The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.

In a recent thread, a Windows user was thrilled to find that the free
Paint.NET Windows software beat the payware PhotoShop for his needs.
*Results of paint.net app*
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.photo.digital/c/2abPbCbWw-8>

Knowing that he's also on Linux, I am of the impression Pinta is the cross
platform macOS, Windows, Linux PhotoShop replacement for Paint.NET.

However... I use Paint.NET for anything PhotoShop can do, and as such,
I haven't personally looked at Pinta (or at PhotoShop) in many years...

Maybe people on this newsgroup have used mac/Linux/Win Pinta recently?

A possible advantage of Pinta, is it works on macOS & Linux along
with Windows and BSD (so it's a cross platform Photoshop replacement).

NOTE: It's a fact that it's a cross platform app; it's an assessment
that it's a Photoshop replacement. The iKooks can't figure that out.

Has anyone on this newsgroup looked at Pinta recently, perhaps???
<https://snapcraft.io/pinta>
<https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>
<https://www.techspot.com/downloads/5501-pinta.html>
<https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/pinta.html>

If so, would you kindly inform the rest of us how your tests worked out?
The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to try to learn more about the free Pinta editor.

On 4/6/23 17:57, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.
>
> In a recent thread, a Windows user was thrilled to find that the free
> Paint.NET Windows software beat the payware PhotoShop for his needs.
> *Results of paint.net app*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/rec.photo.digital/c/2abPbCbWw-8>
>
> Knowing that he's also on Linux, I am of the impression Pinta is the cross
> platform macOS, Windows, Linux PhotoShop replacement for Paint.NET.
>
> However... I use Paint.NET for anything PhotoShop can do, and as such, I
> haven't personally looked at Pinta (or at PhotoShop) in many years...
> Maybe people on this newsgroup have used mac/Linux/Win Pinta recently?

Pinta-1.7bp-154.1.49-noarch.rpm is available for Suse-Leap-15.4

the package info says:

"Pinta is a free, open source drawing/editing appliaction designed after
Paint.NET. Its goal is to provide users with a simple yet powerful way
to draw and manipulate images"

So I just installed it... no tests

> A possible advantage of Pinta, is it works on macOS & Linux along
> with Windows and BSD (so it's a cross platform Photoshop replacement).
>
> NOTE: It's a fact that it's a cross platform app; it's an assessment
> that it's a Photoshop replacement. The iKooks can't figure that out.
>
> Has anyone on this newsgroup looked at Pinta recently, perhaps???
> <https://snapcraft.io/pinta>
> <https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>
> <https://www.techspot.com/downloads/5501-pinta.html>
> <https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/pinta.html>
>
> If so, would you kindly inform the rest of us how your tests worked out?
> The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.

On 7/04/2023 9:57 am, Andy Burnelli wrote:

>
> However... I use Paint.NET for anything PhotoShop can do, and as such, I
> haven't personally looked at Pinta (or at PhotoShop) in many years...
> Maybe people on this newsgroup have used mac/Linux/Win Pinta recently?

As much as I loathe Photoshop (similarly with Protools) for similar
reasons, I cannot understand how you can compare Paint.net with
Photoshop when you haven't looked at the later in many years.

geoff

On Thursday, April 6, 2023 at 11:57:04 PM UTC+2, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.
>
> In a recent thread, a Windows user was thrilled to find that the free
> Paint.NET Windows software beat the payware PhotoShop for his needs.
> *Results of paint.net app*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/rec.photo.digital/c/2abPbCbWw-8>
>
> Knowing that he's also on Linux, I am of the impression Pinta is the cross
> platform macOS, Windows, Linux PhotoShop replacement for Paint.NET.
>
> However... I use Paint.NET for anything PhotoShop can do, and as such,
> I haven't personally looked at Pinta (or at PhotoShop) in many years...
>
> Maybe people on this newsgroup have used mac/Linux/Win Pinta recently?
>
> A possible advantage of Pinta, is it works on macOS & Linux along
> with Windows and BSD (so it's a cross platform Photoshop replacement).
>
> NOTE: It's a fact that it's a cross platform app; it's an assessment
> that it's a Photoshop replacement. The iKooks can't figure that out.
>
> Has anyone on this newsgroup looked at Pinta recently, perhaps???
> <https://snapcraft.io/pinta>
> <https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>
> <https://www.techspot.com/downloads/5501-pinta.html>
> <https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/pinta.html>
>
> If so, would you kindly inform the rest of us how your tests worked out?
> The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.
> --
> Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
> which, in this case, is to try to learn more about the free Pinta editor.

I think photopea.com is the most obvious free alternative for photoshop, because it is both cross-platform (running in the browser on ios, android, windows, mac, linux, etc..) and convenient (no need to install any software).
It is also powerful, since it supports advanced editing (like using layer masks, which paint.net doesn't seem to support).

https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/120062-layer-masks/

bad sector wrote:

> Pinta-1.7bp-154.1.49-noarch.rpm is available for Suse-Leap-15.4
>
> the package info says:
>
> "Pinta is a free, open source drawing/editing appliaction designed after
> Paint.NET. Its goal is to provide users with a simple yet powerful way
> to draw and manipulate images"
>
> So I just installed it... no tests

Hi bad sector,

Thanks for installing the Linux pinta as most people don't pitch in
to be part of the team, or report back - but you and Joel pitched in.

Kudos to you.
Please do let us know how it works out for you.

I installed it after I saw that you did, so I could be part of the team.
<https://i.postimg.cc/bJVmhkRM/paintnet-vs-pinta01.jpg> Missing drag box?

It only had one fatal flaw in my quick test, which is pretty good as it
had a few niceties that weren't in Paint.NET (AFAIK).

Last I had tested pinta for the three things I care most about, it sucked
compared to Paint.NET - but things have improved a _lot_ over the years.

What I care about may be different from what you care about but what I care
about mostly is dead simple super efficient eminently obvious...
a. Texting
b. Curved arrows
c. Drawing boxes

Most programs do them horribly (e.g., Joel knows this with The GIMP but
even the venerable Irfanview does them poorly, as do most image editors).

The definition of poorly is it takes too many steps for something that
should be a single step, and then another minor step to adjust.

That's it. "Draw & adjust"

No drawing the text box first - that's just stupid.
No manual expanding needed of that text box if you go out of bounds.
If you want to move it, you just move it and keep going.
If you want to change the font in the middle of texting, you change it.
And you keep going. It's not an extra step ever. Just draw & adjust.
Same with size and all sorts of other text things (like italics or bold).
You draw and then adjust if necessary. One step. Max two.

That's it. "Draw & adjust". Two steps. Max.

Same thing with curved arrows.
You start click and end click and you adjust to curve around stuff.
If you want to make it dotted, you set that while you're doing it.
If you want to change the end shapes while you're doing it, you do that.
If you want to adjust the curve, you move it around while you're doing it.
If you want to change the width or the color (or whatever), you do that.
That's it. "Draw & adjust". Two steps. Max.

