delpart

@sperber I've been torn on this. I think what you opt to add to the foreground will determine more on which canvas effect fits best. Sharp lines from paint draws would probably show more variation in angle which is the only thing that makes the sharp one not look quite right. Selective blurring using layer spots or as a thing alpha pass addition like around 20-30 may help you determine some of the area as well. It has a wonderful oil on canvas feel either way.

It can work in 90 degree shifts. Since you want to work with a radial repeating image I would suggest using Majik's Kaleidscope to help get the repeating pattern. Make one layer to line things up using the line feature. Below that layer postition the object and use the plugin on that corresponding wedge to repeat it around. The example images from Majik will probably help explain why this will work. There is another version of this with angle controls that may offer a different result as well: Kaleidoscope

You're looking for the dropdown box that will show up when you have the color picker selected called After Click. From the help file/online help @http://www.getpaint.net/doc/latest/Toolbar.html it will look like this next the to Tool menu with the color picker selected. To set this permenantly, use Choose Defaults from the Tool Menu and make sure to save. Color Picker The Color Picker may be configured to switch to the Pencil tool or the previous tool after clicking on a color.

Intel 2.4 gig second gen dual core at 1600 bus speed (800 base dual channel effective rate) to memory for reference point. Bumped into overclock at 3.2 it got worse slightly ... curious. As to the primary/secondary set the same: significant reduction in pattern occurence. Even trying to push it down in scale ... wait, I forgot to test odd size canvas, ... like 8 to 1 ratio. (post paused) Hrm, inconclusive in some ways. Small square has same problem. But again, the black on black using the primary to secondary seems to be working. All examples using 144, black primary and secondary full noise color. Okay at 8 to 1 I can get the results Goon got using primary only (2 examples): 16 to 1 just because I saved it: Small square showing the behavior: And of course the primary to secondary showing this resolves the issue more or less: Hope that helps.

Also, try changing the DPI of your logo before pasting/importing into Word. A 300 DPI image and a 96 DPI image look the same in PDN, but when Word, and others grab it, the actual size of the image is used differently. This will prevent you from having to mess with resizing in Word. Basically the logo needs to be constrained in size to the standard format. Roughly 2 inches tall or if its 300 DPI, 600x600 pixels. @96 DPI, less than 200 pixels square ... Depending on which way you need to go is simply a matter of pasting a copy into the correctly formatted starting image size/DPI. EDIT: Only fair warning here is whether or not Word will play nice with your printer with source image DPI being ignored, etc. In some cases the printer drivers have to be kept in mind and page layout set before you can deterime what DPI you need to aim for to get the fit. I've found this to be less of a problem than some, but this is something that will cause you to lose some hair ... That's about as close of a manip suggestion as I can manage to prevent resizing with tools like Word. No example logo or sizing information given to fully vet what exactly you'd need to do to the image/logo in question here as well. That makes for a lot of guess work.

Less chance of occurrence with the new build. Even the other noise options can generate some lines. This is the nature of the chaos being used from how they function from what I can decipher from the code. Only way to avoid it is to use something else but it would be a huge overkill as you'd essentially be making fractals on some level. I pushed and prodded and couldn't get the same regularity as shown by Goon. Plenty of lined up dots with the old one. Far too many occurrences. Seems resolved on my system. EDIT: (I'm more tired than I think. There is some odd stuff still showing up. See below for screen shot of it.) Of note, mine is a Vista platform. Pretty sure Goon is running Windows 7. Some "lines" showing up ... minor in some ways, but this shows up to one degree or another. Arrows pointing roughly towards the lines not directly on them: Settings used. Mainly toned down to show dots in line clearly that I didn't trust my eyes about: Side thought: Like with the other noise patterns available, the reseed option can be the solution to starring and other pattern problems that can/will occur on dense settings levels. Slamming the sliders though to make sure it's not there every time is the difference really. Though in some ways the tiling effect Goon got is rather neat.

I get it on 800x600 in fast testing just now towards the outer edges both left and right ... Slight, but still distinct enough to see "lines" ... Tried a couple of other sizes but it crashed me at 3000x ... My own fault from the dump on that it seems ... resource issue. Have to pop out, but it does show up to some degree or another with that setting in my fast tests.

