|
Post by Zarth on Dec 8, 2010 21:48:24 GMT -5
I thought "pencil not brush" was the case in pretty much every art program :b In paint before Windows 7, the pencil was only one pixel wide, and the brush was what you would use for different sizes of the pencil. Other than paint, though, yeah. you could change the size of the pencil in ms paint via CTRL + or lower it with CTRL -
|
|
|
Post by Grimscott on Dec 10, 2010 21:41:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Zarth on Dec 10, 2010 21:49:28 GMT -5
thankyou, Grim.
|
|
Kromax
Landlord
Why are you reading this?[M0n:-2167]
Six pronged dick
Posts: 1,206
|
Post by Kromax on Dec 10, 2010 23:51:00 GMT -5
I LOVE you Grim, though It'll never ever be easy to do that Stuff
|
|
|
Post by xamllew on Dec 12, 2010 11:43:58 GMT -5
Tools don't make the artist. Thats why. Exactly, so the fact that someone uses a newer version of paint isn't important. The fact that your tools are irrelevant actually makes going out of your way to downgrade a program that comes standard with your operating system make even less sense. I don't understand why your point is helping your argument instead of hindering it. Quit trying to lie to yourself, we all know windows 7 paint is a silly gimmick of Photoshop. If you want to use paint use the original, otherwise you may as well just download Photoshop or Gimp right now and use a real painting program instead of that makeshift POS windows shamelessly pushed out of their colon and wrapped up with the package.
|
|
|
Post by Gront on Dec 12, 2010 15:20:17 GMT -5
Exactly, so the fact that someone uses a newer version of paint isn't important. The fact that your tools are irrelevant actually makes going out of your way to downgrade a program that comes standard with your operating system make even less sense. I don't understand why your point is helping your argument instead of hindering it. Quit trying to lie to yourself, we all know windows 7 paint is a silly gimmick of Photoshop. If you want to use paint use the original, otherwise you may as well just download Photoshop or Gimp right now and use a real painting program instead of that makeshift POS windows shamelessly pushed out of their colon and wrapped up with the package. I'm with Xam. Paint had a suitable niche in the computer art program world and they gave it up to be a shittier version of other programs. Yes, the tools don't make the artist, but some tools are better than other.
|
|
|
Post by Metal Chao on Dec 12, 2010 16:07:49 GMT -5
Quit trying to lie to yourself, we all know windows 7 paint is a silly gimmick of Photoshop. If you want to use paint use the original, otherwise you may as well just download Photoshop or Gimp right now and use a real painting program instead of that makeshift POS windows shamelessly pushed out of their colon and wrapped up with the package. I'm with Xam. Paint had a suitable niche in the computer art program world and they gave it up to be a shittier version of other programs. Yes, the tools don't make the artist, but some tools are better than other. If I have a car that I use to drive to work, then it is replaced by an identical car that is no better or worse at driving me to work but also includes a clock radio, why would I choose to go out of my way and go back to the old car that has no advantages and loses a feature that I might not use but might come in handy some time? There is no reason why paint XP is better than paint 7 because all that they have done is added features and nothing has been removed. Your arguments make no sense at all. What did they take out that removed it from its niche? What makes it any more of a shit version of any more advanced paint program than ever? Nothing has been taken out, how can adding optional features and keeping all the old ones ever be a bad thing?
|
|
|
Post by Gront on Dec 12, 2010 16:43:22 GMT -5
I'm with Xam. Paint had a suitable niche in the computer art program world and they gave it up to be a shittier version of other programs. Yes, the tools don't make the artist, but some tools are better than other. If I have a car that I use to drive to work, then it is replaced by an identical car that is no better or worse at driving me to work but also includes a clock radio, why would I choose to go out of my way and go back to the old car that has no advantages and loses a feature that I might not use but might come in handy some time? There is no reason why paint XP is better than paint 7 because all that they have done is added features and nothing has been removed. Your arguments make no sense at all. What did they take out that removed it from its niche? What makes it any more of a shit version of any more advanced paint program than ever? Nothing has been taken out, how can adding optional features and keeping all the old ones ever be a bad thing? Actually, using the car analogy, Windows 7 paint is like taking your old car, adding a GPS, clock radio, and set of turntables, but, since the addition of these things took up too much space, they had to move the steering wheel to the backseat. Oh, and they switched around the gear shift because that's the way another, more popular brand does it. Yes, they added shit, but they tried to organize it in a way that looks nothing like the original, they flipped commands around (I see no reason why the zoom controls should have been switched, for example), and made all the autoshapes useless. I use the shit out of autoshapes. Basically, it's not the fact that they added functions that bothered me, it's that they changed it so fundamentally so that it would appeal to people who probably will stick with gimp and the rest, while making it difficult to do one of the things Paint was best at: pixel-by-pixel editing. Yes, you can still do it, but XP (or, even more so Vista) paint was streamlined for it, because initially, that's all paint was capable of.
|
|
|
Post by Metal Chao on Dec 12, 2010 16:55:10 GMT -5
How are the autoshapes broken? I still use them and they seem to work fine. I always used my mouse wheel (you can't in XP) or the tool for zooming so I had no idea that was changed either. And neither make pixel by pixel editing harder because once you've zoomed in you don't need to go out again, and you shouldn't be using autoshapes if you're doing it pixel by pixel (and if you want to they still work fine, I make sprites on a regular basis).