Same with boxes around things, such as empty boxes to highlight stuff.
That's it. "Draw & adjust". Two steps. Max.

If you look at my threads, you'll see millions of examples...
<https://i.postimg.cc/tgvzsMRm/scrcpy25.jpg> Connect over Wi-Fi sans USB
<https://i.postimg.cc/9FJMKYch/scrcpy21.jpg> Windows Drive: === Android
<https://i.postimg.cc/g2yNftw0/scrcpy15.jpg> Trick to pin batch shortcut

Looking at my logs, I last installed Pinta in May of 2022, about a year ago
<https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta/releases/download/2.0.2/Pinta.exe>

So I just downloaded the latest version and will run a quick test for
a. Texting
b. Curved arrows
c. Drawing boxes

Here are the latest pointers for Windows users...
<https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>
<https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta/releases/download/2.1.1/Pinta.exe>
Name: Pinta.exe
Size: 57072926 bytes (54 MiB)
SHA256: CDD43F411F99449ABCF720148B669D270CAFC617B45F192B8136AC4175484E29

It wants to go into C:\Program Files\Pinta
I put it where it belongs at C:\app\editor\pic\pinta

It didn't create a desktop shortcut so I made one and put it in my menus.
c:\menu\editor\pic\pinta.lnk TARGET=C:\app\editor\pic\pinta\Pinta.exe

1. Texting
Pretty good. Only one major flaw (unless I missed how to do it).
You can text without having to draw a box first.
Good news is it will change the text font on the fly mid command.
And the color, size, outline, and all that good texty stuff.

Drat. You can't _move_ the text without extra actions.]
(See image where Paint.NET has a corner drag point.)

2. Curved arrows
Good news for starters, as you can draw a line and then you can add
points to change the curve of the line without having to re-select.

I don't think Paint.NET did that (although Paint.NET curves are
some of the best on the planet, if not the best, IMHO).

And you can change the line color mid command, which is good.
You can change the line style mid command, which is good.
You can change the shape mid command, which is good.
You can change the line width mid command, which is good.

It's actually nicer than Paint.NET in one way because you can add
as many inflection points as you like. It doesn't have the types
of arrow ends that Paint.NET has but it has arrows so that's OK.

But again, there is no drag point that I can find.
This is a serious lack of critical functionality but it may exist
by some other method that isn't obvious yet to me.

3. Drawing boxes
Good news also in that you can draw a box, and then you can
add inflection points to that box, so you can change its
shape at will almost infinitely (presumably) - which
Paint.NET doesn't do (AFAIK).

And you can change the line color mid command, which is good.
You can change the line style mid command, which is good.
You can change the shape mid command, which is good.
You can change the line width mid command, which is good.

Yet again, it has the same fatal flaw of the lack of ability
to drag it to a new location mid command (unless I missed it).

4. It used many of the keyboard combinations that Paint.NET used,
e.g., control+d to deselect, and control+x to cut, and control+z
to return to the previous selection, etc., so that was good.

In summary, in my test, it's as good (and slightly better in
some ways, if not as polished as Paint.NET... but ... but...

But unless it can drag (a) text (b) lines and (c) boxes mid
command, it's lacking a critical component for ease of use.

Maybe you can find that drag box that I didn't see?
<https://i.postimg.cc/bJVmhkRM/paintnet-vs-pinta01.jpg> Missing drag box?
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to faithfully test Paint.NET vs Pinta PhotoShop
replacement tools on the Windows platform (for ease of use & functions).

geoff wrote:

> As much as I loathe Photoshop (similarly with Protools) for similar
> reasons, I cannot understand how you can compare Paint.net with
> Photoshop when you haven't looked at the later in many years.

Hi geoff,

Could it be that I'm the only person on this newsgroup who has tested all
three of these PhotoShop replacement apps for ease of use or not?

1. PhotoShop (a super expensive - compared to free - complicated mess)
2. Paint.NET (a free Windows-only PhotoShop replacement with ease of use)
3. Pinta (a free cross platform PhotoShop replacement with ease of use)

I'm not comparing total functional - I'm comparing ease of use.
One grows over time - the other is either built in - or it's not.

And for PhotoShop, it fails so miserably on ease of use that for anyone to
say that it's easy to use, they are just not going to be credible (IMHO).

If you've never used Paint.NET, you have absolutely zero idea how EASY it
is to use over PhotoShop, by the way, so I could say the same of you.

I would have to be blunt with you as you are with me, where you have to
remember the entire point of Paint.NET is to be a free PhotoShop
replacement that is far (far) (far) (far) (far) easier to use.

While it could be that PhotoShop got is far (far) (far) (far) (far) easier
to use in the intervening years, PhotoShop didn't become free, so
PhotoShop fails miserably on that count also.

That's two strikes against PhotoShop.

The third strike against PhotoShop is what Pinta is supposed to accomplish,
which is to be cross platform on all common operating systems.

Three strikes against PhotoShop when/if Pinta becomes mature enough to
do what I need it to do (my tests are that it's getting closer lately).

The only thing missing in my quick test of ease of use, not functionality,
is the drag box which should allow mid-command moving of the item and then
you can pick up where you left off in the command that you were in.
<https://i.postimg.cc/bJVmhkRM/paintnet-vs-pinta01.jpg> Missing drag box?

Bear in mind, for those who are prone to arguments, I'm sure I can "select"
and then "drag", but that's not the point, now is it.

The whole point is ease of use.
a. PhotoShop fails in ease of use (IMHO).
b. Paint.NET is _designed_ for ease of use.
c. Pinta is designed to _replace_ PhotoShop (it's getting closer).

Let's see what other people think about it who have tested PhotoShop
ease of use against that of Pinta & Paint.NET as I can't be the only
person on the rec.photo.digital newsgroup who tested all three.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to faithfully answer the ease of use question.

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Maybe you can find that drag box that I didn't see?
> <https://i.postimg.cc/bJVmhkRM/paintnet-vs-pinta01.jpg> Missing drag box?

I don't know yet, which is why it would be best to find someone experienced
with the free Pinta cross-platform Paint.NET replacement (which itself is a
free Windows-only PhotoShop replacement with ease-of-use built in)...
but... this is what it says on the Pinta site for drawing lines & boxes.
<https://www.pinta-project.com/user-guide/objects/>

It may be that the use model is different with Pinta versus Paint.NET for
_moving_ those objects, mid command, without breaking stride.

With Paint.NET, the move is as natural as anyone could hope it to be.

But with Pinta, that move has to be pre-planned - which - sort of like
having to draw a text box - is - to me - just plain stupid.

This is what that web page said:
"Before selecting a pencil or paintbrush, it's recommended to add
a new layer to the workspace so that it's easier to isolate/edit
your pencil and brush strokes in the future."

