Defining "Made with Paint.NET"

[Pride]

Would you guys consider an image 'made with Paint.NET' if I made the images with Adobe Illustrator, then using the images from Illustrator to put together an artwork in Paint.NET?

Simplified:

Make images with illustrator.

Use images from illustrator to make an artwork.

Is it still considered "made with Paint.NET"?

[Mike Ryan]

It really, truly depends. I think that if 70-100% of the image is created or edited in Paint.NET then yes, you can give it that tag. Anything below it deserves the Edited in Paint.NET tagline. For instance, my signature is comparison to the stock is very, very different. Not only have I added portions of Paint.NET created imagery, but because the focus of the signature is a stock it really can only be said to have been Edited in Paint.NET.

However, it is with in the artists call and self conscious to determine on whether he or she created the piece using which tool. If you are having to ask us, then no, it wasn't made in Paint.NET. I really hope this brings some clarification to your decision regarding your artwork. Hopefully a tag maker, such as tHs, posts his opinion.

[Pride]

So I could define it as "Edited and Executed with Paint.NET | Images made with Illustrator"..

Thanks for ze opinion.

[Mike Ryan]

So I could define it as "Edited and Executed with Paint.NET | Images made with Illustrator"...

Precisely.

[Simon Brown]

Do you know what license the "made with Paint.NET" logo on the downloads page is licensed under?

[Mike Ryan]

"This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License. Permission is granted to use the logo and icon artwork in ways that discuss or promote Paint.NET (e.g. blog and news posts about Paint.NET, "Made with Paint.NET" watermarks or insets)."