Customize Menus, Plugin Manager, Different Free-form select, Text selection Mask tool, more.

[MrPioe]

My thoughts are that it would be nice to be able to add new menus to menu bar

a Customize feature that would allow the user to place add-on pluggins such as printer+ in the File Menu, to create New Menus such as a menu in which sub menus can be created and the user can move effect and other functions into these menus, or create additional shortcuts in these sections, also be-able to delete effect and adjustment related files from within a plug-in customize mode feature, also install in new effect/adjustment/etc dll's from inside the program or disable/enable them. auto detection of multiple copies of dll's, and scan for most up to date, with user prompt to delete older or not ask again.

also a text selection mask type text would be a very big benefit

 

and a selection tool similar to the Free-Form Selection tool from MS-Paint where you click in the next point you want the selection to continue to, then close with a CTRL left click or so... as without a USB Pen or Stylus device it is very difficult to do a perfect selection...

 

ability to add custom windows into "windows" menu, i.e. alternate Palettes, Alternate Tool Sets, enhanced Layers window that switches to an  Animations style display for gif and agif, etc, switches to an animated cursor, or animated icon display with play and frame as layer select, as for icon and alike, allowing different icons to be displayed in the layer list in correct size instead of all layers being same size, and all icon layers being listed by colr bit and size, etc...

 

ability to extract, modify or implant icons into dlls and executables

create or load ICL(icon libraries), create icon dlls...

 

Page preview with adjustable margin control, better ability to show true picture size when printed(reguardless of dpi) or to allow scaling, ability to print with the included print support recognition of your printer aswell as other built in print modes not provided by your printer software

 

GPU & CPU + full multi-threaded/multicore utilization and Combined processing for large size images and layers and possible resort to pagefile usage as additional last resort.

 

 

these are some ideas, if you like, then take 'em and run with 'em, but do let me know, as it would be a great benefit

Edited March 28, 2013 by MrPioe

[pdnnoob]

GPU & CPU + full multi-threaded/multicore utilization and Combined processing for large size images and layers and possible resort to pagefile usage as additional last resort

If I'm not mistaken, paint.net is already heavily multi-threaded.

[SAND33P]

Being able to customise your UI would be a massive +1 i think, Shifting things around to create your own experience would be a huge feature i think. Obviously it all depends on how things are made allready

There was a plugin manager, but it wasn't allowed i think, so all download links were removed..

Edited April 8, 2013 by SAND33P

[MrPioe]

If I'm not mistaken, paint.net is already heavily multi-threaded.

I wasrefering to defining Processor Affinity, aswell as GPU Affinity, and when to kick them into gear, in example, if you are working on a 16+ megapixel image and rendering an effect or pluggin, to then seek not only the affinity of all 8 cores of an 8 core system, but to also allow overflow to specific setting onto GPU such as set high priority on CPU and set above normal or hgh for GPU and set affinity of GPU cores and for all these setting also allow for max percentage use of specific cores for GPU and CPU, or CPU and GPU seperate, aswell as allowing priority change during certain functions,

example of use

 

______________________________________________________________

Easy Mode

 

Add a check box to each settings list listed bellow for functions: Use All But One CPU, Do Not Use GPU for Processing, Use All But One GPU for Processing (if previous listed option is not checked),

 

 

Under Normal use

CPU-All: Priority=Default(Normal); Max Load Percentage=**%

GPU-All: Default

 

Under Heavy Use

CPU-All: Priority=Above Normal; Max Load Percentage=**%

GPU-All: Priority=Above Normal; Max Load Percentage=**%

 

Under Extreme Use

CPU-All: Priority=High; Max Load Percentage=**%

GPU-All: Priority=High; Max Load Percentage=**%

______________________________________________________________________

Advanced Mode

------------------------------------------

Under Normal use

Set Core(s):

CPU1: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=**%

CPU2: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=**%

CPU3: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=**%

CPU4: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=**%

CPU5: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=**%

CPU6: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=**%

CPU7: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=**%

CPU8: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

GPU1: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=50%

GPU2: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

------------------------------------

Under Heavy Use

User Set as above

------------------------------------

Under Extreme Use

User Set as above

 

Add Custum Entry Setting

Example

Minimalist Mode

CPU1: Affinity=On(Use);  Priority=Normal;  Max Load=100%

CPU2: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

CPU3: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

CPU4: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

CPU5: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

CPU6: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

CPU7: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

CPU8: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

GPU1: Affinity=Default(Program Managed);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

GPU2: Affinity=Off(Do Not Use);  Priority=N/A;  Max Load=N/A

_________________________________________________________________

Other Info about this Idea

-------------------------------------------

automatically raise mode in Easy Mode, with a check box to enable manual change(would be opposite in Advanced Mode)

The above mentioned check box would be connected(depending on settings)to an up and down arrow on the quick function buttons menu on the GUI, or a drop down menu

 

 

That is the Gist of that Idea

Edited May 7, 2013 by MrPioe

[MrPioe]

Being able to customise your UI would be a massive +1 i think, Shifting things around to create your own experience would be a huge feature i think. Obviously it all depends on how things are made allready

There was a plugin manager, but it wasn't allowed i think, so all download links were removed..