Um. Duh. Yeah. But that's as dumb as having to draw a text box
before you can text. You are supposed to just text, and if you want to MOVE
that text, you just move it and continue on with your texting.

IMHO, that's ease of use. No thinking ahead. No extra layers.
Just move it in the middle of everything else you're doing with it.

That's ease of use (IMHO).

However, I'm still looking for whether Pinta has a simple move command
that doesn't require post-selection or pre-putting things on a new layer.

If anyone has experience with Pinta, please pitch in for the team.

On Apr 6, 2023, Andy Burnelli wrote
(in article <u0nugd$qij2$1@paganini.bofh.team>):

> Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information

Is it that, or is it really just the byproduct of some recreational meth use?

rbowman wrote:

>> 3. Pinta (a free cross platform Paint.NET replacement with ease of use)
>
> Pinta was an easy install on Ubuntu and seems to work. One of the few
> things I've done with gimp is editing pngs for icons and it's awkward.
> I'll have to try it with pinta. I never liked the number of children gimp
> spawns and so far pinta keeps to itself.

Hi rbowman,
You've helped me a lot over on a.h.r so I respect your acumen on Pinta.
<https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>

All of us know of The GIMP, which, essentially, can do anything.
However, I personally find The GIMP atrocious in usability for the three
things I do most with my thousands of screenshots posted to forums yearly.
1. Texting
2. Curved arrowing
3. Circling

Here are examples of texting, curved arrowing, and circling that I do.
<https://i.postimg.cc/q7VC5YXV/microsoft-browsers01.jpg> 3 M$ browsers
<https://i.postimg.cc/26F7CZ7V/microsoft-browsers02.jpg> Shortcuts gotcha!
<https://i.postimg.cc/PrcV1pXF/browser06.jpg> 3 M$ browsers at once
<https://i.postimg.cc/Mpwvz1pF/browser09.jpg> Browser:task 1:1 philosophy
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0J1tgDZ/windows-tweak.jpg> Browser 101 philosophy

Thanks for letting us know Pinta installed easily on Ubuntu as it's "main"
claim to fame is that it is _intended_ to be a FOSS cross platform
Paint.NET replacement, which itself was intended to be a Windows-only free
PhotoShop replacement.
<https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/121643-paintnet-50-is-now-available/>

For my purposes, Paint.NET overwhelmingly outclasses PhotoShop in ease of
use, at least when I compared an old PhotoShop version to a just as old
Paint.NET years ago (where I assume PhotoShop didn't get easier to use).
<https://www.techspot.com/downloads/3689-adobe-photoshop-cs2.html>

There's no doubt PhotoShop has some better functionality over Paint.NET so,
as per geoff, I don't want to intimate there is 100% superiority, as, for
example, I found the PhotoShop magic wand to be more accurate than the
Paint.NET magic wand - and yet - the Paint.NET magic wand is good enough
for my needs.

Most people who use PhotoShop likely work on photographs, where I almost
exclusively use Paint.NET for editing screenshots, so the use model matters
greatly - but still - the cost advantage of Paint.NET & Pinta is clear. :)

Please do let us know how Pinta fares for you. For me, I found it a bit
less functional for the three things I care about and a bit more functional
too - which isn't necessarily a wash since the main thing I found
advantageous (the ability to add infinite inflection points) doesn't
outweigh the main thing I found to be detrimental (I haven't found out an
easy way to move objects mid stride - while being edited, in Pinta yet).

Given it's so trivial to move text, circles & arrows midstream in
Paint.NET, if anyone can figure out how to do the same with Pinta, then it
would begin to be a contender to replace Paint.NET, mainly because Lord
knows, I _hate_ NET.Framework (which is a necessary evil for Paint.NET).

We may be the only people to have tested all three tolls, strangely enough.
1. PhotoShop (powerful, expensive, hard to use)
2. Paint.NET (powerful, free, easy-to-use Windows PhotoShop replacement)
3. Pinta (aimed to be a cross-platform FOSS Paint.NET replacement tool)
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to try to get information on Pinta testing results.

