Here’s my suggestions for the patch, or version 10! Some I’m repeating from other posts on this thread (*)…
Snap to grid (what is the point of a grid you can’t snap to)
Better opacity control (current opacity is is biased WAY too much towards 100%) (*)
Impasto modify and export (would be interesting to see and edit the impasto effect layer like it was a channel. It would also be useful to export the impasto z-depth info separately, so it can be used as a bump map in 3d software packages).
Drippy ink/paint (like watercolor diffusion, be nice if we could paint thick runny paint that starts dripping down the canvas)
Splatty paint (drop paint onto the canvas from a height… like Jackson Pollock. Paint splats and runs)
Watercolor Chromatography (split watercolor color into CMYK components and be able to give each color a different diffusion rate, so the color separates like very cheap watercolor/non-art inks)
Visible resist in liquid oil layers (*)
Resist (frisket or wax) for watercolor layers, although I guess using chalk on a layer masks would work the same. Still, would be nice to add color ‘wax’ crayon direct to watercolor layer and have it repell water.
Ability to wet specific areas of the canvas (paint with water) without affecting painting, so you can control subsiquent wet-on-wet diffusion limits. Something we sort-of do with selections, but there’s no fringing of color between the ‘wet’ and ‘dry’ areas.
A real ‘dry’ eraser for watercolor- I don’t want to bleach, I want to rub-away at the watercolor paper without resorting to chalk on a layer mask.
Better ‘dry brush’ abilities with oils ( I want to hit the crests of the paper with color, but not fill the dimples nor apply a very transparent layer of paint)
Impasto takes account of paper texture ( after applying a thick brushstroke to lumpy paper, I want to be able to ‘plow’ away the paint again… although some paint should remain stuck in the dimples in the paper, only the crests should be removed of paint)
Float watercolor selections. Greyed out in the drop-down menu but if you make a selection on a watercolor layer and click using the layer adjust tool it floats the selection into a new normal layer. How about it copies the color and floats it into a new watercolor layer.
Further interface customisation. How about all the custom palettes you create are also made available in the dropdown menu (say between ‘Window’ and 'Help"). That way you can access each function in each custom palette without taking up screen realestate. Opening up this ‘custom pallete’ drop-down menu would reveal a list of custom palettes, each of whic can be opened up to access the contents of each palette.
Better 2-monitor support (*)
OK, I should stop now becore I give the guys at Corel a fright!
an idea to draw fast freehand circles: with Shift we can achieve straight lines, but my idea is to add combination of Shift+Alt for establishing the radius of the circle, then release alt key and with the Shift key hold, we can go on the invisible circle by moving our hand. For designers it would be very useful thing.
when free transforming, to view “on the fly” what we are modificating.
I really, REALLY hope they make the pallettes no longer locked within the parent window. I invested in a dual-monitor setup specifically so I could get those out of the way of the image I’m working on and have tuts/reference material on the other monitor, and the fact that they’re solidly locked in the parent is…baffling.
This is a minor request, but I’ve been thinking why I can scale other toolbars, but color and color info bars. I understand that it might be a bit difficult to make the color bar scalable, but even the color info would help. It would give so much better control of the hue, saturation and value, if the slider would be bigger.
I know that if I double click the current color icon I get bigger and better color picker. Of course you could just make the big color picker to be an optional picker, that people could choose to use if the default isn’t enough. (I mean that you could choose it to replace the default color picker.)
Oh, and painter is missing this “polygonal lasso tool” what can be found in photoshop.
Now this can be done in the current version of painter, like… make a new layer, press “v”, draw the area you want to select, select the area with magic wand, and go to the layer you want to use this selection.
But this is kind of slow, so this tool would help.
But the Real opacity is still my top reguest.
for polygonal lasso, use the pen tool, then once you’ve finished drawing your shape, at the top you’ll see some buttons, one of them is for turning the shape into a selection. no need for any new layers.
Oh, yes! Please!
It would be suitable as a brush application option (e.g., Cover, Erase, [i]Layer-Applied Opacity[/i], Burn etc.)
The reason that photoshop’s opacity works differently is that the brush stroke is not ‘applied’ until you let go of the cursor. Painter adds opacity for every step of the brush stroke, so they are constantly building on the previous brush ‘stamp’.
But the thing that's really stopping me upgrading from Painter 6 to Painter IX is absolutely [b]irritating[/b]:
In painter 6, if I want to resize a brush on-the-fly, I hold Ctrl+Alt, resize and the brush is ready for use. In Painter IX, I have to click once on the canvas after resizing to activate it! Why??? What else are you going to do other than paint with the brush once you’ve resized it?
Please Corel, I know this sounds trivial, but it’s like walking along the road but having to tap each shoe on the pavement before taking another step. It’s looks stupid and breaks up workflow.
Resize, tap, draw. Resize, tap, draw. Resize, tap, draw. Resize, tap, draw. Resize, tap, draw. Resize, tap, draw. Resize, tap, draw. rrrraaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaargh. [ Painter IX box is flung out of the window… ]
Unless I’m completely missing what you’re asking for, we already have it in Painter IX and we had it in Painter 8 as well, some of it in several earlier versions too.
The Painter IX and Painter 8 Paint Bucket tool does work on Layer Masks and on Alpha Channels, as does the Painter IX and Painter 8 Effects > Fill command work on both Layer Masks and Alpha Channels.
make the create layer mask from selection actually make a layer mask from the selection rather than from what’s inside of the selected area.
I’m not sure where you find a command named “create layer mask from selection”. I think you might be talking about Alpha Channels (that can be created by saving selections) not Layer Masks.
In any case, that’s exactly what Painter IX, Painter 8, and earlier version Alpha Channels or User Masks do.
They mask the area around the selection to protect it from being affected by painting or Effects menu options. That’s the default behavior and unless the Alpha Channel or User Mask is inverted, or the loaded selection is inverted, or another Drawing Mode icon is chosen, only the unmasked area will be affected.
Mask = hide or protect
Hide = Layer Masks
Protect = Alpha Channels or in earlier versions, User Masks
Yes, but do you use bracket keys when you have a size 100 brush and then zoom in and resize to 4 or 5? You’d be holding down the ‘[’ for quite a while.
Ctrl-Alt, imo, was the best way of doing it. It was fine in Painter 5.5 and Painter 6. Then they added the Shift to it. Everyone hated it, so they accepted that and went back. But we were lumbered with an extra step in the process.
To be honest, it’s not a problem. If it’s not fixed, I don’t upgrade. Simple.
Isn’t this result dependent on the Painter Media Variant you choose for your experiment?
In the real world, each media oil, gouche, watercolor, etc. has very specific properties of transparency and opacity. You choose which one is best for the result you want.
I think we have to take into account the natural media abilities of Painter when trying to compare it to Photoshop. If you want a clear glaze use watercolor. If you want a translucent glaze or an opaque tone use gouche or oil, etc. Just as you would in the real world.
Photoshop is dumb in this respect. It has ONE WAY to apply paint and doesn’t emulate anything. I think that uniformity is why it seems to “work better.”