jchunn

Your post is titled "copy and paste", but you talk about "CUT and paste". The checker board is how the program represents a transparent area, and the checkerboard will not show up in any saved images. If you are "cutting" and pasting, then you have moved your image from one place to another, leaving a transparent area in your source image, which looks like a checker board. If you don't want to "move" the image, then be sure to "COPY" and paste, which will leave your original image intact.

Very nice! That is a professional job... I'm impressed.

thanks expiration, i noticed that, i didnt do it quite the same, wanted to make it some what original lol, do you think it would look better if i did that? For what it's worth, I would think a direct port from PS to PDN, as exact as possible, is a better tutorial, since it "proves" that it can be done in PDN. Others might disagree, but to me the whole point of doing a PS tut in PDN is to show that you can make it "exactly" like it is in PS.

We'll just stop writing Renders and Distortions, then I have been thinking about just putting all of the plugins that I write in my own menu, like "effects->jchunn", just so people wont have so many plugins cluttering up the render menu. There are only a few people writing plugins... so even if everyone did that, it would only add 5 or 10 items to the main effects menu, and then you could just jump to "madjik" or "boltbait" or whatever, and just see their plugins. I don't know about everyone else... but that is the way I would rather see it. Ideally, in a future version of PDN, it would be nice if the user could organize their plugins themselves, kinda like the favorites menu in IE.

Download Here After struggling (and watching others struggle) with magic wand, I put this one together. It is something like magic wand, but with the ability to fine tune the color and alpha channels, or ignore them altogether. Options: Tolerance (range): Allows you to set a range or precision for the plugin to use when selecting (or excluding) pixels. If set to 50, for example, and Red is set to 100, it will select pixels that have a red channel value from 75 to 125 (a range of 50), assuming all other channels are ignored. Red Use Red Channel: check to include the red channel settings in the pixel selection criteria. Value: The value of the red channel (+/- Tolerance) to look for when deciding whether or not to select a pixel. Blue, Green, and Alpha... same as red. Exclude: Un-check to pick pixels that meet criteria. Check to "invert" selection. Fill: Uncheck to "delete" selected pixels. Check to fill selected pixels with primary color. You can then use the "real" magic wand with a low tolerance to select that color (or transparency) if you want to run another effect based on that selection. "Color Replace" will show up in the menu: "Effects->Color Replace". Here are some examples: Original image: (image link broken) Starting with the original, you can do lots of other things, like: (image link broken) Enjoy, Jesse Chunn

It looks to me like wither did a fantastic job of it! If that is not a good enough starting point, I would say you don't need paint.net help, you need to hire a graphic artist. Nice job wither... I'm impressed.

Thanks. What do you mean/suggest for the ball itself? The background is actually just a zoomed version of the ball.

Here is something I created using only line/curve tool, shape3D, and bricks and relief for texture.

I think he was just pointing out that all of the other posts in the "announcement" section are locked, even in the other parts of the forum. I asked myself the same question, but didn't care enough to ask about it.

From the vb.net documentation: I could change the code to be more explicit (ctype(xxx, system.double)), but it should work the way it is. I'll change it for the next release, just in case. The stack trace seems to agree with what you are saying, but I don't know why it would work for me and others most of the time but then fail "occasionally". If anyone else experiences these errors (or any errors) it would be very helpful if I had another stack trace, just to verify this was not related to people having two versions installed at the same time, somehow confusing the runtime (.Net) or the host (PDN). Thanks for following up Rick.

Couldn't you use layers? Maybe I don't understand what you are trying to do... oh well... sorry I couldn't help.

Try this... Do a mandlebrot fractal (effects->render) and then an outline (effects->stylize) or emboss (effects->stylize). From there just play around with various settings and effects. This uses mandlebrot fractal and then emboss: Let me know if that works for ya.

AWESOME... thanks for the quick reply guys.

If you are getting duplicates (more than one copy of bricks or varicose in your effects menu), please try the following and let me know if this fixes the problem. 1. Close all instances of PDN. 2. Go to "c:\program files\Paint.Net\effects\" (or whereever your "effects" folder is). 3. Delete varicose.dll AND jchunn.dll. 4. Run PDN. 5. Verify that you do not have any of the following effects in the effect menu: effects->object->Varicose effects->render->Varicose effects->render->Bricks If you have any of those, well... you have something seriously wrong with your installation, or you didn't "really" delete the files, or your effects folder is not where you think it is, or something else has gone wacky with your computer. 7. Close PDN again. 6. Re-download "jchunn.zip". 7. Unzip "jchunn.zip" and verify that it contains ONLY jchunn.dll. 8. Copy ONLY "jchunn.dll" to your effects folder. 9. Run PDN. 10. Verify that you have the following effects: One copy of effects->render->Varicose One copy of effects->render->Bricks NO copy of effects->object->Varicose If you do all that, and still have two copies of either bricks or varicose (or both), please post here again... that means either something is wrong with the plugin, something is wrong with PDN, or something is wrong with your installation... and I'll need to try and figure out which one it is.

