Shrinker

* I've just checked out a trim texture in Doom 3 and the problem does indeed not occur because the filtering is set to draw really sharp edges. What if I don't want them? * So how about the mipmaps still? You darken the image by defaulting that color. * And what if I wanted to have a shiny glow around my letters, e.g. in red? * And still, what about textures which are supposed to look nice with the alpha layer ignored/disabled? * What if pre-multiplied alpha is not available or has been decided against for some reason (performance, anyone?) You're not even using it in your program! pyrochild, please note that it doesn't matter whether it is my 3D engine, that of id software or Valve, or just a test project someone made in DirectX or OpenGL. I don't need advice which modeler to use since my sole intention is to convince Rick that it is better to lift that limitation because it is unnecessary. Absolutely unnecessary. Rick, please tell me: What are the benefits of defaulting that color over not doing so? I clearly see an advantage for gimp there for allowing me that freedom. How to compare this limitation... What if your text editor only allowed you to place at max 2 empty lines? What if Windows wouldn't start up if you didn't set a desktop background? What if your compiler did not allow float literals which have more than 2 digits after the decimal separator? What if Microsoft Visual Studio set a fixed indent size of 10 without any way to change it? Unnecessary limitations. We are mostly treating pictures to be made of the red, the green, the blue and the alpha channel, aren't we? Why to make that very exception, only when the alpha is zero, and alter the channel content automatically? You're all right that 99% of the time it does not matter at all whether or not that is defaulted, but apparently I found a case where it matters, and this program could easily cope with it with a slight modification. Newbie biting?

Please open your eyes and see the reality, which is that textures are filtered and all channels are interpolated along the pixels. That's the way it is done in every modern graphics engine. Your assumption is wrong because it does make a difference, but it seems like you'll never agree. As I said I'll have to use both Paint.Net and Gimp to accomplish this then. I remember reading on the official png page how they described Photoshop's handling of the matter some time ago as plainly wrong. (It's like in Paint.Net, only that they used to set the color to white). Note that fixing this would require very little effort from your side, since it would merely be a removal of a "feature" which defaults the colors. BTW, why are you using black and not white or pink? I remember pink being a designated color for transparency in many old DOS games. I personally like green too. Let me state this very important fact once again: While filtering textures (e.g. bilinear, trilinear), it does make a difference what the color channels' values are when the image is 100% transparent in places. Your method causes uncontrollable black outlines. Also please note that some shader systems give you the option to just ignore the alpha layer. An example would be a green texture with jungle bushes which could optionally have transparent holes between the leaves and also be set to be 100% opaque but still look nice. Why limit the user in this way? If you don't automatically set 100% transparent pixels to black, this can still be done, while the current implementation imposes an unnecessary limitation. You could add a little dialog for setting 100% transparent pixels' color values to something, but as a real feature and not a silent limitation. I'd always yield to a solution which allows for more things, and that would clearly be not defaulting those pixels. See my font in action: http://www.intercomm.com/shrinker/images/08/font.tech.test.png Using only Paint.Net, it'd have ugly black outlines. Zooming out, mipmaps would make it look gray. Also note that during mipmap calculation, your black color makes subsequent mipmaps darker and darker because of interpolation effects too. Such a generic gaming scene has a lot of transparency going on too, and as you see, texture filtering is a must: http://www.happypenguin.org/images/doom3.jpg Recommended reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texture_filtering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Pink http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mipmap

I present you: The reason why the transparent color matters. (the inside is black, the outside red)

Well that software is OpenGL and properly blends every color component... That is bilinear texture filtering and it's the way how transparent things are interpolated in every 3D API. It is wrong to assume that a color with alpha = 0 is equivalent to all other colors with alpha = 0, even though that doesn't matter the least bit most of the time. To properly support this, Paint.Net would need the ability to edit all four color layers individually like in Gimp... I think that'd be a nice feature. I like your program nevertheless, but this is a situation where you could reduce the need to use more than one program to solve a certain task

Hi. I created a PNG picture with shapes and 100% transparent areas. When loading this in a 3d environment where colors are interpolated I notice black borders around everything. With the color picker I found out that every 100% transparent pixel's color is set to pitch black (and alpha = 0, of course). Is there a way to prevent Paint.NET from using a default color there? This behavior has been criticized in Photoshop already by the official PNG website: Photoshop sets transparent pixels to be white, causing white outlines in 3d environments. This default color also applies to areas I filled with another color whose alpha is zero. *edit: I was just happy to find out that this is possible to do with Gimp. S