On 4/6/23 22:07, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> bad sector wrote:
>
>> Pinta-1.7bp-154.1.49-noarch.rpm is available for Suse-Leap-15.4
>>
>> the package info says:
>>
>> "Pinta is a free, open source drawing/editing appliaction designed
>> after Paint.NET. Its goal is to provide users with a simple yet
>> powerful way to draw and manipulate images"
>>
>> So I just installed it... no tests
>
> Hi bad sector,
>
> Thanks for installing the Linux pinta as most people don't pitch in to
> be part of the team, or report back - but you and Joel pitched in.
>
> Kudos to you.
> Please do let us know how it works out for you.
>
> I installed it after I saw that you did, so I could be part of the team.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/bJVmhkRM/paintnet-vs-pinta01.jpg> Missing drag box?
>
> It only had one fatal flaw in my quick test, which is pretty good as it
> had a few niceties that weren't in Paint.NET (AFAIK).
>
> Last I had tested pinta for the three things I care most about, it sucked
> compared to Paint.NET - but things have improved a _lot_ over the years.
>
> What I care about may be different from what you care about but what I care
> about mostly is dead simple super efficient eminently obvious... a. Texting
> b. Curved arrows
> c. Drawing boxes
>
> Most programs do them horribly (e.g., Joel knows this with The GIMP but
> even the venerable Irfanview does them poorly, as do most image editors).
>
> The definition of poorly is it takes too many steps for something that
> should be a single step, and then another minor step to adjust.
>
> That's it. "Draw & adjust"
>
> No drawing the text box first - that's just stupid.
> No manual expanding needed of that text box if you go out of bounds.
> If you want to move it, you just move it and keep going.
> If you want to change the font in the middle of texting, you change it.
> And you keep going. It's not an extra step ever. Just draw & adjust.
> Same with size and all sorts of other text things (like italics or bold).
> You draw and then adjust if necessary. One step. Max two.
>
> That's it. "Draw & adjust". Two steps. Max.
>
> Same thing with curved arrows.
> You start click and end click and you adjust to curve around stuff.
> If you want to make it dotted, you set that while you're doing it.
> If you want to change the end shapes while you're doing it, you do that.
> If you want to adjust the curve, you move it around while you're doing it.
> If you want to change the width or the color (or whatever), you do that.
> That's it. "Draw & adjust". Two steps. Max.
>
> Same with boxes around things, such as empty boxes to highlight stuff.
> That's it. "Draw & adjust". Two steps. Max.
>
> If you look at my threads, you'll see millions of examples...
> <https://i.postimg.cc/tgvzsMRm/scrcpy25.jpg> Connect over Wi-Fi sans USB
> <https://i.postimg.cc/9FJMKYch/scrcpy21.jpg> Windows Drive: === Android
> <https://i.postimg.cc/g2yNftw0/scrcpy15.jpg> Trick to pin batch shortcut
>
> Looking at my logs, I last installed Pinta in May of 2022, about a year ago
> <https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta/releases/download/2.0.2/Pinta.exe>
>
> So I just downloaded the latest version and will run a quick test for a.
> Texting
> b. Curved arrows
> c. Drawing boxes
>
> Here are the latest pointers for Windows users...
> <https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>
> <https://github.com/PintaProject/Pinta/releases/download/2.1.1/Pinta.exe>
> Name: Pinta.exe
> Size: 57072926 bytes (54 MiB)
> SHA256: CDD43F411F99449ABCF720148B669D270CAFC617B45F192B8136AC4175484E29
>
> It wants to go into C:\Program Files\Pinta
> I put it where it belongs at C:\app\editor\pic\pinta
>
> It didn't create a desktop shortcut so I made one and put it in my menus.
> c:\menu\editor\pic\pinta.lnk TARGET=C:\app\editor\pic\pinta\Pinta.exe
>
> 1. Texting
> Pretty good. Only one major flaw (unless I missed how to do it).
> You can text without having to draw a box first.
> Good news is it will change the text font on the fly mid command.
> And the color, size, outline, and all that good texty stuff.
>
> Drat. You can't _move_ the text without extra actions.]
> (See image where Paint.NET has a corner drag point.)
>
> 2. Curved arrows
> Good news for starters, as you can draw a line and then you can add
> points to change the curve of the line without having to re-select.
>
> I don't think Paint.NET did that (although Paint.NET curves are
> some of the best on the planet, if not the best, IMHO).
>
> And you can change the line color mid command, which is good.
> You can change the line style mid command, which is good.
> You can change the shape mid command, which is good.
> You can change the line width mid command, which is good.
>
> It's actually nicer than Paint.NET in one way because you can add as
> many inflection points as you like. It doesn't have the types
> of arrow ends that Paint.NET has but it has arrows so that's OK.
>
> But again, there is no drag point that I can find.
> This is a serious lack of critical functionality but it may exist
> by some other method that isn't obvious yet to me.
>
> 3. Drawing boxes
> Good news also in that you can draw a box, and then you can add
> inflection points to that box, so you can change its shape at will
> almost infinitely (presumably) - which Paint.NET doesn't do (AFAIK).
>
> And you can change the line color mid command, which is good.
> You can change the line style mid command, which is good.
> You can change the shape mid command, which is good.
> You can change the line width mid command, which is good.
>
> Yet again, it has the same fatal flaw of the lack of ability
> to drag it to a new location mid command (unless I missed it).
>
> 4. It used many of the keyboard combinations that Paint.NET used,
> e.g., control+d to deselect, and control+x to cut, and control+z
> to return to the previous selection, etc., so that was good.
>
> In summary, in my test, it's as good (and slightly better in some ways,
> if not as polished as Paint.NET... but ... but...
> But unless it can drag (a) text (b) lines and (c) boxes mid
> command, it's lacking a critical component for ease of use.
>
> Maybe you can find that drag box that I didn't see?
> <https://i.postimg.cc/bJVmhkRM/paintnet-vs-pinta01.jpg> Missing drag box?

I'm 79 but so busy that it'll be many a long moon before I get to do any
hands-on with it. I can say though that the early paint-shop had the
right idea about what people wanna do with a paint prog. I too use the
gimp and am ready to throw myself face down on the floor in adoration of
it every week but for drawing-n-painting it's freakin useless, photoshop
I've never even touched. As for the name Pinta, a pint o'what? It also
recalls the great little Pinto that got a bad rap courtesy of GM :-)

In article <u0nugd$qij2$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli
<nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

> 1. PhotoShop (a super expensive - compared to free - complicated mess)

photoshop elements is $60-70 street price, not even close to expensive,
let alone 'super expensive'.

you're not even a novice professional graphics artist, let alone a
professional one, therefore you don't need the full photoshop, which
has all sorts of features pros need and you don't understand.

bad sector wrote:

> I'm 79 but so busy that it'll be many a long moon before I get to do any
> hands-on with it. I can say though that the early paint-shop had the
> right idea about what people wanna do with a paint prog. I too use the
> gimp and am ready to throw myself face down on the floor in adoration of
> it every week but for drawing-n-painting it's freakin useless, photoshop
> I've never even touched. As for the name Pinta, a pint o'what? It also
> recalls the great little Pinto that got a bad rap courtesy of GM :-)

I can't disagree with you that the earliest "paint" program seemed to do
"basic" stuff we all grew out teeth on before moving to the others...
<https://i.postimg.cc/xjXSP6QY/app-editor-pic.jpg> c:\app\editor\pic\
{artweaver,faststone,fotor,fotosketcher,ghostscript,gimp,imagemagick,
inkscape,irfanview,jsware_crop,krita,morph,paint.net,paintstar,photodemon,
photopad,pinta,vicman_last_good_version,xnview,psp_shareware,photome,etc.}

I've tested _every_ free image-editing program ever suggested (AFAIK) on
the Windows, digital photo & freeware newsgroups for something like two
decades (I am not counting - it's just been since the beginning of time).

I'm older than you, but still under my life expectancy of 91 years
(according to Social Security anyway) where if when you say "early paint
shop" you mean PaintShop Pro shareware, the main caveat I have with the PSP
setup msi is that it _destroys_ your carefully crafted right-click menus!

And, when you delete Paint Shop Pro in frustration, it leaves fragments
behind in your right-click context menu that you have to find & delete.

For that reason alone, I will _never_ install PSP again, but if others need
the program, here are the pointers to the latest known good version.
<https://web.archive.org/web/20220205033721/http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>

Note you can't get the last known good version of PSP from here:
<http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>

As far as I know, the last known good version is 5.03 (IMHO).
Bear in mind there are a _lot_ of dead ends with PSP nowadays.

For example, this purports to be PSP version 5.03
<https://winworldpc.com/product/paint-shop-pro/5x>
Name: JASC Paint Shop Pro 5.03 Update.7z
Size: 4135963 bytes (4039 KiB)
SHA256: 9BCE9AC19B2608B947A7F01B012398EEEF8E96D36F7686B4E024738A315AB842

That unzips to
Name: psp503up.exe
Size: 4113688 bytes (4017 KiB)
SHA256: A8511907E9748F1F2D882D991430E459157100A055A1DC04A7C9236F20DB4BD9

But that's just an update to the 5.00 or 5.01 version which has to already
be installed for this update to bump either of them to version 5.03.

Hence, my advice is the last known good version is "only" found here:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20220205033721/http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>

As always, we're a well-honed team, so if you know of a better location
for the last known good version of PSP, please let all of us know where.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to faithfully respond to bad sector's comments.

