Sign in to follow this  
pyrochild

Smudge

Recommended Posts

The next version of Smudge is nearing completion! (At the expense of my AP Art History grade...)

:) ! ( :( ...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The next version of Smudge is nearing completion! (At the expense of my AP Art History grade...)

Thats fantastic news! But, you shouldn't give up your AP Art History grade. I suggest you get that grade then complete the next version of smudge (even though i can't wait until smudge with alpha!). :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is alpha smudging the only new update (that makes it sound like nothing :oops: )?

Nothing?! Have you seen some of the bloody potato this plugin spits out when used with transparency? It's quite hideous, really.

But no, there are dozens of changes both to the user interface and under the hood. Alpha is definitely the big one, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats fantastic news! But, you shouldn't give up your AP Art History grade. I suggest you get that grade then complete the next version of smudge (even though i can't wait until smudge with alpha!). :)

That's not a class I need to pass; since it's an AP class, the only thing that really matters is the score on the AP exam at the end of the year. Everything else is just the same old busy-work that is so deeply ingrained into the public education system. And my physics and calculus grades easily make up for the GPA hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like this:

It started out as a pink square and a black square on a transparent background. After smudging, this. Where did the white come from? Why is black smudging in from a transparent area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is alpha smudging the only new update (that makes it sound like nothing :oops: )?

Nothing?! Have you seen some of the bloody potato this plugin spits out when used with transparency? It's quite hideous, really.

Yes, I've seen :P. I meant that the way I had said it, it sounded as if I was belittling it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is certainly neat to try, but the performance is ridiculous. You have to sit and wait each time you click for it to show up. GIMP seems to do this effortlessly and instantaneously.

Is there any way to make future versions perform more appropriately?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not dual core, unfortunately. It's 1.6GHz processor, Nvidia 6200 and 1GB memory. Certainly not a fast computer, no doubt.

However, GIMP somehow performs smudge with more detail and more options quite effortlessly which is strange for it being ported to win32 on GTK. You would think that GIMP would be slower for this.

Paint.NET being native win32, I would assume it would make use of DirectX for these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is certainly neat to try, but the performance is ridiculous. You have to sit and wait each time you click for it to show up. GIMP seems to do this effortlessly and instantaneously.

Is there any way to make future versions perform more appropriately?

I'm installing GIMP right now for testing, but in my experience the render quality is not as good in GIMP, and Photoshop is ridiculously slow. Also, make sure your brush size settings are comparable. Keep in mind the difference between diameter and radius.

LATER: Yep, I just tested in GIMP. You can clearly see banding in the smudge once you start using brush sizes above like 8.

It's not dual core, unfortunately. It's 1.6GHz processor.

Is it a Pentium 4? My Smudge algorithm is especially slow on P4s compared to AMD or other single-core processors with similar performance. The next version will reduce this p4-penalty, but it will still be like swimming in molasses when compared to any multi-core processor.

However, GIMP somehow performs smudge with more detail and more options quite effortlessly which is strange for it being ported to win32 on GTK. You would think that GIMP would be slower for this.
GTK is an interface toolkit - it's responsible for handling the differences between buttons and windows on Linux versus buttons and windows on Windows. It has nothing to do with the data-processing, which will be compiled to native code on each platform it is compiled on.
Paint.NET being native win32, I would assume it would make use of DirectX for these things.

Paint.NET is not native - it's .NET. It runs in a virtual machine.

DirectX has nothing to do with graphics processing in the sense of image editors. Its job is to interface with the graphics card as fast as possible so that the card may do what it's designed for - rendering 2D and 3D images to the screen as fast as possible, with it being perfectly acceptable to sacrifice accuracy for speed. 2D-Graphics editing programs such as Photoshop, GIMP, and Paint.NET are designed for something completely different and use the CPU, not the GPU for all of their work. Although it would be technically possible to use DirectX for it, it would be extremely painful for the programmer, and probably quite a bit slower. This would be akin to using a hammer to drive screws.

I highly recommend upgrading to a dual-or-more-core processor. Not only will Smudge and most other graphics-editing tasks be orders of magnitude faster, but anything else you do on your computer will be faster too. You'll be able to run more programs at once without any of them slowing down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pyrochild,

Thank you so much for taking your time to write all of that and going into detail about each thing. I really do appreciate that. My first post in this topic probably even seemed a little on the negative side with very little substance to it, and yet you took your time to answer me professionally and respectfully. And that, I most definitely appreciate. Thank you.

Anyways, the processor is just a 1.6GHz Celeron, not even dual core. I built this PC a few years back, trying to go as cheap as possible. Although it's got a really decent, fast motherboard that can support a quad core, somehow I decided to slap a Celeron into it. What was I thinking. I'm going to look into picking up a dual core soon because they are incredibly affordable now and would probably show a significant performance increase with my whole disk encryption as well.

You proved me wrong on all of my points and taught me a few things as well. What do I know, I'm just a computer security guy that wishes he could be a graphic designed. But unfortunately, I haven't much creativity for design thus far.

Thank you for being the good person that you are and thanks for creating great plugins and for sharing them with others, of course.

Cheers,

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You proved me wrong on all of my points and taught me a few things as well. What do I know, I'm just a computer security guy that wishes he could be a graphic designed. But unfortunately, I haven't much creativity for design thus far.
Everyone has their area of expertise, but it's cool that you're getting into graphics design :D
Thank you for being the good person that you are and thanks for creating great plugins and for sharing them with others, of course.
I just like programming. Haha.

To be honest, your complaints of the performance versus GIMP's smudge tool gave me an idea for the next version of mine. I now want to include a quality setting so that people with slower computers will be able to sacrifice some of the render quality in order to maintain a responsive interaction with the program, if they so choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paint.NET is not native - it's .NET. It runs in a virtual machine.

Actually, .NET doesn't use a virtual machine. Go here, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx , and search for things like JIT and NGEN.

Since Paint.NET use NGEN at install-time ("Optimizing performance..."), it doesn't have to do any of the JIT compilation and so the whole thing is mapped straight into memory and executed exactly like a native program. (Well "exactly like" is a bit of a simplification...)

DirectX has nothing to do with graphics processing in the sense of image editors.

Tell that to the Photoshop CS4 guys :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirectX has nothing to do with graphics processing in the sense of image editors.

Tell that to the Photoshop CS4 guys :)

And maybe PDN4 ?? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. PDN4 will not be GPU-accelerated.

????

For CS4, Adobe rewrote their entire rendering pipeline to be GPU accelerated (afaik/iirc). Go check out their website and demos, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this