MJW

That's pretty old, but it still had 336 shaders and 1 GB of graphics memory. I was particularly wondering about systems using integrated graphics, rather than a card, and shared graphics memory. I suppose the Core i5-6260U w/ Intel Iris Plus fits into that category. I very much appreciate the information.

I look forward to that. I yearn for an "Idiot's Guide to GPU Shading." So far I really don't have a clue about what GPU shaders can do, or how to do whatever it is they can do. I'm somewhat aware of some of those built-in Adjustment-type things (like changing the contrast) which honestly don't hold much interest for me. EDIT: There is one possible objection, which I've kept to myself, but will mention. Will the use of GPU shading for so many built-in Effects and plugins essentially make PDN worthless without hardware acceleration; and perhaps without sufficient hardware acceleration? Will PDN run super-fast for those with gaming systems, but dog slow for everyone with older or low-end systems?

But can't a plugin that doesn't use IndirectUI do that? If so, it's an omission from IndirectUI, not from the plugin system; and how much consistency is gained by that? I somewhat sympathize with the WYSIWYG objective, but I think there are some plugins where considerably more is gained than is lost by allowing it. BoltBait's Horizon plugin and my Texture Merger plugin being particular examples. Anyone writing a plugin that used the feature without clearly revealing it in the UI would be a fool. For instance, I'd add a checkbox control to Texture Merger saying something like "Disable Shading for Final Image."

Thanks, Pixey! Glad to know I'm not becoming crazier than I already am. (Or at least this isn't evidence of it.)

Unfortunately, the answer is still no, despite the lobbying for it by @BoltBait and me. (I believe this question belongs in Plugin Developer Central.) EDIT: Hmm, did this get moved or was I mistaken about which forum it was posted in? In any event, it's where it belongs.

If the 3D look is due to directional light shading, you can turn that off and only use flat shading. Under Lighting, uncheck ON. You can also change the amount of perspective by changing the Camera Angle under Projection.

I wouldn't know about that, since it's never, ever happened to me.

That would be very nice, too; though I think there's a distinction, since those can change what the Effect does, while panning and zooming only changes what's displayed.

A very useful feature would be the ability to use the canvas pan and zoom controls while an Effect is active. Quite often, I wish I could move around an image to look more closely at the results of running an Effect before exiting. I suspect this would be prohibitively difficult to implement, since it seems like it requires the Effect be run as something between a modal and a modeless window. However, it it were possible to do, it would certainly be handy.

Congratulations to @lynxster4 and @Pixey for their excellent work! I'm somewhat surprised lynxster4's second entry didn't get more votes; it's my favorite. Something about the view angle and rendering gives it a particularly solid and realistic look. Sorry there was no entry from me. I've been far too lazy and unproductive of late.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any way to do what you want. It would be a pretty neat plugin, but one I don't believe anyone has written. The closest thing I can think of is pyrochild's Grid Warp. I doubt, though, that the types of curves it can produce are general enough for what you have in mind.

I suggest starting a new thread for your question. As you mention, this thread is ancient, and besides, doesn't seem to be all that closely related yo your question. EDIT: As too often happens, I should have read your post more closely. I see now that you are proposing a method, not asking a question. (Nevertheless, I'm still not sure it's all that related to the original question posed in this thread.)

Perhaps what you want is the Color Clearer with the Color to Make Transparent set to black. The default is the Primary Color. If Color to Make Transparent's isn't already black, it can easily be made black by moving the the Value color slider to the bottom of its range. EDIT: I'll add that other similar plugins, such as Reverse Blend and Make Transparent, will likely also work. Though I take pride in the fact that Color Clearer is the most precise at removing all the specified color, black is an easy case, and I expect all the similar plugins will work about the same. So is you already have one of those plugins, you don't need to install another.

I seem to have gotten my Wacom CTE 630BT tablet to work under Windows 11; though I can't yet say whether all the features, including pressure sensitivity,fully function. At least it's not always in mouse mode (i.e., relative instead of absolute positioning), which is what happened last time, when I tried to install it under Windows 10. To install it, I just downloaded the latest available driver from Wacom, which was for Windows 7. I then right clicked on the .exe file I'd downloaded, and selected (among the "more options") "Troubleshoot Compatibility." One of the options I was offered was to use the recommended settings. When I used them, it chose Windows 7, which makes sense. I then just ran the .exe file. Though it seems odd to me that choosing how to run the installation program would determine how the driver, itself, runs, that's what Microsoft said to do, and so far it appears to work. For some reason the tablet preference menu didn't initially recognize a compatible tablet was connected, but a minute or so later it did. I'm not sure what if anything I did to change that.

I haven't tried it, but I came upon a site that has open-source drivers for old tablets: https://opentabletdriver.net/

In the unlikely event I can get any of my old tablets to work on Windows 11, I'll be sure to post instructions on how I did it.

I don't think I should have to spend a bunch of money when I've already got several perfectly good 8" x 6" tablets, with modern interfaces (USB and Bluetooth).

I wish it were, but I doubt it. It's just too old, and no longer supported by Wacom. I had a driver that worked for XP and, I believe, Windows 7, but when Windows 10 came out I couldn't find one that worked. The Wacom website was of no help (other than to generously suggest I buy a brand new Wacom tablet). However, because Paint.NET didn't support pressure-sensitivity, and I wasn't using any other applications that would benefit much, I didn't really try especially hard. It's possible there's someway to use a compatibility mode. I know little about that sort of thing, but I vaguely recall it being mentioned in a discussion of the tablet. (I actually have four -- count 'em, four -- Wacom tablets that are likely in the same obsolete boat: a CTE 630, a CTE 630BT, an Intuos 2, and a Graphire 4.)

I suppose this means I'll have to see if I can find a driver for my somewhat ancient Wacom tablet that works on Windows 11.

Another approach, at least for the fabric, might be to do something like a method I used to create a cloth texture with the Texture Shader. The task of creating a cloth-like patch is consists several problems. There's the general fabric texture, the texture for the edge stitching, and the texture for the lettering. The edge and letter stitching is pretty tricky, since the stitches should be approximately perpendicular to the line direction. I can't think of any way to do that.

I'd like to credit @AndrewDavid's post as the solution (which I should have done when it was first posted), but can't figure out how to do so. Is it too late?

What may save some work is: Save the current version of the image. Undo until the specified layer is in the state you want. Load the saved version. Copy the layer from the Undone version and paste it into the same layer of the saved version.

The most obvious choice is dpy's Rotate Text. I believe this will likely give better results than typing in horizontal text, then rotating it. Rotating thin lines tends to result in aliasing (jagginess) or blurring

That was also my interpretation.

I assume the comment refers to the line Style for the ends when using Line/Curve. Unfortunately, I don't think there are any options for arrows besides filled or non-filled. In my opinion, the filled one has about the right proportions, but the non-filled one does look a bit stubby, at least for some uses. The possibilities may be limited by some underlying API, such as GDI+ or DirectX, though I certainly don't know if that's the case.