Just now, bad sector wrote:

> I'm 79 but so busy that it'll be many a long moon before I get to do any
> hands-on with it. I can say though that the early paint-shop had the
> right idea about what people wanna do with a paint prog. I too use the
> gimp and am ready to throw myself face down on the floor in adoration of
> it every week but for drawing-n-painting it's freakin useless, photoshop
> I've never even touched. As for the name Pinta, a pint o'what? It also
> recalls the great little Pinto that got a bad rap courtesy of GM :-)

Hi bad sector,

Thank you for your purposefully helpful reply, which, in complete contrast
to the always purposefully _un_helpful childish taunts from the childish
low-self-esteem iKooks, you added value so that the team is enlightened.

I can't disagree with you that the earliest "paint" program seemed to do
"basic" stuff we all grew out teeth on before moving to the others...
<https://i.postimg.cc/xjXSP6QY/app-editor-pic.jpg> c:\app\editor\pic\
{artweaver,faststone,fotor,fotosketcher,ghostscript,gimp,imagemagick,
inkscape,irfanview,jsware_crop,krita,morph,paint.net,paintstar,photodemon,
photopad,pinta,vicman_last_good_version,xnview,psp_shareware,photome,etc.}

I've tested _every_ free image-editing program ever suggested (AFAIK) on
the Windows, digital photo & freeware newsgroups for something like two
decades (I am not counting - it's just been since the beginning of time).

I'm older than you, but still under my life expectancy of 91 years
(according to Social Security anyway) where if when you say "early paint
shop" you mean PaintShop Pro shareware, the main caveat I have with the PSP
setup msi is that it _destroys_ your carefully crafted right-click menus!

And, when you delete Paint Shop Pro in frustration, it leaves fragments
behind in your right-click context menu that you have to find & delete.

For that reason alone, I will _never_ install PSP again, but if others need
the program, here are the pointers to the latest known good version.
<https://web.archive.org/web/20220205033721/http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>

Note you can't get the last known good version of PSP from here:
<http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>

As far as I know, the last known good version is 5.03 (IMHO).
Bear in mind there are a _lot_ of dead ends with PSP nowadays.

For example, this purports to be PSP version 5.03
<https://winworldpc.com/product/paint-shop-pro/5x>
Name: JASC Paint Shop Pro 5.03 Update.7z
Size: 4135963 bytes (4039 KiB)
SHA256: 9BCE9AC19B2608B947A7F01B012398EEEF8E96D36F7686B4E024738A315AB842

That unzips to
Name: psp503up.exe
Size: 4113688 bytes (4017 KiB)
SHA256: A8511907E9748F1F2D882D991430E459157100A055A1DC04A7C9236F20DB4BD9

But that's just an update to the 5.00 or 5.01 version which has to already
be installed for this update to bump either of them to version 5.03.

Hence, my advice is the last known good version is "only" found here:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20220205033721/http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>

As always, we're a well-honed team, so if you know of a better location
for the last known good version of PSP, please let all of us know where.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to faithfully respond to bad sector's comments.

On 07-04-2023 18:02 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> photoshop elements is $60-70 street price, not even close to expensive,
> let alone 'super expensive'.

I must have missed your comparison of elements vs pinta and paint-net.
Can you point to the link where you reported your extensive comparisons?
TIA

On 07-04-2023 14:44, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> bad sector wrote:
>
>> I'm 79 but so busy that it'll be many a long moon before I get to do
>> any hands-on with it. I can say though that the early paint-shop had
>> the right idea about what people wanna do with a paint prog. I too use
>> the gimp and am ready to throw myself face down on the floor in
>> adoration of it every week but for drawing-n-painting it's freakin
>> useless, photoshop I've never even touched. As for the name Pinta, a
>> pint o'what? It also recalls the great little Pinto that got a bad rap
>> courtesy of GM :-)
>
> I can't disagree with you that the earliest "paint" program seemed to do
> "basic" stuff we all grew out teeth on before moving to the others...
> <https://i.postimg.cc/xjXSP6QY/app-editor-pic.jpg> c:\app\editor\pic\
> {artweaver,faststone,fotor,fotosketcher,ghostscript,gimp,imagemagick,
> inkscape,irfanview,jsware_crop,krita,morph,paint.net,paintstar,photodemon,
> photopad,pinta,vicman_last_good_version,xnview,psp_shareware,photome,etc.}
>
> I've tested _every_ free image-editing program ever suggested (AFAIK) on
> the Windows, digital photo & freeware newsgroups for something like two
> decades (I am not counting - it's just been since the beginning of time).
>
> I'm older than you, but still under my life expectancy of 91 years
> (according to Social Security anyway) where if when you say "early paint
> shop" you mean PaintShop Pro shareware, the main caveat I have with the PSP
> setup msi is that it _destroys_ your carefully crafted right-click menus!
>
> And, when you delete Paint Shop Pro in frustration, it leaves fragments
> behind in your right-click context menu that you have to find & delete.
>
> For that reason alone, I will _never_ install PSP again, but if others need
> the program, here are the pointers to the latest known good version.
> <https://web.archive.org/web/20220205033721/http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>
>
> Note you can't get the last known good version of PSP from here:
> <http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>
>
> As far as I know, the last known good version is 5.03 (IMHO).
> Bear in mind there are a _lot_ of dead ends with PSP nowadays.
>
> For example, this purports to be PSP version 5.03
> <https://winworldpc.com/product/paint-shop-pro/5x>
> Name: JASC Paint Shop Pro 5.03 Update.7z
> Size: 4135963 bytes (4039 KiB)
> SHA256: 9BCE9AC19B2608B947A7F01B012398EEEF8E96D36F7686B4E024738A315AB842
>
> That unzips to
> Name: psp503up.exe
> Size: 4113688 bytes (4017 KiB)
> SHA256: A8511907E9748F1F2D882D991430E459157100A055A1DC04A7C9236F20DB4BD9
>
> But that's just an update to the 5.00 or 5.01 version which has to
> already be installed for this update to bump either of them to version
> 5.03.
>
> Hence, my advice is the last known good version is "only" found here:
> <https://web.archive.org/web/20220205033721/http://www.oldversion.com/windows/paint-shop-pro/>
>
> As always, we're a well-honed team, so if you know of a better location
> for the last known good version of PSP, please let all of us know where.

I agree with you on PSP5 being the last useful version, but 25 years is
really too old to be usable today, isn't it? Does it even install?

I you want something like that have a look at Photofiltre:
https://www.photofiltre-studio.com/

dillinger wrote:

> I agree with you on PSP5 being the last useful version, but 25 years is
> really too old to be usable today, isn't it? Does it even install?

Hi dillinger,

Thanks for concurring on the last known good version of PSP, as we all work
together here, and I can make a mistake just as easily as anyone else can.

Yes. PSP503 installs. You can tell it uses the "old style" installer, as I
recall, but it works. It just is extremely rude with your context menus.

