Cor'e =)

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

That would be the idea if Blue (middle) was invisible so that the final "composite" was just part Red and part Yellow. The Blue layer would use one its values to render parts of Red & Yellow invisible when flattened. maybe two Blue layers have to be used, one on top of each the Red & Yellow so that Red & Yellow are only partially expressed, i guess Blue & Inverse Blue. Can this be done?

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture . The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B. (Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture . The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B. (Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture . The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B. (Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture . The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B. (Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

Hmm, i don't think i have, could you explain that to me, i'm not following you, i have just 3 layers: top (picture A), middle (something that will blend or fade or mix or merge or composite the two pictures), bottom (picture . The result would be when the layers are flattened that i have one picture that has elements of both pictures, let's say the left side is part of picture A and the right side is from picture B, and the middle is where picture A "faded" or "merged" or "was masked" into/onto picture B. (Sorry, i'm not sure of terms the expert or professionals use for saying this.)

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

hmmm, very blurry solution, maybe i should say i want the lower and upper layers to each fade partially due to the middle layer's transparency value or color value or alpha values so that the end result is that the upper and lower layers fade (meld? join?) into each other.

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers? I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do? For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this? (Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers? I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do? For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this? (Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers? I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do? For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this? (Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers? I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do? For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this? (Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Do the layers have the ability to partially "mask" lower layers? I would like to learn how to use a middle layer to "mask" a lower layer from an upper layer. Is this possible to do? For example, if i use a black or white gradient could the color or alpha or transparency of that middle layer do this? (Please pardon my incorrect use of any terms above.)

Vandermotten plugin pack... i was unable to locate it, is it in the index? I very much appreciated this list btw, thank you so much! =)

What is "the second sizing option"? Edit: I choose the 2nd layout option that crops, but i find it is still off by some...

@CMD: It looks like two issues to me, one is that Paint.net does not support transparent bitmaps; and two paint.net changes bitmaps by saving them. The article is from the MS Windows 3.1 days, but it shows good info for programmers. I did some looking into issue #2 and it appears the Paint.Net automatically saves my 256 color bitmaps to 24bit color and that is corrupting the display of my 256 color bitmaps. However, MS Paint does this too if you save my 256 bitmaps into 24bit bitmaps, but it know not to do that. I do not know why Paint.Net programmers do not give us the options of color depth for saving bitmaps like MS Paint does, maybe someday. Regarding the article, i will look into how my bitmaps are transparent, because they are transparent and i need to make more somehow. Cheers.

I started with a transparent BMP, i was trying to create more of them. Now i only get white or black opaque backgrounds, even if i start with a transparent one. I'm making them for a program that only accepts BMPs.

P.N 305 & 307, WinXP SP2, Cannot seem to get the transparent backgrounds to save in BMP files... Please help! I have a small BMP that has transparency, i have created two more similar in P.N, but when i save the two new ones i get no transparency, when i load the first one and then just save it again it also has no transparency... what's up? I have the EdHarvey & Icon add-Ins, i updated to 307 to see if the issue still exists and it does. =( Please let me know, cheers! =)

Hi, If i clear the work images off my P.N workspace i cannot then also remove windows like Tools, Layers, etc. F5 & F7 etc. do work, the Windows pull-down does also work. Weird. Steps to reproduce: Open paint.net, open an image file, close the image file by pressing the black 'x' to the upper right on image icon, try to close the Tools or History or Layers or Colors windows that remain on the workspace by their upper right little red 'x's, it does not close them. The F# keys work, the pull-down Windows also works. Cheers!