Are those the only changes? I think the infinite undos as opposed to three in xp make up for such a tiny change in control scheme. If you want to cope with the annoyance of only being able to correct three mistakes then you can do what you want, personally I think judging someone by their paint program is completely moronic behaviour, but personally I'm not going to make it so annoying for myself just because I'm sad that they changed the UI.
If someone is fine with these minor changes then you shouldn't be calling them stupid just because they decided to use the most recent version of a program pre-installed on their computer instead of going out of the way to install an outdated version so that they can have a less shiny toolbar. It's actually none of your business, and has nothing to do with their skills as an artist.
|
|
|
Post by Gront on Dec 12, 2010 17:12:21 GMT -5
How are the autoshapes broken? I still use them and they seem to work fine. I always used my mouse wheel (you can't in XP) or the tool for zooming so I had no idea that was changed either. And neither make pixel by pixel editing harder because once you've zoomed in you don't need to go out again, and you shouldn't be using autoshapes if you're doing it pixel by pixel (and if you want to they still work fine, I make sprites on a regular basis). Are those the only changes? I think the infinite undos as opposed to three in xp make up for such a tiny change in control scheme. If you want to cope with the annoyance of only being able to correct three mistakes then you can do what you want, personally I think judging someone by their paint program is completely moronic behaviour, but personally I'm not going to make it so annoying for myself just because I'm sad that they changed the UI. Circles and squares work fine, but if you do a rounded rectangle, the "rounded" corners look retarded unless you do a square. My mouse wheel is pretty sketchy, so I rarely use it except for scrolling on webpages, so I probably wouldn't use the mouse wheel zoom, but I can see why that would be a draw if I had a working mouse wheel. Actually, the main issue I have for pixel-by-pixel editing is the stupid way they make you change secondary colors. For some reason this only really bugs me when I'm doing pixel-by-pixel. Also, there's a glitch that causes the color eraser (the one where you right click with the eraser and it erases only things in your primary color) that makes it not work sometimes. I'd give you more information, but I honestly haven't noticed a pattern as to when it happens or not. I use Vista paint, which has at least 10 undos. Enough that I've never run out, basically. And Vista paint kicks the shit out of XP paint. Also I've never had any major problems with Vista (no more than XP), so I don't want to hear it. If I come off as though I'm judging people for their program, I'm sorry; I don't mean to. I'm just explaining why I hate Win7 paint and why I prefer Vista paint. Speaking of, does anyone know of any good paint programs for Ubuntu? I'm getting a new laptop for Christmas (my dad had to spoil the surprise because I had to tell him what to get), and I've already decided that I'll be running Ubuntu on it because I need a machine that has a UNIX-based command system.
|
|
|
Post by Metal Chao on Dec 12, 2010 17:24:29 GMT -5
If I come off as though I'm judging people for their program, I'm sorry; I don't mean to. I'm just explaining why I hate Win7 paint and why I prefer Vista paint. Well you are explaining it in defence of someone who is calling everyone who uses windows 7 paint an idiot, it's easy to get that confused for you agreeing with him ;)
|
|
charlie
Skin Making
[M0n:2225]
pwof
Posts: 758
|
Post by charlie on Jan 16, 2011 19:36:09 GMT -5
nitro asked for this ty
|
|
|
Post by McJesus on Jan 17, 2011 0:18:35 GMT -5
fuck your shit mvg, men dont have thighgaps
|
|
charlie
Skin Making
[M0n:2225]
pwof
Posts: 758
|
Post by charlie on Jan 17, 2011 0:27:04 GMT -5
fuck your shit mvg, men dont have thighgaps mcj do you have no penis or what
|
|
|
Post by McJesus on Jan 17, 2011 0:52:04 GMT -5
fuck your shit mvg, men dont have thighgaps mcj do you have no penis or what thigh gap is like, a sign of femininity. im pretty sure you dont have a penis >:U
|
|
charlie
Skin Making
[M0n:2225]
pwof
Posts: 758
|
Post by charlie on Jan 17, 2011 0:57:23 GMT -5
mcj do you have no penis or what thigh gap is like, a sign of femininity. im pretty sure you dont have a penis >:U men have a thigh gap, it's just pretty small man gotta stop drinking that haterade i dunno what got up in your heeby jeebies
|
|