> I you want something like that have a look at Photofiltre:
> https://www.photofiltre-studio.com/

Thanks for that suggestion of photofiltre, which rings a bell somewhere...

I don't use photofiltre but as I said, I've tested _every_ free image
editor ever suggested on the windows, photo and freeware newsgroups.

<https://i.postimg.cc/xjXSP6QY/app-editor-pic.jpg> c:\app\editor\pic\
{artweaver,faststone,fotor,fotosketcher,ghostscript,gimp,
imagemagick,inkscape,irfanview,jsware_crop,krita,morph,
paint.net,paintstar,photodemon,photopad,pinta,vicman_last_good_version,
xnview,psp_shareware,photome,freehandpaint}

Hmmm.. If I don't use photofiltre, it failed for some reason.
Let me look.
Oh... OK. Now I know why.

I keep logs of every test I run and it looks like I tested photofiltre
on 7/2/2022 at 3:18pm (which isn't in my long term archives yet).
<https://i.postimg.cc/3JNFrCp9/picture-editors.jpg> New & old archive

It seems that fotofiltre intantly failed its initial software tests.
Here's my log, verbatim.

<http://www.photofiltre.com/download-en.htm>
PhotoFiltre 11 is shareware and is limited to a 30-day trial period.
At the end of the 30-day trial period, if you want to continue using
it you will need to purchase a registration key. If, on the other
hand you no longer want to continue using the program you must
remove it from your system immediately.

<http://photofiltre.free.fr/>
<http://photofiltre.free.fr/frames_en.htm>

PhotoFiltre is free for a private or educational use.
<http://photofiltre.free.fr/download_en.htm>
<http://photofiltre.free.fr/utils/PhotoFiltre-en-653.zip>
Name: PhotoFiltre-en-653.zip
Size: 1970704 bytes (1924 KiB)
SHA256: 1962098ABCFC484A883A55DE33F37AC3A38E257B6272BBCBB2E301BC9A49546E

That's all I remember as I only give a program one strike & it's out.
Looking back, it's confusing though since it says it's free for
personal use on one location and it says that it's not in another.

What is it?
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to faithfully report on my photofiltre testing.

On 4/7/2023 1:04 PM, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> I keep logs of every test I run and it looks like I tested photofiltre
> on 7/2/2022 at 3:18pm (which isn't in my long term archives yet).
> <https://i.postimg.cc/3JNFrCp9/picture-editors.jpg> New & old archive
>
> It seems that fotofiltre intantly failed its initial software tests.
> Here's my log, verbatim.
> <http://www.photofiltre.com/download-en.htm>
> PhotoFiltre 11 is shareware and is limited to a 30-day trial period. At
> the end of the 30-day trial period, if you want to continue using it you
> will need to purchase a registration key. If, on the other
> hand you no longer want to continue using the program you must remove it
> from your system immediately.
>
> <http://photofiltre.free.fr/>
> <http://photofiltre.free.fr/frames_en.htm>
>
> PhotoFiltre is free for a private or educational use.
> <http://photofiltre.free.fr/download_en.htm>
> <http://photofiltre.free.fr/utils/PhotoFiltre-en-653.zip>
> Name: PhotoFiltre-en-653.zip
> Size: 1970704 bytes (1924 KiB)
> SHA256: 1962098ABCFC484A883A55DE33F37AC3A38E257B6272BBCBB2E301BC9A49546E
>
> That's all I remember as I only give a program one strike & it's out.
> Looking back, it's confusing though since it says it's free for
> personal use on one location and it says that it's not in another.
>
> What is it?

Version 7.2.1 is the Last Freeware Version and can be found here:

https://www.photofiltre-studio.com/pf7-en.htm

sobriquet wrote:

> I think photopea.com is the most obvious free alternative
> for photoshop, because it is both cross-platform (running in the
> browser on ios, android, windows, mac, linux, etc..) and convenient
> (no need to install any software).
> It is also powerful, since it supports advanced editing
> (like using layer masks, which paint.net doesn't seem to support).
>
> https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/120062-layer-masks/

Hi sobriquet,

Thanks for the suggestion of photopea.com as we all work together, for
decaes, helping each other find the best software for photo editing.

Given that suggestion, I, for one, try to test every viable free
image-editing app ever suggested on the photo, windows, and freeware
newsgroups (the freeware 3D editors being tested separately from the cad
newsgroups), and I looked & don't see that in my archives.
<https://i.postimg.cc/HLfTjC63/picture-editors.jpg> New & old pic archives

First, since you provided the link, I will look at it, where I went to:
<https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/120062-layer-masks/>
*Posted May 27, 2022 by Brittw*
"Paint.net is great and, with many plug-ins, I can do just about
anything that I could do in Photoshop. One feature that is lacking
however, which would be of tremendous benefit to users, would be
the addition of Layer Masks. This would, for example, enable users
to blend bracketed photos simply. It is a feature found in many
photo editors (e.g. GIMP)."

*Posted May 27, 2022 by TrevorOutlaw*
"Use Alpha Mask Import Plugin 2.0"
MODERATORS NOTE: This Alpha Mask effect may have issues with
newer versions of Paint.NET. An alternative plugin, called
Paste Alpha, is available here.
<https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/1854-alpha-mask-import-plugin-20/>
Alternatively, BoltBait's PasteAlpha does the same thing.
<https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/113220-boltbaits-plugin-pack-for-pdn-v4212-and-beyond-updated-july-16-2020/>
"Gimp and Photoshop's layer mask are non-destructive while Paint.NET's
masking approach is destructive. Whenever using either Alpha Mask
or Paste Alpha, make sure to duplicate the original object."

*Posted May 28, 2022 by Ego Eram Reputo*
"I asked Rick about this quite a while ago. At the time Rick explained
that adding layer masks would break existing PDN files (not something
he was willing to entertain)."

*Posted May 28, 2022 by Rick Brewster*
"Layer masks require extending the .PDN file format. That's not on
the table until PDN v5, along with several other features.
Doesn't mean alpha masks are coming in v5, just means it
becomes possible to start talking about it at that time."

I don't really know what this feature does, nor whether the plugins
do what sobriquet is asking for, but I should note those threads
are old but they probably are still accurate even as my Paint.NET
version is 5.03 (so it's likely layer-mask capable).

Moving forward on sobriquet's purposefully helpful suggestion,
<https://www.photopea.com/>
Photopea: Advanced photo editor supporting
PSD, XCF, Sketch, XD and CDR formats.
(Adobe Photoshop, GIMP, Sketch App, Adobe XD & CorelDRAW)
Create a new image or open existing files from your computer.
Save your work as PSD (File > Save as PSD) or as JPG/PNG/SVG
using File > Export. Suggest new features at our GitHub site.
<https://github.com/photopea/photopea/issues>
Where one of the issues is "Too many ads" as shown here:
<https://github.com/photopea/photopea/issues/5510>

It's a GREAT IDEA for a bunch of reasons, not the least of which is that it
requires no installation, and therefore anyone can use it on any platform.

