• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About rui_mac

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

439 profile views
  1. When will we see it? Yes, yes... I know... when its ready
  2. Back in my old FreeHand days, when a color was added to the palette, the default name would be something like 100c67m37y80k if the color was defined as CMYK or something like 150r208g90b if the color was defined as RGB. We should have a way to change the names of any selected swatch to the color components, automatically. Just add a "Name colors as components" option to the swatches menu.
  3. Actually, GraphicConverter is a misleading name. I bought GraphicConverter several years ago and it is much more than simply a file converter. Just being devils advocate and trying to keeps this as correct as possible
  4. Actually, it is like the Layer Effects, but with localized application, instead of affecting the whole object. And, with optional fallof and shape definition. If applied in between layers/objects, they would affect all layers/objects below and within the defined shape. If applied as a child of a layer/object, they would only affect that layer/object.
  5. Having realtime, virtual deformers, that don't really destroy geometry but simply deform it when they are turned on is a great concept. We could have deformers for: - Roughing - Smoothing - Thickening and narrowing lines - Curling Etc...
  6. Nitroman is an amazing developer but has the funniest accent
  7. Well, english is NOT my native language. Don't know if it is good enough
  8. Here is an example of the MoGraph concept:
  9. But I would like to show them the power of the MoGraph paradigm with 2D vectors
  10. Loved to read the reference to Cinema 4D. I also work with Cinema 4D (I'm a Cinema 4D user, teacher, plugin developer, etc) for over 15 years now. And there are lots of tools and even concepts that would be amazing in an application like AD. MoGraph is one such example. I can make a few videos showing how it could be useful for 2D work.
  11. I also did some darkroom stuff and I still think of dodging and burning in terms of "hiding light" or "let light pass through" ;)
  12. Yeah, black=transparent sounds weird for graphic artists because to them, black is "all colors combined", because they use the subtractive system (CMYK) but is it obvious for the video-guys, because they use the addictive system (RGB) and, in there, black stands for "no light information" or "absence" :) Anyways, all of those artists (print or video) assume that the alpha is just another image that is used to convey information about how the transparency/opacity of the color components should be shown. And, since it is just another image, it should be possible to do whatever is possible to do with an image.
  13. I will be 46 years old, next September :) Here is a movie I did, when I found an old copy of Photoshop lurking around. This is still pre-1.0 and the version I started using was, in fact, 1.0 But you can see how it was, back then :)
  14. Well, I'm even more old-school :) I have been using Photoshop ever since version 1.0 !!! And, besides Photoshop, I already lost count to how many other applications I used that deal with masks. For the last 20 years I have been using and teaching 3D also. And, in 3D we also have alpha maps. And, guess what?!? They are greyscale images :)
  15. I have been giving classes for over 20 years now and many of my students are professionals in the graphic arts and video areas (I give specialized classes to recent graduates and long time professionals) and ALL of them know that, when it comes to masks/alpha channels, white stands for opaque and black stands for transparent. It is almost a mnemonic for them because when they visualize a mask (an alpha channel) that is how it is shown. Most of them deal with alpha channels, straight or pre-multiplied, as extra channels or as independent files and all, and I really mean ALL of those alpha channels (masks) are simply greyscale images. And they must be, since they all have to manipulate those alpha channels (masks) as any other image, blurring, contrasting, smudging, sharpening, etc. And, internally, an alpha channels (mask) is stored as grid of 8 or 16 bit values, just like any other greyscale image. So, there is no reason whatsoever to treat an alpha channel (mask) as something other than a greyscale image. There are only advantages in treating it as a greyscale image and be able to manipulate it as such. But if anyone can point me out any huge disadvantage in doing so that greatly surpasses the advantages, please, tell me.