If They created A seperated mini-program to reset the GUI to default, and place the shortcut in the program directory

[Rick Brewster]

Umm yeah I'm definitely not implementing that.

[MrPioe]

Umm yeah I'm definitely not implementing that.

It would be helpful for people with knowledge base of pc structure as builders, repair Techs and power users who have little money and like the program you have written, I appreciate the direct response, however it could be a use at your own risk funtion

and I would like to enquire as to why you wouldn't implement these functions where as a simple warning before allowing access to those functions lettting the user know that improper use of these functions could cause system/program stability or overall performance issues, and that using these functions is not recomended or supported by the Author and Developer and any use of this function would be at the users risk.

 

this function was not meant to be a plug-in

[MrPioe]

Umm yeah I'm definitely not implementing that.

also under extreme use where it said user set as above, what I was saying was, to have default settings set first and any modifications from there would have to be done by user.

is the reason for the complete disregard for this because you think it is a stupid idea, a bad idea, you don't wish to reprogram it into your programs core, or what, at least being able to customize cpu core# affinity would be great

[MrPioe]

Umm yeah I'm definitely not implementing that.

Also if you would review the main ideas of the original post, and give some feed back it would be a plus

[MrPioe]

Also the current selection tool slows all systems even x64 8-core@3.2 w/12gb 1600 Ram, 2 pci express 16x sli 1gb, once you begin to get really far into selection it can slow it on an x86 the same as an x64, and i am running 7 Pro, win sub scores

CPU Calc 7.6,

Ram Calc. 7.8,

Graphics 7.0,

Gaming Graphics 7.0,

HDD 5.9

 

in major selections the selection tool cannot even keep up with the mouse on x86 let alone x64, other than that Overall I have very little issues with the program, and think it was very well done... especially the effect and plug-in adding ability being so easy, however I do feel that it would be better if there was also an advanced stting that allowed you to move and directly import the effects and other plug-ins as well as allow for better placement and addition of custom icons when the plug-in has no icon

Edited May 9, 2013 by MrPioe

[Rick Brewster]

What you're asking for is a HUGE amount of work from me that would benefit a tiny fraction of Paint.NET users. 

 

 

Add a check box to each settings list listed bellow for functions: Use All But One CPU, Do Not Use GPU for Processing, Use All But One GPU for Processing

First off, you've already got Task Manager for managing CPU thread affinity. I will not add features to Paint.NET that the OS already handles.

 

Second, effects don't use the GPU for processing. They just don't. In order for them to use the GPU, which would be necessary for this thing you're asking for, they'd all have to be rewritten and that just isn't going to happen anytime soon. I've been eyeing DirectCompute, but again: it's a ton of work, it increases system requirements (Win7 SP1+, although 4.0 will require that anyway), and it also treads into an area that is known to be a bug infested nightmare (ever had problems getting a game to work? yes? everyone has and it's almost always video card related).

 

You're asking me to add a complicated Starship Enterprise bridge computer* into Paint.NET for the purpose of monitoring and tweaking performance. That is not what Paint.NET is about. It is not the user's job to manage memory or performance, that is the application developer's responsibility (remember the "clear history" button?). 

 

You say that it'd be an "at your own risk" feature and it'd have a warning. I will never implement a feature like that, for several reasons. One is that people don't read warning dialogs. Two is that people don't remember the warnings anyway when things do start to fail. Three is that everyone thinks they're an advanced user, even if they're not advanced in that area, and then they get swamped by "advanced" settings they don't understand. See also: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2003/07/28/54583.aspx

 

Four is that even though it'd be "at your own risk" it would still be at my reponsibility and liability when it comes to things not working and crashes. I will not implement features that have a high chance of flooding my inbox with bug and crash reports.

