jerry533482 Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Hey, this may sound weird, but I've recently been following some tutorials and they frequently ask to run Gaussian blur on individual layers. Is it possible to implement a control on the layer properties box that allows you to blur the selected layer without affecting the others? Perhaps this could be implemented in a future release? Quote Space...The Final Frontier. -James Tiberius Kirk; circa 2260s My gallery: Jerry's Paint.NET creations My tuts: sun galaxy rings My youtube: http://www.youtube.com/jerry533482 YLOD VICTIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leif Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 :?: Blur ONLY works on the selected layer. (And selected area.) I think that goes for anything else, exert resizing. Quote My DA: http://leif-j.deviantart.com/ -------------- Some people seek justice so persistent, that they will do great injustice themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry533482 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Yes, but what if the blur could be adjusted on-the-fly without stepping back in history; like the opacity bar? That would help if you messed up a blur a couple steps back. Quote Space...The Final Frontier. -James Tiberius Kirk; circa 2260s My gallery: Jerry's Paint.NET creations My tuts: sun galaxy rings My youtube: http://www.youtube.com/jerry533482 YLOD VICTIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brewster Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 What you're asking for is non-destructive editing, similar to Photoshop's "smart filters". This is not currently possible in Paint.NET; it would be performance-prohibitive to implement. It would be extremely slow without GPU assistance or something. Quote The Paint.NET Blog: https://blog.getpaint.net/ Donations are always appreciated! https://www.getpaint.net/donate.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oma Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Yes, but what if the blur could be adjusted on-the-fly without stepping back in history; like the opacity bar? That would help if you messed up a blur a couple steps back. since I use blur all the time, let me clue you in on a secret. It gets easier with practice. and you make less errors several layers back if you make a duplicate layer uncheck one of the layers and then blur. you can always just go back and swap out the bad blur layer. longer process but gives better results. also I've been known to use a transparent gradiant on one of the blurs if its way to pronounced. there are work arounds. but as always the best pictures and best control comes with practise practise practise. :wink: Quote  My Deviant Art Gallery Oma's Paint.Net gallery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry533482 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Assuming that non-destructive editing was a feature, what would the system requirements be? Quote Space...The Final Frontier. -James Tiberius Kirk; circa 2260s My gallery: Jerry's Paint.NET creations My tuts: sun galaxy rings My youtube: http://www.youtube.com/jerry533482 YLOD VICTIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Brown Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Edit: I forgot about history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brewster Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Assuming that non-destructive editing was a feature, what would the system requirements be? The feature is lame unless it rerenderd in real time. Photoshop has strong restrictions on the feature and is definitely not real-time. For the functionality that I'd want, it would require GPU acceleration. Otherwise you'd be looking at needing a 16-core 3.0Ghz monster. Otherwise things like Gaussian Blur, distortion, etc would just be too slow (in general). Adjustments, on the other hand, are much cheaper and could be done in the current footprint. Quote The Paint.NET Blog: https://blog.getpaint.net/ Donations are always appreciated! https://www.getpaint.net/donate.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry533482 Posted February 9, 2010 Author Share Posted February 9, 2010 In terms of future planning, what if a + version of Paint.NET (that was still free) was made that took advantage of high-end GPUs to increase performance? Not necessarily implementing the layer feature request I mentioned above, but in general, wouldn't a GPU-assisted version be much faster? Gamers with the latest machines would probably find this interesting. Quote Space...The Final Frontier. -James Tiberius Kirk; circa 2260s My gallery: Jerry's Paint.NET creations My tuts: sun galaxy rings My youtube: http://www.youtube.com/jerry533482 YLOD VICTIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sozo Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Indeed I would, but such an idea would hinge on Rick's willingness to develop and maintain a separate version of Paint.NET. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry533482 Posted February 10, 2010 Author Share Posted February 10, 2010 What if some other forum members were willing to help with such a project? And doesn't Rick already have some help with writing Paint.NET? This isn't a one-man-deal; Paint.NET has become a very complex program and development will take forever if Rick does it himself (not to mention the stress involved). I'll admit, Rick is the brilliant mastermind behind Paint.NET, but everybody needs help sometimes. Quote Space...The Final Frontier. -James Tiberius Kirk; circa 2260s My gallery: Jerry's Paint.NET creations My tuts: sun galaxy rings My youtube: http://www.youtube.com/jerry533482 YLOD VICTIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ego Eram Reputo Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 I doubt Rick is going to be enthusiastic about developing a parallel project as you suggest. Nor do I think he would smile on the idea of a collaborative approach. Paint.Net is what it is due to Rick. Let's learn to love it as-is. Quote ebook: Mastering Paint.NET | resources: Plugin Index | Stereogram Tut | proud supporter of Codelab plugins: EER's Plugin Pack | Planetoid | StickMan | WhichSymbol+ | Dr Scott's Markup Renderer | CSV Filetype | dwarf horde plugins: Plugin Browser | ShapeMaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry533482 Posted February 10, 2010 Author Share Posted February 10, 2010 All I'm saying is, when you have a forum for your program with a couple thousand members, development can put you under a lot of pressure; and bog you down (not to mention when you're working with over 100,000 finely crafted lines of code). Especially if it's a project done in your spare time. All I'm saying is a collaborative approach might be more efficient. But still Rick, Thanks for Paint.NET. Quote Space...The Final Frontier. -James Tiberius Kirk; circa 2260s My gallery: Jerry's Paint.NET creations My tuts: sun galaxy rings My youtube: http://www.youtube.com/jerry533482 YLOD VICTIM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.