The method of showing the glow on the person etc is a nice add for this tut. While this is an old bump, its worth mentioning the other tut from the Wikibook on PDN as it sort of covers the tip in this derivation: Wikibook lightsaber tut

Get Blender. Its free ... and one of the most powerful all around. The orb has a nice highlights. Using Median and and alpha blurring (layered in etc) can create stronger depth with gradient sweeps like this. Most of the kick from S3D is in the edges for what most people consider to be distinct 3D objects. Getting that more distinct edge is often the difference between a radial blur and an orb ... Just thinking out loud. I'm still trying to figure out how to get most gradients to shape but this is one thing that always stands out.

I like the sun flares. Way too many sci-fi books over time and all the art that goes with it. This has the qualities of both rendered and painted space expression without looking "off." Wonderful combo in my book. (Pun intended.) The red banding/density on the stars from the background is also something that is probably helping set the entire tone and blend.

Noise is an important tool as you mentioned in combination with other things. Like median and some other things it doesn't make a lot of sense at first on why you'd do something so chaotic. The extra range should be nice here. Tanel's Grain plugin is my usual goto for the same reasons of control you have listed here when needing this. Thanks again for widening the toolbox.

Rough week(s). Didn't even want to get into how Curves would work, etc. Figured shotgun plugins would cover the bases in case I read that right. Though with Curves you can get a whole different level of control over this sort of thing for what its' worth. Combinations including accent though can help the outcome though WB.

I dont think Color Accent wont do that in the way you're expecting it to. It can wash through the image though. Best bet try Color Tint and Single Hue from Ed Harvey's Effects to just color out the non black areas only or in combination with Color Accent. Single Hue is similar in intensity to that. White Balance can also be used in combination to color in more areas. In case you opt to do extreme blending with it, wash out the black even to blue hues with the Cyanotype, Monochrome InK, or Duotone filter passes from Kris's pack.

Came, saw, experienced, wasn't sure what to say. Your style and always makes me ponder. Powerful BBShepard is ... Chruchmouse worked wonders on the glassy illusion ...

Well, how about one out of two wishes granted? While you do have to setup the font, color, and size first, you can copy and paste text. Start the position of the text with the text tool. Paste text. It will take most character returns. I've primarily used it with Notepad and Notepad+ but it will take text from pretty much anywhere. Example snippet showing notepad line return top and manually cut up sentence below: Had one thing I wanted justified for. Cheated and used a screen shot from Word instead. Not a fun workaround per se, but can be used in a pinch. Especially since PDN just converts to image anyways.

And while I know its covered in the topic EER has posted, I'll be more clear this time ... Direct link for download: http://www.dotpdn.com/files/Paint.NET.3.5.10.Install.zip

Yeah, highlight, copy, paste is much harder than typing out that entire sentence ... I think the word you were looking for was egotistic or pretentious.

File is clean. False warning ... If you are using Internet Explorer, this is the message you'll get for any .dll and a number of other file types to prevent people from doing things they shouldn't, prevent hackers from doing various things, etc. In this case, it's not actually evaluating the file in any way, just looking at the .dll extension and throwing out this "warning." ... Just ignore (on some levels) when its from a trusted source. As always though, practice due diligence on any file you grab with basic virus scan checks and site reporting, etc. Evan's effects code is clean, etc for a short version, just select Run Anyway to make the crazy warning go away or View Downloads so you can move it if you didn't download it directly to your effects folder for ease of use.

I'm torn between thinking fair troll or just plain confused here. Sadly, I dont want to believe you're a troll. Merely confused on how to use things. But the tone, insults, etc all come across as troll. However, perhaps you should re-read this part of the documentation on how PDN works. Then revisit those tutorials and how to blend layers together to have images with areas of transparency (as shown by that checkboard) will indeed blend together. From the help for PDN on layers @ http://www.getpaint....WithLayers.html : Pixels and Transparency Every layer in Paint.NET is composed of pixels which contain a color and an alpha, or opacity value. This alpha value may range from 0 (completely transparent) to 255 (completely opaque). (Other software may refer to this as ranging from 0% to 100%.) If a pixel is transparent, then pixels from the layers below will show through. Paint.NET uses a technique called alpha compositing to be able to display a layered image on a standard computer monitor. However, transparent pixels cannot be displayed on a computer monitor. In order to simulate this Paint.NET uses a checkerboard pattern, which looks like this: Transparency If you see this then it means that part of your image is transparent -- the checkerboard pattern is not actually part of the image. If you save the image and then view or load it with other software then the checkerboard pattern will not be there (unless that other software also uses a checkerboard pattern to simulate transparency). In the following example, the background has been removed from the apple. When placed on another layer you can see the checkerboard represents the transparent area where lower layers show through: Example <-- Background removed, represented by checkerboard pattern <-- Apple placed on background image of Seattle

Fiddlesticks ... "Sorry, that page was not found." -- google/picassa page result for the link mate.

