Name: Photormin Development Test 2:Updated to latest PAF Specs
Description:Photormin is a Advanced Multi-Window painting tool for Windows. Drag & Drop Support, Advanced Drawing Tools, Color and Text and Zoom Box, Multi-Button Mouse Controling, Smooth Image Resizing, Crop and Support Common file formats for opening.
Release Notes
Development Test 1:Initial Release
(MD5: 38e48348cb927392559300a9b88fcf64)
BTW, this is my first app that saves stuff to the registry :P.
You are here
Photormin Portable 0.91b DevTest 2
March 7, 2008 - 6:29pm
#1
Photormin Portable 0.91b DevTest 2
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
You're my hero for finding this (I think). Yea, GIMP is much to much for most common tasks, and Paint.NET can't be 'portable'. I hope this is what I'm looking for.
Edit: Very nice find! I'll be eager to try this one out. I've been looking for something like this for months now. Hopefully a few more features and it'll be all I'm looking for.
it was written in Visual Basic, so you will need to download the runtimes and extract them, so the installer will detect it and put them in the app folder.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
Multiwindow? That's not a feature but a flaw
multiwindow as in one big window with smaller windows...
But still simpler thatn GIMP.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
Actually, this would be a good fit as a simpler tool alongside GIMP if it works as advertised.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I develop mainly for the education value, and that I get bored easily
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
I'd been looking for something like MS Paint style that's open source for so long.
Here's the usual picky stuff for you to change.
And that's basically all I caught in my line of duty, looks good! And again, awesome find.
Add "gdi32.dll not compressed with UPX" to that list.
Additionally, the photormin.exe file needs to be compressed with the correct options (unless there is a reason it wasn't). How can I tell? Because I expanded it then compressed it using the official command line options/switches and it's smaller in size that what I downloaded.
Cancer Survivors -- Remember the fight, celebrate the victory!
Help control the rugrat population -- have yourself spayed or neutered!
I upaxed it.
Oh, and You can't upx gdi32.dll because that's a windows component and is closed source. I made the installer copy it in in case if you end up on some old PC (like mine, I don't have VB6 runtimes :P)
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
I love having some criticsism, having nothing to improve on is baad.:
It took me several hours on SF.net to find this, a lot of reresearching.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
7. you need to add the readme.txt to stay within PAF specs, just check out how the other apps set up their readme.txt
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
Just gotta wait for the next release when somebody shows up with a bug.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
Some of the txt files seem to be just wasting space. A 'put your settings files here' textfile is even counterproductive. No-one reads them, and if some do they might think they need to do something manual. Yet these text files arent generic and often include the name of the app, etc.
The readme the same. It even refers to alternative folder lay out as if anyone chould even try to alter the folder structure.
For my launchers I am not adding these kind of readme's, because some have little or no real purpose to the end user.
I get a feeling most of the text files in the folders are just pointers to developers what is a folder for, but beyond that it's just over the top. (Like adding empty folders when they are not used just to comply with the format)
The readme.txt is the most useful txt files of the bunch but again if I want to make a new app portable, it's again requiring to modify/add/edit these file(s).
These don't seem to be aimed at the end users to much. (who even reads readmes
I eventually made a batch file that generated all there txt files based on the app title but as none of my apps will even be considered to become official I will not use these txt files like 'your this goes here' and 'your that goes there'.
Those are 'over the top'.
But cool to see an application enter the endless list of Alphas, Betas, Release candidates, etc. And who knows, next week official
Good job!
Keep'em coming.
The readme.txt in the source directory should only list the default layout, other layouts are no longer supported.
I agree that some of the txt files do seem useless, but it does keep things organized.
Adding directories that aren't used should not take place. Like if the app has no settings, it shouldnt need a settings dir. One of T's apps here in testing is like that, I don't remember which one right now though.
