl ... hape3D.dll for the dll link and http://mkt.t-cat.biz/pdn/dl.cgi?mode=dl ... _2_6_0.zip for the zip link. The ones that are here are broken links. BTW. Fantastic plugin

Thanks, I'll post the finished product in the pictorium, once we figure out what they really want to do with the H and the T... looks a little bland... May try to make the effect so that the ball is either coming out of the fire, or being thrown at it, sort making some sort of a displacement look... The problem is, it has to look good on a t-shirt, but, also on something small like a business card. The second problem is my run on sentences,,,, LOL

I might be slow? I Tried this just with black and blue clouds, just to do a quick test of this method. I go to curves+ and under alpha, I didn't understand all of that... just one curve to manipulate, then went to advanced insted. there I have the option of In and out. These provide dropdowns with Key/black being one of the options. When I do the "in" as key black, it actually makes all the white stuff transparent. If I do the "out" as key black, it turns the whole thing black if I do both as key black, we get no change at all.? What am I doing wrong with it? Thanks for the help by the way Sage EDIT::: never mind, I figured it out. I used Red in the "in" instead of doing something with the black, and this pulled trick off. Here is the prototype of the image I am working on. It's for a tennis team called "Heart Of Texas 6" They go by HOT 6.

I am stumped. I am doing a logo for a local charity event to be put on t-shirts. The shirts are going to be white. Anyway, I guess that's not really relivant, but, I am trying to make realistic fire but on a transparent or even white background rather than black. All the tutorials on fire require backgrounds of black, but, if you pull the background out of these, the image no longer seems "natural". Does anyone have a way to make a decent, fire on either a transparent background or a white one? Transparent might be best in this case, but, I'll settle for white. Thanks a bunch. Sage

Keep in mind, that you also have many options with the layer types, that might be able to help you out a bit. step 1.) make sure that when you draw the lights you do it on it's own layer 2.) copy the layer. 3.) in the bottom version of the layer, gausian blur it and set the layer to something like "lighten", you may even need to play a little with brightness and contrast to get your desired effect. This works best if the photo that you are working with is in full light and then you darken it on your own. It may take several layers to get the perfect glow effect, depending on the photo you use. Sage

I voted "Other" as well, because, I really think that it's your choice. We love S3D, I don't think that anyone would argue otherwise. You can hang out on the board and chat as you wish. I think most of us are simpathetic to the fact that English is not your first language. I enjoy having you here, and using the amazing tool in S3D that you have provided. It is amazing. Many people will give their opinion of how to "fix it" or "make it better", but, ultimately, you need to go with your own vision of what you want it to be and do. I have had this problem with my own art. "you should do this, you should do that", and believe me, I view coding as an art form all it's own. I would say, giving out the source code would be a good idea, but, I fear that we would end up seeing 10 different versions of plugins which use S3D as it's base... Perhaps, even a better route would be to release it as opensource on something like sourceforge.net so that those who want to work on it, can do so together, and add stuff as a team on the project itself. This way, only one plugin is made, and it encorporates the vision of several people all at once. Just my thought. Please know that it is your choice to do what you will as far as updates go and let no one pressure you in your progress. Sage

Funny, When I first started with PDN, the only thing that made me keep an old bought software was that PDN couldn't batch process. I was getting tired of not being able to get updates for that particularly out dated software. Someone turned me on to irfenview (spelling error maybe), which does all that for me now, so, I am all freeware here. Sage

<--- is sometimes dumb... this may be locked.... I've used that tool before, don't know why I forgot about it. Temporary insanity. Thanks Pyro

Is there a plugin (I can't seem to find one), that just does a basic zoom of one layer. Perhaps centered and just cutting off whatever leaves the workspace? There are a couple of projects that I have done so far where this tool would be helpful. As it is now, I am copying the layer to a new image, resize the new image to be bigger, then crop down to the size of the origional image, then copy and paste to the layer in the origional image. It's a lot of steps, not a lot of work, but, this type of tool could be useful if someone has it somewhere, Thanks Sage

I can think of a couple of ways... The easiest by far is to select the blue portion of the computer with the magic wand tool at about 54 tolerance, and select the blue inside the computer... Then, hit "delete". That should get rid of most of the screen. Add the photo of the cardinal on a layer below it, and then resize the cardinal image so that it fits the view that you want. That's it. Sage

Good, I don't feel as dumb as I did when I wrote this then... :-) Woot woot. :-) Can't find the C# book I bought a while back, I probably loaned it to someone, trip to Barnes and Nobles coming soon I bet... LOL.. Thanks again Bolt for all your help. Sage

OK, So, BoltBait and Drakaan talked me into trying to learn C# http://paintdotnet.12.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=2618 Read that link if you are interested in reading the arguments as to why I should learn it. I am having some trouble. For instance, looking at some people's code snippets and trying to decypher what they do. I figure, having some understanding of C, C++ and VB (not a pro at either, but, I know enough to figure out what code is supposed to do what), that I should be alright with the C# stuff. Blow my mind away. Looking at some code samples found around the web, I had noticed a couple of people claiming that something was C# that clearly is not... for instance I started seeing some include statements for stdio.h and windows.h Ok, so, from what I understand anything .h is a header file (I'm used to working with them to an extent), used only in C and C++ NOT C# right? C# uses a different syntax... for this to begin with... using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Windows.Forms; So, now, you are wondering what I need help with... lol.. I need to understand if the above code "using system", is the logical equivilant to useing the include headers in C and C++ and if so, where do I find these "headers", for C#, and how would I find more. I don't expect anyone to sit and type out a long answer to this question, (unless you want to), but, even a link that would be a good place to look this up would be great. I have googled, I have found some tutorials which were supposed to be beginner tutorials on C#, however, they are all just "here's some code, test it out, see what it does" type things, and I really would prefer to know what I am doing rather than just know what they are doing. The biggest reason for this questioning is because, I used to always import my .h to my projects with vc++ to make sure that they were in the same location, and here, I don't know if I need to do a similar step with C# or where to begin with finding those files or whatever. Any help at all, would be great. My biggest reason as of now, for wanting to learn C# is for plugin building for PDN... Thanks. Sage

I could have sworn that the creator of PDN (Rick?) worked for Microsoft (or what you call "the beast")... and had already mentioned that "anti anything" posts shouldn't take place on the board. Rick would actually have to give Microsoft permission to use his program, which, I don't think he will. Plus, if Microsoft wants a different Paint program than the one that they have, they can always um, build one... I mean, come on, they built an entire operating system, one paint program isn't going to be that difficult. Sage

Rapsquatch, I have had this issue before, on smaller image files, or low res files... Try first upsampling to at least 100 (I would even go to 200) dpi, and then doing the water effect. If your not sure how to upsample, go to "image" > "resize". make sure that "resampling" is set to "best quality" or bicubic, they are the same thing (I think). Make sure that "Maintain aspect ratio" is checked. Then under "Resolution" bump it up to the desired amount.... and click ok. Just an idea Sage

Just a quick question/suggestion... A lot of times on the "plugin" page, I see someone saying "wouldn't this plugin be better in a different folder"... How hard would it be for the next release to make it so that the USER can file their plugins rather than the designer of the plugin. Perhaps by simply putting subfolders of their own within the "effects" folder? This way, if I don't like the placement of a plugin, I can simply move it myself. Just a suggestion. Sage