My first test failed miserably, but I'm sure that's just data dependent.
a. I read in this exact file...
<https://i.postimg.cc/QN6rbSQD/browser05.jpg> All 3 Microsoft browsers
b. And this is what showed up...
<https://i.postimg.cc/Sx1zCsdp/photopea01.jpg> My 1st photopea edit
c. But that could be due to my browser settings...
Can you test out that exact file to see if it's the file please?

No big deal if you don't, as the value inherent in your suggestion is that
there is a documented supported reasonably powerful photo editor that is
available online using a web browser on any platform - which is really
nice.

Thanks for that wonderful suggestion.
I likely won't use it but it is great to know that it exists as others
may use it so we can help many people who don't want to install editors.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to faithfully try to help the original poster.

AllanH wrote:

> Version 7.2.1 is the Last Freeware Version and can be found here:
>
> https://www.photofiltre-studio.com/pf7-en.htm

Hi AllanH,
Thank you for that pointer to the last known freeware Photofiltre version.

People like you are what makes Usenet great because everyone benefits
from the effort you put into helping us find the last known free version.

<https://www.photofiltre-studio.com/pf7-en.htm>
PhotoFiltre 7 is freeware for private uses.
"PhotoFiltre 7 is a complete image retouching program.
It allows you to do simple or advanced adjustments to an image
and apply a vast range of filters on it. It is simple and
intuitive to use, and has an easy learning curve.
The toolbar, giving you access to the standard filters
with just a few clicks, gives PhotoFiltre 7 a robust look.
PhotoFiltre 7 also has layer manager (with Alpha channel),
advanced brushes, batch module and lot of other powerful tools."
<https://www.photofiltre-studio.com/utils/pf7-en-7.2.1.zip>
Name: pf7-en-7.2.1.zip
Size: 5332573 bytes (5207 KiB)
SHA256: DEE1337ABBDE74ED8F908AD405DDB8F0EE5FA801DC323CA38039A860CCED6356

The zip unarchives to a directory which I moved to my pic editors
c:\app\editor\pic\photofiltre\.
In that directory are a bunch of files, the most important being:
Name: PhotoFiltre7.exe
Size: 3478528 bytes (3397 KiB)
SHA256: 3D7C8943C8A4BEC3A2AEF47D17007E0E318B4DEA615DECA502E2836578FF90B1
Making a shortcut and putting that shortcut into my cascade menu:
c:\menu\editor\pic\photofiltre.lnk
Target=C:\app\editor\pic\photofiltre\PhotoFiltre7.exe

The first test was to load in this arbitrary file which I was working on
at the very moment of testing, for this thread on Android sneakyware...
*This free Android app ad and tracking inspector will easily show apps you might want to delete*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/ALTier7haA0>

This is the test file that I was working on to document that app.
<https://i.postimg.cc/BQ06Hvyd/inspector01.jpg>

Normally I annotate the screenshots using three fundamental tools
a. I text a description
b. I circle key items in that description
c. I also point to key items in that description

I have one rule which is NO LINE OR BOX COVERS ANY TEXT EVER!
(which is why curved arrows are required!)

First I'll try circling the application in the FOSS Google Play Store
client and then I'll try arrowing and then texting to point out detail.
<https://i.postimg.cc/httm3wtg/photofilter01.jpg> Expected input

This is the result (or similar) that I expect _any_ editor to realize:
<https://i.postimg.cc/d1PLvSwh/text-circle-arrow.jpg> Expected output

I couldn't even _find_ the circling, texting and arrowing tools in
photofiltre, so I will send this off and look for those later.

In summary, this looks like a nice program, which seems to be truly
freeware, which means it's useful to know about for now & the future.

Thank you for pitching in to be purposefully helpful for everyone.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to faithfully test out the freeware photofiltre.

On 4/7/2023 8:54 AM, mike wrote:
> On 07-04-2023 18:02 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> photoshop elements is $60-70 street price, not even close to expensive,
>> let alone 'super expensive'.
>
> I must have missed your comparison of elements vs pinta and paint-net.
> Can you point to the link where you reported your extensive comparisons?
> TIA

Why do you need to test anything ?

First, you do a candidate check, this way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinta_%28software%29

"Compared with open-source image editor GIMP, Pinta is simpler and has fewer features.[4]"

So Pinta < GIMP < Photoshop.

Run complete.

Only extraordinary assertions require extraordinary proof.

Paul

On 07-04-2023 21:52 Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

> Only extraordinary assertions require extraordinary proof.

You took my request of nospam seriously when I had never expected that
nitwit to back up his dimwit assertions because he doesn't know anything.

All that blockhead cretin wanted to do was throw a wrench in the works.

That nospam twit takes lessons for his clodpoll arguments from this clinic.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=monty+python+argument+clinic