No, I am not. The plugin is not doing anything out of the ordinary. I am at work, so I can't post the latest source, but I am not doing anything differently than what is in this earlier version, other than re-arranging some of the effect logic for the "bricks" effect: http://paintdotnet.forumer.com/download/file.php?id=1193 That is vb.net, but it is very simple and easy to follow. Certainly, a quick look will make it obvious that (unless I am completely missing something) I am not doing anything fancy with resources. I am simply modifying a few pixels. Very straightforward stuff. It is possible that I have a reference to the resources dll, but if I do, it was simply a matter of setting the reference, and never using it. If you (Rick) want to just quickly open the source and take a quick look (even in notepad if you didn't install vb) you should be able to verify that I am not doing anything out of the ordinary. If I am, let me know what it is and I'll go back to the drawing board, but this is pretty basic stuff, so I'd doubt it. The only thing I "am" doing that is different from the other examples I've seen posted is that I am using the "my.resources" namespace, instead of embedding the resources the way others are doing it in C#, strictly for the effect icon... but that shouldn't matter since I am still just returning a bitmap. Any feedback would be appreciated. Regards.

Thanks, and yes. I just added the new plugin to the existing code (added a class). Not sure why you have 2 bricks. I changed the filename of the dll, so it makes sense that you would have 2 varicose (the old one and the one in this dll)... just delete the old varicose.dll and you should be fine. I'll try not to change file names in the future to avoid that problem. If you delete varicose.dll and still see 2 bricks OR 2 varicose, let me know. As for your error, I am running 3.22, so maybe there is a compatibility problem... not sure, but it seems to work fine for me. I am checking all types, and the input controls (I assume) will not allow invalid input.

This plugin is a part of the "Jesse Chunn Plugin Pack" and can be downloaded HERE Once installed, "Bricks" will show up in the "Render" submenu. Here are some examples: This image uses "Bricks" to create texture. Here is a tutorial to create a brick wall. (link to old forum removed - please use search: http://searchpaint.net/ ) This effect is a part of Jesse Chunn Plugin Pack located at: Jesse Chunn Plugin Pack All comments welcome. Regards, Jesse Chunn.

Have you tried the effects in the "Effecs->Stylize" menu? Just an idea. By the way, I used your idea for the bloodshot eye... you can check it out in the tutorials forum.

This is one of the coolest tuts on this site. My try uses "Varicose" plugin (http://paintdotnet.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=22670&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=0). NOTE: Original idea from D.C. (Conviction

Will do, and thanks.

Yes, but every plugin other than this one is in C#, thus it would not be easy for him to exactly implement without a C# to VB.net translator, which even then the output is very shaky. I have no problem translating from one to the other... to translate from C# to VB all you have to do is delete the semicolons from the end of each line Seriously... I can do the translation... (how do ya think I got this far ) but I have looked at a few already, and the ones I have looked at seem to do it in different ways. I have only had time to look at a couple so far... so I'm still looking, but if anyone wants to point me to the best example, that would help. If not, I'll figure it out.

I already have that one on my list... good idea. Some properties are easier to edit in place (without reseeding automatically) than others. For example, alpha (which will be called intensity, and you have not seen it yet) will be easy to edit without reseeding. Width is a little more difficult, but possible, compared to frequency, which will be much more difficult (although still remotely possible if I make some relatively major changes). Right now, however, I am struggling with how to do anti-alias, which is the highest priority, and I have no clue how to do it. Any code that demonstrates that would be helpful... ?

Agreed. I have never questioned the fact that your points are valid. In fact, as I mentioned, I debated these same points before I posted the plugin, which is why I stuck it in the "Object" menu, just to avoid cluttering up the top level of the effects menu while I thought it through (I personally dislike having 50 plugins in the top level menu, but maybe thats just me). The only point that I have disagreed with is that the output isn't based on the source... since it is. I really don't care where it goes in the menu system... if anyone actually wants to use it, they will probably be okay with either "distort" or "render" or "object" without too much concern. A nice enhancement for Paint.Net would be to allow the user to organize their own plugins.... but I have bigger fish to fry... so for now, I will put it in the render submenu in any future versions until further notice (right now it is in the distort menu in the current version of the code on my computer, so hopefully I won't forget to change it). If anyone else wants to debate that, I'm all ears, but that is not high on my priority list. Majik made some suggestions that I think require more of my brain cycles :? Thanks sincerely for the feedback.

Well, for the user it "feels" like a render. Tile Reflection really distorts the source, this one creates a new thing without using the source image. At least it looks that way for me. I understand your point... I really do... but even though it may look that way, especially on very dark or very light images... if you look closely, especially when the "width" is on a high setting, you can see that the "source" image is still visible, blended with the output. This is also clear in the code, if you are a coder. I might add an alpha slider (or intensity, or something like that) which would make that much easier to see, and add some flexibility. The source is absolutely a part of the output pixels. I agree that Tile Reflection clearly "distorts" the source (by moving pixels around), where this plugin simply modifies the pixels in place, which for many might seem to be less of a "distortion" and more of a "render"... that is why I was unsure of where to put it in the menu. Regards.

1. I can do that... it will take a little time to re-think the "top-to-bottom" logic, but not insurmountable. What would REALLY be difficult would be to let the user select an angle, at least given my implementation. Any suggestions on that would be welcome. 2. It can be done... I have actually already given that some thought. Early attempts ran a high likelyhood of "re-merging", so I'll need to give that more thought to see how I can reduce that likelyhood. 3. I'm sure I could look at other plugins to see how others have implemented that... but I am VERY open to suggestions on what quality "means" in this context. Anti-aliasing? Not sure... any advice is appreciated. 4. I had an early version that did that... easy to implement... probably should be optional? 5. Yes, I agree... that will be in any future versions. Also, I'll probably move it to the distort submenu.