I think a shift to generic readme file is a good idea, that way the structure and organization can remain, but the file's dont have to constantly be updated.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
I hope someone will switch to generic readmes, or drop the useless ones. Maybe you think it keeps things organised but the users don't need then (other than being told what the folder is for, imagine Windows or other applications doing that) and Developers only 'need' those when they are figuring out the portable format. When was the last time you have opened one of those text files (other than edit the name of the app). And info about the portable format should be in a document, not scattered throughout the folder structure. I never felt like it was helping me to keep the folder structure organized.
the "someone" has to be John
And the readmes helped me a lot when I started figuring out how this all works with NSIS and Portabalising and stuff. As John said, they are only for the launcher, so they are meant for devs or people who want to redo things and not for the average user. I think we should keep them; at least till we have a proper documentation we can point people to.
"What about Love?" - "Overrated. Biochemically no different than eating large quantities of chocolate." - Al Pacino in The Devils Advocate
It's perfect. I need something like this. Great pick, I'll take a look at it.
EDIT: No problems whatsoever. You also receive the official The Settings Keeper™ Seal of Approval.
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." - Rick Cook
Great app, one issue I noticed though, it doesn't look like the settings file is ever created.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
reg entry thingy? I have no idea...
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
Yeah, it never creates the .reg file in the settings directory. Also, we may want to wait for John to comment, but I really do think it is ok to include the required runtimes. Qt based apps, apps that need the VB runtimes, apps that need the C runtimes, most of the ones on SF with those dependencies do include them. It's just the full frameworks like .NET or Java that aren't packaged with the app.
And 1 more, your copyright sections should look like this
In your current setup, it implies that you have been developing with John since 2004, which I do not think is accurate.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
I wonder where it says that ....
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
which are you referring to, the runtimes, or the copyright info?
If it's the runtimes, i dont know, i havent found any official documentation, but then again i havent looked for any. I've just seen several apps include the needed runtimes in them, or at the very least, the installer offers to download them for you.
If it's the copyright stuff, look at ANY of the other apps in Development Test status, and you'll see that it's John's copyright on one line, and the other developer's copyright on the next line. This is the way it should be done. If you have only been developing since 2007, or only in 2008, you cannot include your name in John's copyright which starts in 2004.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
Just played with it a bit, but it seems to have difficulty with med-large sized pictures.
1. No scrollbar when resizing frame: If I have a large photo, and I drag in the edges, there are no scrollbars to allow me to pan - and it always keeps the center on the center.
2. It seems to take a long time to apply any filter. I've been using Photofiltre (portablefreeware.com) as a benchmark, since it is fairly similar.
Photormin takes as much as a minute to apply a filter (such as the "Red" filter), while Photofiltre does it almost instantaneously.
Photormin has crashed a couple of times, too.
P.S. I thought the Windows error message was particularly amusing:
"You chose to end the nonresponsive program, Photormin is a Amazing Photo Drawing and Editing tool based on Windows Platform.."
I made this half-pony, half-monkey monster to please you.
Those are some pretty harsh drawbacks, and nice error.
not my fault
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
Never said it was?
And:
Open Source sucks! Get Open Source and Copyleft!
Is that not a bit contradicting?
I got bored again.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
and wondering if I'm the only one that's seen this behavior in the app.
I took a look at the SF page, and while I think this project has promise, it's definitely still way beta.
I also googled it, and of all the sites that referenced it and offered it for DL, there were zero (0) comments or reviews.
I'll post to SF tonight with the bugs I found.
I made this half-pony, half-monkey monster to please you.
to DevTest 2
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
If this is comparable to GIMP, does that mean that it can manipulate photos? I have tried opening several photographs with mixed results. The first was a snapshot from my cell phone: 960x1280 pixels - opened fine. Didn't really do any manipulating. Next I opened an image from my camera: 2592x1944 pixels. Only was able to see half the image and could not figure out how to zoom out or navigate around the photo. When I tried to resize, the program crashed.
Has anyone else used Photormin to edit photos? I realize the program is in its infancy. I just don't know if it is primarily for simple painting, or photos (as the name seemed to indicate for me).
I use GIMP, it's starting to go faster as the PC loads more pre-fetch files.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.