On Friday, April 7, 2023 at 8:56:49 PM UTC+2, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> sobriquet wrote:
>
> > I think photopea.com is the most obvious free alternative
> > for photoshop, because it is both cross-platform (running in the
> > browser on ios, android, windows, mac, linux, etc..) and convenient
> > (no need to install any software).
> > It is also powerful, since it supports advanced editing
> > (like using layer masks, which paint.net doesn't seem to support).
> >
> > https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/120062-layer-masks/
> Hi sobriquet,
>
> Thanks for the suggestion of photopea.com as we all work together, for
> decaes, helping each other find the best software for photo editing.
>
> Given that suggestion, I, for one, try to test every viable free
> image-editing app ever suggested on the photo, windows, and freeware
> newsgroups (the freeware 3D editors being tested separately from the cad
> newsgroups), and I looked & don't see that in my archives.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/HLfTjC63/picture-editors.jpg> New & old pic archives
>
> First, since you provided the link, I will look at it, where I went to:
> <https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/120062-layer-masks/>
> *Posted May 27, 2022 by Brittw*
> "Paint.net is great and, with many plug-ins, I can do just about
> anything that I could do in Photoshop. One feature that is lacking
> however, which would be of tremendous benefit to users, would be
> the addition of Layer Masks. This would, for example, enable users
> to blend bracketed photos simply. It is a feature found in many
> photo editors (e.g. GIMP)."
>
> *Posted May 27, 2022 by TrevorOutlaw*
> "Use Alpha Mask Import Plugin 2.0"
> MODERATORS NOTE: This Alpha Mask effect may have issues with
> newer versions of Paint.NET. An alternative plugin, called
> Paste Alpha, is available here.
> <https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/1854-alpha-mask-import-plugin-20/>
> Alternatively, BoltBait's PasteAlpha does the same thing.
> <https://forums.getpaint.net/topic/113220-boltbaits-plugin-pack-for-pdn-v4212-and-beyond-updated-july-16-2020/>
> "Gimp and Photoshop's layer mask are non-destructive while Paint.NET's
> masking approach is destructive. Whenever using either Alpha Mask
> or Paste Alpha, make sure to duplicate the original object."
>
> *Posted May 28, 2022 by Ego Eram Reputo*
> "I asked Rick about this quite a while ago. At the time Rick explained
> that adding layer masks would break existing PDN files (not something
> he was willing to entertain)."
>
> *Posted May 28, 2022 by Rick Brewster*
> "Layer masks require extending the .PDN file format. That's not on
> the table until PDN v5, along with several other features.
> Doesn't mean alpha masks are coming in v5, just means it
> becomes possible to start talking about it at that time."
>
> I don't really know what this feature does, nor whether the plugins
> do what sobriquet is asking for, but I should note those threads
> are old but they probably are still accurate even as my Paint.NET
> version is 5.03 (so it's likely layer-mask capable).
>
> Moving forward on sobriquet's purposefully helpful suggestion,
> <https://www.photopea.com/>
> Photopea: Advanced photo editor supporting
> PSD, XCF, Sketch, XD and CDR formats.
> (Adobe Photoshop, GIMP, Sketch App, Adobe XD & CorelDRAW)
> Create a new image or open existing files from your computer.
> Save your work as PSD (File > Save as PSD) or as JPG/PNG/SVG
> using File > Export. Suggest new features at our GitHub site.
> <https://github.com/photopea/photopea/issues>
> Where one of the issues is "Too many ads" as shown here:
> <https://github.com/photopea/photopea/issues/5510>
>
> It's a GREAT IDEA for a bunch of reasons, not the least of which is that it
> requires no installation, and therefore anyone can use it on any platform..
>
> My first test failed miserably, but I'm sure that's just data dependent.
> a. I read in this exact file...
> <https://i.postimg.cc/QN6rbSQD/browser05.jpg> All 3 Microsoft browsers
> b. And this is what showed up...
> <https://i.postimg.cc/Sx1zCsdp/photopea01.jpg> My 1st photopea edit
> c. But that could be due to my browser settings...
> Can you test out that exact file to see if it's the file please?

I tend to use chrome and firefox mostly, but the file seems to work fine
in edge as far as I can tell. Note that photopea doesn't like adblockers, so it's best
to turn it off for that site.

https://i.imgur.com/WNWu68m.png

https://i.imgur.com/puwqFYd.png

>
> No big deal if you don't, as the value inherent in your suggestion is that
> there is a documented supported reasonably powerful photo editor that is
> available online using a web browser on any platform - which is really
> nice.
>
> Thanks for that wonderful suggestion.
> I likely won't use it but it is great to know that it exists as others
> may use it so we can help many people who don't want to install editors.
> --
> Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
> which, in this case, is to faithfully try to help the original poster.

Andy Burnelli <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

>The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.
>
>In a recent thread, a Windows user was thrilled to find that the free
>Paint.NET Windows software beat the payware PhotoShop for his needs.
> *Results of paint.net app*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/rec.photo.digital/c/2abPbCbWw-8>
>
>Knowing that he's also on Linux, I am of the impression Pinta is the cross
>platform macOS, Windows, Linux PhotoShop replacement for Paint.NET.
>
>However... I use Paint.NET for anything PhotoShop can do, and as such,
>I haven't personally looked at Pinta (or at PhotoShop) in many years...
>
>Maybe people on this newsgroup have used mac/Linux/Win Pinta recently?
>
>A possible advantage of Pinta, is it works on macOS & Linux along
>with Windows and BSD (so it's a cross platform Photoshop replacement).
>
>NOTE: It's a fact that it's a cross platform app; it's an assessment
>that it's a Photoshop replacement. The iKooks can't figure that out.
>
>Has anyone on this newsgroup looked at Pinta recently, perhaps???
> <https://snapcraft.io/pinta>
> <https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>
> <https://www.techspot.com/downloads/5501-pinta.html>
> <https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/pinta.html>
>
>If so, would you kindly inform the rest of us how your tests worked out?
>The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.

Hey, Andy, I just purchased a year of:

---
Photography (20GB)

Edit photos in Lightroom and then transform them with Photoshop. Get
both plus 20GB of cloud storage.

US$9.99/mo
---

Directly from Adobe's site. I had some credit that was usable for it,
and wanted to just see what I was missing. It definitely is a top
notch app. May or may not renew it, a year from now, of course. I'd
like to take that length of time to see if it's useful, beyond what
paint.net already provided me.

--
Joel Crump

On 22/05/2023 03:13, Joel wrote:
> Andy Burnelli <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.
>>
>> In a recent thread, a Windows user was thrilled to find that the free
>> Paint.NET Windows software beat the payware PhotoShop for his needs.
>> *Results of paint.net app*
>> <https://groups.google.com/g/rec.photo.digital/c/2abPbCbWw-8>
>>
>> Knowing that he's also on Linux, I am of the impression Pinta is the cross
>> platform macOS, Windows, Linux PhotoShop replacement for Paint.NET.
>>
>> However... I use Paint.NET for anything PhotoShop can do, and as such,
>> I haven't personally looked at Pinta (or at PhotoShop) in many years...
>>
>> Maybe people on this newsgroup have used mac/Linux/Win Pinta recently?
>>
>> A possible advantage of Pinta, is it works on macOS & Linux along
>> with Windows and BSD (so it's a cross platform Photoshop replacement).
>>
>> NOTE: It's a fact that it's a cross platform app; it's an assessment
>> that it's a Photoshop replacement. The iKooks can't figure that out.
>>
>> Has anyone on this newsgroup looked at Pinta recently, perhaps???
>> <https://snapcraft.io/pinta>
>> <https://www.pinta-project.com/releases/>
>> <https://www.techspot.com/downloads/5501-pinta.html>
>> <https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/pinta.html>
>>
>> If so, would you kindly inform the rest of us how your tests worked out?
>> The goal is a free cross-platform PhotoShop replacement for what YOU do.
>
>
> Hey, Andy, I just purchased a year of:
>
> ---
> Photography (20GB)
>
> Edit photos in Lightroom and then transform them with Photoshop. Get
> both plus 20GB of cloud storage.
>
> US$9.99/mo
> ---
>
> Directly from Adobe's site. I had some credit that was usable for it,
> and wanted to just see what I was missing. It definitely is a top
> notch app. May or may not renew it, a year from now, of course. I'd
> like to take that length of time to see if it's useful, beyond what
> paint.net already provided me.

Hi Joel

Do you share your photographs on-line?

If so, may I ask where?

--
Kind regards,
David

David Brooks <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

>Hi Joel
>
>Do you share your photographs on-line?
>
>If so, may I ask where?

It depends why I took them, sometimes I put them on imgur.com, and
show the link wherever appropriate. Occasionally I put one on
Facebook.

--
Joel Crump