Without logging into Facebook, or needing Facebook ... or mainly, not wanting to be anywhere near Facebook .... (sigh). Thankfully Google seems to show pics people have made. So basically we'd be creating headers or Banners for a webpage? This could be adaptable for Wordpress and other more useful things than just Facebook. So would this be themed or just open ended comp more or less? Just discussing. My other idea is a little hokey I'll admit. On that note the docking area concept can be used for building websites or a good exercise in framing some things for a website, etc. I think I forgot to mention that aspect. I tend to get rather focused at times. And welcome back. Hope all is well.

You're most welcome and thank you for posting the question. I'm still trying to learn and digging into some of these questions has been as much help as tutorials in refining my own use of PDN. So it's really a win-win.

In many ways there are a lot of things a bot can help with ... in this case I dont think this is a language barrier issue at all, but a simple bot that helped us out. Upswing is that you opted to use it's response in a great way to add more depth to the base texture concept. Found it odd just now that there wasn't more actual texture variations on the basic marble patterns (PDN google based results). Lots of examples here and there, but I guess that's the PDN numbers game on some levels. I would suggest looking into adding splinter blur and cloud deformation of set line patterns as a blurring method to control the outcome and offer blending layers to create larger chaos from this. Agreed, the idea is to set the mind in motion on the tutorials, but often a few more variations and examples can be helpful. I've found the old cloud's ability to leave alpha and other transparency "zones" in can be helpful when trying to get the multicolor blends. Harder to use the old one but it offers some different controls on morphing an image using this noise approach. Just food for thought and thanks for making a workable tutorial and the willingness to modify it.

Hex grid is most frustrating to do something like this with ... those off angles never work out right to merge the gaps using something like Median. So my first question is, how do you feel about little white dots or possibly switching to a standard grid? Probably not, so I beat myself up a little trying to figure out if median will work. There may be some other way, but I dont know of it. Maybe someone else has a better idea but here's what I was thinking: You can basically draw a 2 pixel width grid with standard squares in black. Fill in your areas. Then use white (or whatever color you want your background as long as it doesn't match anything in the grid more or less) to erase the grid to wipe it clear. Then use median on 1, percentile 0 to fill in the gaps of the squares more or less ... It can be more but you start to get overlap then. Example of what that can wind up looking like: But this is squares and you said hex ... The same thing can more or less be done with hex grid. Draw black, the wipe it with white then median to fill the gaps. Only problem is the lines drawn, even with AA have flaws and are never really the same two passes in a row. The AA looks solid, but zoom in and you'll see how random the grey fill dots are. What you tend to see trying to keep the hex shape when using median is a few 1 pixel or half pixel shading points in between. Though if you work at say 4 times larger than needed and reduce the final to 25% of that, it will get rid of most of them. Especially with a slight Gaussian blur set really low. Though this causes some distortion and may or may not accent a white dot or such ... No setting recommendations on the hexgrid other than small as possible while getting the paint bucket to still work without bleeding into the next hex over. At 1 with no AA this will happen. At 2 with AA on you usually wont see it happen, but you get more artifacts. At 2 without AA you most likely wont have a problem, but the artifacts look bigger than they are ... Removing the background and then using other blurring or clean-up may work like AA assistant, but I dont have enough patience tonight to keep trying different levels here to see how far you could take the clean-up. Problem again is the over-write of the black lines. More than likely you will have to use a 4 pixel width grid to write over the top of even a non AA 2 width grid. Hence the gap issues. Example of the dots you may see and other issues with using the median approach to wipe the grid -- Base w/ 2pixel AA grid and some color spots. Black on white: Grid removed using 4 pixel white hexgrid: Median at 2,0: Median then reduced 50%: Median then reduced 25%: Okay, hope that helps some. And welcome to the forum.