Sourceforge is bundling malware in the GIMP for Windows installer
-
IIRC that's still there, but you have to do some fancy trickery with the WM to get it to show up (disable Aero I think)
-
A hidden third colour?
-
In XP and older versions of paint, you can ctrl+click on a colour to assign it to the background of the colour picker, and paint with it by holding ctrl
-
sorry, i can't think of anything other than rotate to an arbitrary angle, which i'll be frank, i never used nor did i miss.
The main single thing is arbitrary rotation which I frequently used, really miss, and now have to go through a really wretched workaround to do.
The other things are the simple, intuitive way to select different sized and shaped 'brushes' and pencils, which were simply different sizes and shapes of flat colour tool. Also the brushtip was visible so you could see what area you were covering before you painted with it.
Now they only have the pencil tool, which (above the single pixel size) is round, which I never ever want, and you can't see the brushtip until you click - even for randomly scrawling, the size is basically trial and error (as is what the fancy new fake paints and crayons actually look like), and for pixel-by-pixel work, which is what Paint used to be good for, it's hideous.
for anything other than "paste screenshot, crop, draw circle around that bit, add text, copy, paste into JIRA" paint (even winXP paint) was far too painful to use.
I always loved it for really simple image editing but also for drawing pictures in a particular style. There's any amount of things it was never any good for, but it happened I rarely or never had any inclination to do any of them.
Anyway, is paint.net like the proper version or the stupid new broken version?
-
-
Anyway, is paint.net like the proper version
this buy more awsome.
although the brush is also locked to be circle.
there should be a plugin that fixes that though. because paint.net supports plugins.
-
9.46E+21 meters of time. TDEMSYR.
I was waiting for someone to pick up on that.
You are presumably correct though I'm not going to look up or calculate the figure to check. However it's rather less intuitive to interpret like that than when it's rendered as a lightyear, in the case it's being used to measure time rather than distance in the other three dimensions.
I am, in fact, intentionally using metres of time in the correct relativistic sense. Which makes a lightyear of time (the time it takes light to travel the distance light can travel in a year) perfectly reasonably though spectacularly redundant.
Filed under: Pedant-baiting, for pleasure and profit
-
-
-
Which makes a lightyear of time (the time it takes light to travel the distance light can travel in a year) perfectly reasonably though spectacularly redundant.
-
But you see, the whole point of metres (or any other distance unit, provided you use the same one as you measure the distance in) of time is to make the speed of light unitless 1.
It turns out that's rather useful.
-
-
-
Not so redundant.
Only if you're entirely ignorant of the context and convention. Speed of light not otherwise specified always means c, the speed of light in a vacuum, which is a constant. In particular, for the purpose of defining lightyears and metres of time, we are considering light in a vacuum.
-
So, am I TR
for using Inkscape for arbitrary rotations because I have no time nor patience to screw around with canvas sizes and cropping and just want to get shit done?Also, many bitmap tools degrade the quality on multiple rotations, so if I screw up I have to undo and do it again, as opposed to a vector editing tool like Inkscape that doesn't mess with image data at all until I hit export and I can fiddle with it as much as I want.
-
Also the brushtip was visible so you could see what area you were covering before you painted with it.
It still is.
you can't see the brushtip until you click
You can.
On Windows 7, at least, which is all I can check from work.
-
No you can't.
Or at any rate, I can't, on windows 7, on my home computer or my work computer, and I haven't messed with any settings to make it that way. It is not visible. The eraser is - sometimes I make the second colour the one I want and paint by erasing, just for that reason, but it doesn't have a single-pixel size.
-
I tried it before posting and was sure it did - but now I've tried it again and it doesn't. So I'm possibly imagining things. Apologies.
-
Speaking of, anyone knows a good Linux editor for something like pixel art? So something that can do grids decently (ideally, adjustable sizes for grids, and minor and major grid), showing coordinates as I mouse around, and the ability to fiddle with selections after I made them.
Everything I find is so lacking, even if I can get half of the requirements I'd be happy.
