bEPIK

Members
  • Content Count

    285
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

772 profile views
  1. Like this? I made this from the flat PNG version of the picture from my previous post. Duplicating the layer, sliding the top one right, colour dodge, another layer glow, flatten, copy, undo, paste, difference, copy layer, colour dodge, flatten, copy, undo, paste, emboss, additive, flatten, copy, undo, paste, flatten, duplicate layer, stretch (vertically and horizontally), slide, difference, copy that layer, normal, lower opacity, copy base layer, stretch, additive. (Or something like that for those interested.)
  2. Hello all, don't mind this post
  3. Oh most definitely haha. I don't think it's a game changer for anyone. I have a feeling that "Cancel" usually has that standard behaviour, but deviates sometimes. I couldn't point to any examples at the moment. I'll concede there's a cost to doing things differently, but there's also a benefit to being clear about what you mean. The Cancel button is already different in Paint.Net than in other applications, so the benefit of being standard is smaller than it would be in another application. And when an extra word provides complete clarity, I think the benefits outweigh the costs in this case. I don't think people are going to read the word "Don't" and fill in the rest of the line themselves. I would be surprised if it confused people more than the current wording.
  4. I really like the UI of buttons having their meaning clear within the button, rather than simply having 'OK' and 'Cancel'. Paint.net is good at this. But I think the current Cancel button still has a semantic issue: Someone could interpret it as "Cancel the image". It's obvious that it doesn't mean that when you read the other buttons, but it's better to have a clear meaning upon reading the button without having to look elsewhere for context. I think it's more like an undo button, and it would be clearer to say 'Don't close'. Let me know what you think. EDIT: updated for clarity.
  5. Hello. I'm Brad. I haven't been on these forums in ages. Being here gives me the same feeling I had when I visited to my old elementary school. Has Ash returned? He was awesome.
  6. I added some new wood and new water I put some tips on how to make them in my tutorial.
  7. Here I took that water image in the above reply, duplicated the layer, repeated the outline effect and then multiplied. Then I copied that layer and stretched it. And then like 20 recursive things. Copy layer, stretch, flatten, copy, unflatten, paste onto new layer, copy that layer, emboss, contrast, et cetera. Also, the soft saturation plugin is your friend. The wood part is possibly untutoriable, but maybe not. Yay or nay?
  8. Step 19. Copy a layer and flip vertically Step 20. Stretch horizontally Step 21. Flatten and Sepia ????? Use stretch repeatedly ????? Do some stuff ????? Flatten, copy layer, emboss, increase contrast of embossed layer, set layer to multiply, flatten, use curves to make image less dark ????? Step 200? Save and wonder what the hell you did. If anyone figures out how to get the timber in the original post, let me know
  9. Well I guess that's better than nothing. Thanks.
  10. I would guess that it's something with the printing margins, which I don't think you can change from paint.net's print dialogue. My workaround is to make a MS Word document with margins set to zero and drag the image into it. When you press print, a box will come up that says Press yes.
  11. The ability to scroll beyond the image is a great feature, but it could be a bit better. Pressing Ctrl+Shift+A twice to recentre would be handy. It would also be nice if there were a shortcut to recentre the image without changing zoom to 100% (Ctrl+Space maybe?). P.S. I know that there's the button in the bottom right corner that you can press twice to recentre.