 

Five is that I have purposefully not added features to Paint.NET that would split it into multiple modes, because then there is a multiplicative effect on testing, bugs, and misery. A user reports "Oh no this crashed!" and then it's a game of 20 Questions to figure out how they've configured the app before we can even start to troubleshoot it. This would be totally intractible for myself and the super helpful folks on this forum. And it would cause misery for regular users. There will never be an "expert mode". If you want a "Paint.NET expert mode" then what you probably want is Photoshop.

 

Six is that it would be very expensive to develop this stuff, and the benefit for most users (not you) is slim to none. I'd rather spend the time finishing and stabilizing features that have clear benefit to many users (like antialiased selections, which is in 4.0).

 

In summary: neat idea. However, it is not practical in any sense and it just won't ever happen. I say this to be realistic in favor of the "oh cool yeah maybe" response which would be polite on the surface but would really just lead you along and get your hopes up.

 

Your other requests for further customization of the UI and menus can be answered similarly. If the UI is fully customizable like that, then nobody actually has the same software and people can't communicate about it with each other in a standard way. Did you know I actually get e-mails from people asking why I've removed certain features? I haven't ... they just forgot about the plugins they had installed after they bought a new computer. Now imagine how much this would be multiplied if you could do extensive customization to the UI. There is a lot of value in having a user interface that is 100% consistent across all systems. If you want this type of customization then you should consider using other software (I say this not to be rude, but as a pragmatic suggestion).

 

 

 addition of custom icons when the plug-in has no icon

No. The solution here is already available: ask the author to add an icon to their effect. I'm not going to add features for things that already have much simpler solutions. It is not trivial to add this type of ability to Paint.NET, and it's also completely superfluous. It is significantly cheaper and easier to lobby the author to add an icon.

 

 

once you begin to get really far into selection it can slow

That's fixed in version 4.0 by way of using GetMouseMovePointsEx(). The UI won't necessarily update at a higher framerate, but it also won't drop intermediate mouse input, so the lasso outline can still be smooth instead of angular/jaggy/ugly.

 

* I don't say this to be disparaging, I'm just trying to make an analogy. I test drove a 2008 BMW M5 once and it had so many gizmos and buttons and displays that I said it was like driving the Space Shuttle.

[MrPioe]

What you're asking for is a HUGE amount of work from me that would benefit a tiny fraction of Paint.NET users. 

 

 

First off, you've already got Task Manager for managing CPU thread affinity. I will not add features to Paint.NET that the OS already handles.

 

Second, effects don't use the GPU for processing. They just don't. In order for them to use the GPU, which would be necessary for this thing you're asking for, they'd all have to be rewritten and that just isn't going to happen anytime soon. I've been eyeing DirectCompute, but again: it's a ton of work, it increases system requirements (Win7 SP1+, although 4.0 will require that anyway), and it also treads into an area that is known to be a bug infested nightmare (ever had problems getting a game to work? yes? everyone has and it's almost always video card related).

 

You're asking me to add a complicated Starship Enterprise bridge computer* into Paint.NET for the purpose of monitoring and tweaking performance. That is not what Paint.NET is about. It is not the user's job to manage memory or performance, that is the application developer's responsibility (remember the "clear history" button?). 

 

You say that it'd be an "at your own risk" feature and it'd have a warning. I will never implement a feature like that, for several reasons. One is that people don't read warning dialogs. Two is that people don't remember the warnings anyway when things do start to fail. Three is that everyone thinks they're an advanced user, even if they're not advanced in that area, and then they get swamped by "advanced" settings they don't understand. See also: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2003/07/28/54583.aspx

 

Four is that even though it'd be "at your own risk" it would still be at my reponsibility and liability when it comes to things not working and crashes. I will not implement features that have a high chance of flooding my inbox with bug and crash reports.

 

Five is that I have purposefully not added features to Paint.NET that would split it into multiple modes, because then there is a multiplicative effect on testing, bugs, and misery. A user reports "Oh no this crashed!" and then it's a game of 20 Questions to figure out how they've configured the app before we can even start to troubleshoot it. This would be totally intractible for myself and the super helpful folks on this forum. And it would cause misery for regular users. There will never be an "expert mode". If you want a "Paint.NET expert mode" then what you probably want is Photoshop.

 

Six is that it would be very expensive to develop this stuff, and the benefit for most users (not you) is slim to none. I'd rather spend the time finishing and stabilizing features that have clear benefit to many users (like antialiased selections, which is in 4.0).

 

In summary: neat idea. However, it is not practical in any sense and it just won't ever happen. I say this to be realistic in favor of the "oh cool yeah maybe" response which would be polite on the surface but would really just lead you along and get your hopes up.