-
It looks like most brushes do show, but the default brush at the default size is a bit flickery and hard to see
-
It looks like
most brushesthe ridiculous, useless fake paints and crayons do show, but thedefault brushpencil tool, aka the only 'brush' that does anything like what I want to do atthe defaultany sizeis a bit flickery and hard to seedoes notFTFY
-
Win8.1, with the one and only sensible brush, I see the preview on the two largest sizes. Looks like a case of Discoursistency,, and either way is crap and wrong
-
The preview for the brush always shows up, but at the two smallest sizes it's hidden behind the cursor. But @CarrieVS's real problem with it, I think, is that it's anti-aliased and you can't do accurate pixel work with it.
and the pencil has no preview
-
The preview for the brush always shows up, but at the two smallest sizes it's hidden behind the cursor. But @CarrieVS's real problem with it, I think, is that it's anti-aliased and you can't do accurate pixel work with it.
There's eight or so 'brushes', I guess you mean the one labelled 'brush' which seems to be the least offensive?
My problem with any of them is that they do Belgium fake paint/pen/crayon effects - i.e. they put colours other than the colour I have selected on the page and at least in the case of the 'brush' they don't colour the same area that the brushtip - which is not a preview as it bears only slight resemblance to what you get if you click - covers.
It's not just that you can't do accurate pixel work, it's that it does not put the colour you selected on the page on the area covered by the brushtip. It does not give me what it promises to give me. And the single-pixel size doesn't 'dot' when you click at all.
I get that that's more like how real paintbrushes work - I have no objection to real paintbrushes. It's just that anyone trying to do digital art that looks like you actually painted it is not using MS Paint. What Paint used to do, was very good at doing, and should do, is let you select a colour and put precisely that colour on the page in precisely the area that it shows you it will, when you click. That's something you can't really do with physical paintbrushes, and it's essentially the thing I use Paint to achieve.
If it has a selection of tool shapes to do that that's great, but I'd settle for only the round one, as long as it worked properly. Which it doesn't if there is no visible brushtip - trying to work pixel-wise like that (as opposed to scribbling, which I can do much better on real paper with a real pencil than with a mouse on a screen) is Belgium torture.
That is the basic functionality of paint. Sure, add some fancy textures - I used to be rather fond of the airbrush tool - as well, but don't strip out most of the basic functionality and break the single remaining tool that does it.
-
O__________________________________________________________________O
-
So, am I TR for using Inkscape for arbitrary rotations because I have no time nor patience to screw around with canvas sizes and cropping and just want to get shit done?
Inkscape is GTK+, so you're an idiot for using it at all.
-
So I'm doubly an idiot because for any kind of manipulations, I'd be using GIMP!
At this stage I'm quite willing to ascribe that particular bad habit to Stockholm Syndrome...
-
Does anyone know how I can efficiently paint an alpha channel in Paint.Net? (with or without plugins)
The Eraser tool is nice for setting things transparent, but it doesn't work the other way around. The Gradient tool has a "transparent mode" which is extremely nice.
But until I can interactively apply a curve adjustment to a layer's transparency, GIMP is going to be my go-to tool for phochops. That and the ability to fine tune rectangular selections.
-
Does anyone know how I can efficiently paint an alpha channel in Paint.Net? (with or without plugins)
The Eraser tool is nice for setting things transparent, but it doesn't work the other way around.
I don't understand what your definition of "paint an alpha channel" is such that it excludes the eraser tool.
-
I think he's thinking of editing an alpha layer, to get partial transparency
-
Ok this post has really annoyed me.
So I'm going to do the 3rd grader thing and reply, "IS YOUR NAME ZECC?"
Seriously, RaceProUK, stop posting bullshit like this just to up your post count. Nobody cares. And if anybody does, they shouldn't. Now here come the parade of mod warnings.
-
If you think I'm doing this to up my post count, then you can shove your head up your arse
-
That is the basic functionality of paint. Sure, add some fancy textures - I used to be rather fond of the airbrush tool - as well, but don't strip out most of the basic functionality and break the single remaining tool that does it.
The thing is that Microsoft, IMHO, never meant Paint to be anything other than a toy. It was one of the so-called "productivity" programs bundled with Windows, so Microsoft could make a show of selling you a complete productivity product. Specifically, it was the broken art program; just as Notepad was the broken text editor and WordPad was the broken word processor. If you wanted real utility, you were supposed to purchase additional Microsoft products.
Trouble was, Paint was too useful. So I think Microsoft, in time, decided that it was too "competitive" with products they were selling and so they upgraded it to make it more toy-like.
I stopped using it, oh, probably six to eight years ago; right now I use GIMP.
-
I don't understand what your definition of "paint an alpha channel" is such that it excludes the eraser tool.
It doesn't.
-
