bEPIK

I seem to recall this being a temporary work-around: Copy the image Paste the image to Microsoft Word first Copy from Microsoft Word Paste into paint.net I think this works, but if it doesn’t, try pasting to a different program in Step 2.

Ah that's much better. Thanks. I didn't think my suggestion through properly anyway: It would only work for circles, not ellipses in general. But there may be a few ways to make the suggestion sensible. For example, rather than the first click defining the bounding box, you could have it define the point on the ellipse's circumference that's in the centre of the ellipse's leftmost point and the uppermost point (assuming your click-and-drag line goes down and to the right).

Thanks again Rick for your great work. I have a problem that I regularly face. If I'm trying to select a person's head, I naturally start the click-and-drag on the edge of their head. The current way to draw an ellipse is to define the bounding box: The current method requires me to use the Move Selection tool to select the person's head. For me, a more natural way is the following (defining the centre of circle to be the middle of the click-and-drag line, and the diameter of the circle to be the length of that line): I suppose the same goes for a few other tools (maybe even all of select/draw tools for consistency's sake). What are everyone's thoughts?

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.)

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.

I know; I'm amazing.

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.

LOL nice work

I added some new wood and new water I put some tips on how to make them in my tutorial.

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?

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

Well I guess that's better than nothing. Thanks.

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.

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.

+1 for the grey background. Wasn't there a thing that happened ages ago and everybody agreed grey was the right colour for a background? I remember something about a rude women, it's kinda fuzzy though. Then again, maybe I'm crazy. Anything other than a grey background messes with your colour perception. Like viewing stuff through red tint and still being able to tell if something is green (even though objectively it's red). Anyway, I don't know when it happened, but semi-transparent brushes now work perfectly. Thanks, Rick. Edit: Turns out I am not crazy: http://blog.getpaint.net/2008/07/10/paintnet-335-ugly-canvas-background/

I hate having lame covers in my digital music collection so sometimes I edit them. edited from

Hey Rick. I've got a weird thing going on where I duplicate a layer and then merge down and then I undo it and the top layer (the duplicated layer) has changed from "Normal" to "Xor". It's only with this one image though. Now the program has crashed--but it hasn't crashed. I clicked "restart paint.net" and then I went back to working on my image as if nothing had happened. Here's what was in my crash log folder (I'm not sure why there were three): http://pastebin.com/1gXZyisp http://pastebin.com/uUSR277S http://pastebin.com/8wCHhfEq Also, when I try to say this image as a JPEG, it saves in black and white. Okay, enough whinging. The speed of complex selections is sssoooooo much better in pdn4 and I really like the direction you're taking with the new UI.

Make sure the height is 86.6% of the width*. Rick, I came across a bug with the shapes tool (triangle): http://min.us/lbfGCL9OhwLq8h I drew a triangle on a zoomed out canvas (1100x1100px) while holding down shift. I set the shape to 1001x1001, then when I resized only the vertical size, the horizontal size dropped by 1 pixel. I tried this on a canvas when zoomed to 100% but the error didn't occur. The same error happened with a square, as in the above image. *Here's the maths if you want to double check cos(90-60)=h/w h=w*cos(90-60) h=0.8660*w

I've only found one bug so far: drawing on an invisible layer causes 128x128px blocks to appear and you can see what you're drawing. It doesn't cause any trouble, but it is a bit odd.

Let's say you're working on "Original.pdn". You save a JPEG version of it as "copy.jpg". "Original.pdn" closes and is "replaced" (for lack of a better word) by "copy.jpg". In other words, the file he's working on has changed from a PDN to a JPEG. He would like to save the JPEG copy while still working on the PDN version.

When I turn a layer back on (and the mouse is hovering over that layer) I often mix up which layer is on because the colours are too similar. I can tell when I focus on it or if I pull the mouse away (though by that time I'm usually concentrating on the canvas), but it makes me mess up a lot. Does anybody else start working on the wrong layer because of this?

Look under Effects>Blur>Surface Blur

Effects>Color is a menu Ed Harvey added in for his effect pack. As for moving the adjustments into submenus, think they'd all fit under Color so it wouldn't help organize it. I see. But I don't think this distinction warrants their separation. If it did, why not put Effects>Render in it's own menu? Adjustments and Effects are certainly closer together than Effects and Renders. Also, what do you think about Ed and his Color menu? To repeat pdnnoob, wouldn't they fit under Adjustments? Should Adjustments being renamed Color?