 

Your other requests for further customization of the UI and menus can be answered similarly. If the UI is fully customizable like that, then nobody actually has the same software and people can't communicate about it with each other in a standard way. Did you know I actually get e-mails from people asking why I've removed certain features? I haven't ... they just forgot about the plugins they had installed after they bought a new computer. Now imagine how much this would be multiplied if you could do extensive customization to the UI. There is a lot of value in having a user interface that is 100% consistent across all systems. If you want this type of customization then you should consider using other software (I say this not to be rude, but as a pragmatic suggestion).

 

 

No. The solution here is already available: ask the author to add an icon to their effect. I'm not going to add features for things that already have much simpler solutions. It is not trivial to add this type of ability to Paint.NET, and it's also completely superfluous. It is significantly cheaper and easier to lobby the author to add an icon.

 

 

That's fixed in version 4.0 by way of using GetMouseMovePointsEx(). The UI won't necessarily update at a higher framerate, but it also won't drop intermediate mouse input, so the lasso outline can still be smooth instead of angular/jaggy/ugly.

 

* I don't say this to be disparaging, I'm just trying to make an analogy. I test drove a 2008 BMW M5 once and it had so many gizmos and buttons and displays that I said it was like driving the Space Shuttle.

 

yes i am aware I can set priority and affinity through Tack manager "each time" i run it, however you cannot set a max cpu usage, however I suppose this can also be overcome by disabling affinity on one cpu.... but I also understand implementing this big of a change could be of great time consumption, and inexperienced users could goof it up and whine at you....

the GPU Render idea was only a recommend for additional data render at faster pace, however I suppose not necessary

 

I thought the Star Trek bridge comment was funny

 

as far as a plugin manager, with icon function and ability to customize U.I., I can Understand why not, maybe it could be designed as a add-on or plug-in

and I am aware and as a word of advice to those who wine about theyre UI being different, tell them to save their favorite dlls and alike for theyre functions into a "effects" and "adjustments" folder on a flash stick, DVD, CD etc... and paste it to the forum

 

I can understand your head ache with the issues of crash reporting and dealing with inexperienced users...

 

as far as most users, they probably didnt custom pick and design every aspect of the computer they use, and also tweak the OS as much as i have, though not to the point of unstable

 

and personally I prefer to stick with free and Open Source type software, and aside from that, Photoshop is what I used to use, but the cost is a killer

however personally, I think you got a work of art of a program so far, keep it up

 

and yeah I get the analogy about the BMW, however I do love the Automated-Manuel Transmission Combo in them LOL, Take care

 

and by the way, what was it that drew your attention to my post? that was the biggest thing I noticed, I didnt expect to get a response from even a development member, at least not til I had had a billion posts about the subjects....

 

My Car May be a Pinto, But my PC is a Ferrari (joke, funny, however not true about the car)

Thanks for taing the time also....

Edited May 10, 2013 by MrPioe

[pdnnoob]

and by the way, what was it that drew your attention to my post? that was the biggest thing I noticed, I didnt expect to get a response from even a development member, at least not til I had had a billion posts about the subjects...

That's one of my favorite parts about paint.net...it's always nice when the developers of a program actively read and respond to user feedback

[Ego Eram Reputo]

We Mods & Admins (Rick included) read almost all the posts made on the forum. So chances are it wasn't any specific thing that drew the developers eye. The fact that Rick took the time to provide a lengthy answer probably means you post was intelligent, articulate & unique.

Take it as a good sign

[MrPioe]

thanks guys

[dfschrader]

First, I too would like to add my thanks for (1) the HUGE contribution to the graphic tools field and particularly while simultaneously keeping the price as reasonable as you have; (2) for making PDN so openly available for additions by users. I have little experience with big price packages (interpret Photoshop and genre).

 

While this post (and string of posts) is more-or-less quite old and I don't want to either revive old arguments or open old wounds, I'd still like to add my voice to having the ability to add or move a .dll into an "effect" category of my own determination. There are (or can be) hundreds of .dlls which can be added and then it can take huge amounts of time to sort through and find whet one was seeking. Just being able to move various .dll (effects) into tree like structure could ease the effort for someone like myself who is the new-biest of the nubies.

 

VStudio has already created such a menu-ing organization which I would assume (yes, I know - &lt; no swearing &gt;-you-me) wouldn't be denied to an associate internal group (or so I would think). Of course, using your auto simile, I have no idea what would be required to stuff a BMW code segment into your Maserati (you're heads and shoulders above a Dart <smile>). 

 

David

[Rick Brewster]

Old thread is old. As per the rules (which you should go read), necroposting isn't something we do here.

 

Thread Closed