Fotoxx: digital image editor
New attempt: Fotox 0.37
With some help of Muggins i repackaged Fotox 0.37:
- Installs now on /usr/... as this is the path Muggins used for his packages
- Desktop-File now has an icon
- Help-Button will now also work with epdfview and gsview (if the docs-package is installed)
- New seperate Doc package
The Docs-package can be found at: http://www.tdk-net.de/puppy/fotox_docs-0.37.pet (1.1 MB)
For exif-support exiv2 is needed.
Hope this one's better.
Thanks for improvements to Muggins.
Aragon
With some help of Muggins i repackaged Fotox 0.37:
- Installs now on /usr/... as this is the path Muggins used for his packages
- Desktop-File now has an icon
- Help-Button will now also work with epdfview and gsview (if the docs-package is installed)
- New seperate Doc package
The Docs-package can be found at: http://www.tdk-net.de/puppy/fotox_docs-0.37.pet (1.1 MB)
For exif-support exiv2 is needed.
Hope this one's better.
Thanks for improvements to Muggins.
Aragon
- Attachments
-
- fotox-0.37.pet
- fotox-0.37 repackaged
- (162.5 KiB) Downloaded 804 times
PUPPY SEARCH: http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html
- ttuuxxx
- Posts: 11171
- Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
- Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
- Contact:
I tried fotox-0.37.pet and it has potential but it wouldn't let me make a 16x16 icon from a 48x48 icon, it stops at 20x20 for some strange reason, I tried it a couple of times.
ttuuxxx
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
hi ttuuxxx,
i don't think that this is (and will ever be) the right utility for your task.
i wanted to use it as a simple tool to remove red-eyes and to adjust brightness and colors of my digicam-pics.
i tested it a little and it seems to do this job.
as a former windows-user i'm trying to pick-up apps for tasks i've formerly done with windows-tools.
for pics this is (my opinion) not that easy. i've used picasa on windows but this is not the right app for my puppy.
so for now i'm using
- gtkam for transfering
- jhead for renaming based on exif-data
- gqview for viewing
- fotox for 'adjusting'
for all other kinds of image tasks other tools (like your gimp-package ) would be better. but f.e. gimp also is a big and difficult program, so i hope fotox will be sufficient for my tasks.
cheers
aragon
i don't think that this is (and will ever be) the right utility for your task.
i wanted to use it as a simple tool to remove red-eyes and to adjust brightness and colors of my digicam-pics.
i tested it a little and it seems to do this job.
as a former windows-user i'm trying to pick-up apps for tasks i've formerly done with windows-tools.
for pics this is (my opinion) not that easy. i've used picasa on windows but this is not the right app for my puppy.
so for now i'm using
- gtkam for transfering
- jhead for renaming based on exif-data
- gqview for viewing
- fotox for 'adjusting'
for all other kinds of image tasks other tools (like your gimp-package ) would be better. but f.e. gimp also is a big and difficult program, so i hope fotox will be sufficient for my tasks.
cheers
aragon
PUPPY SEARCH: http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html
- ttuuxxx
- Posts: 11171
- Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
- Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
- Contact:
Your right aragon,aragon wrote:hi ttuuxxx,
i don't think that this is (and will ever be) the right utility for your task.
i wanted to use it as a simple tool to remove red-eyes and to adjust brightness and colors of my digicam-pics.
i tested it a little and it seems to do this job.
as a former windows-user i'm trying to pick-up apps for tasks i've formerly done with windows-tools.
for pics this is (my opinion) not that easy. i've used picasa on windows but this is not the right app for my puppy.
so for now i'm using
- gtkam for transfering
- jhead for renaming based on exif-data
- gqview for viewing
- fotox for 'adjusting'
for all other kinds of image tasks other tools (like your gimp-package ) would be better. but f.e. gimp also is a big and difficult program, so i hope fotox will be sufficient for my tasks.
cheers
aragon
I still do 90% of all my images on Photoshop CS3 and Icon Lover for the PSD to XPM conversion, I would like a small tool that could compress and resize images with a drag and drop function when I'm building a Variant like I'm doing at the moment on 3.01 retro. Just to save some time, And not mtpaint because I find the quality isn't all that hot. Installing gimp to do those task just to remove it in the end could seriously corrupt some programs.
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
hi ttuuxxx,
i like drag'n'drop too, but wouldn't that be a task for image magick?
i think it is able to convert psd-images and it is able to resize.
with 2 little scripts (that i think you are able to write, i'm not ) you might have it as a action in rox => wouldn't this be better than drag'n'drop
aragon
i like drag'n'drop too, but wouldn't that be a task for image magick?
i think it is able to convert psd-images and it is able to resize.
with 2 little scripts (that i think you are able to write, i'm not ) you might have it as a action in rox => wouldn't this be better than drag'n'drop
aragon
PUPPY SEARCH: http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html
hi gerry,
i don't print images myself. if i wanted them printed out, i go to someone who is specialised => bricks'n mortar...
sorry, i can't help you
aragon
i don't print images myself. if i wanted them printed out, i go to someone who is specialised => bricks'n mortar...
sorry, i can't help you
aragon
PUPPY SEARCH: http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html
Just a small observation. Citing "quality" as a reason to prefer GIMP over mtPaint demonstrates not one's sophistication, but one's ignorance. Because anything mtPaint is capable of doing, it does better than GIMP, and this is a hard technical fact.ttuuxxx wrote:And not mtpaint because I find the quality isn't all that hot. Installing gimp to do those task just to remove it in the end could seriously corrupt some programs.
There surely are many other reasons for disliking mtPaint - I hope picking one based in reality will be easy the next time.
-= With best regards, Dmitry Groshev, maintainer of mtPaint =-
- ttuuxxx
- Posts: 11171
- Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
- Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
- Contact:
I Have done thousands of hours of graphic's and when it comes to plugins Gimp wins over mt paint, But Photoshop CS3 kills Gimp, plus everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion and that is mine.wjaguar wrote:Just a small observation. Citing "quality" as a reason to prefer GIMP over mtPaint demonstrates not one's sophistication, but one's ignorance. Because anything mtPaint is capable of doing, it does better than GIMP, and this is a hard technical fact.ttuuxxx wrote:And not mtpaint because I find the quality isn't all that hot. Installing gimp to do those task just to remove it in the end could seriously corrupt some programs.
There surely are many other reasons for disliking mtPaint - I hope picking one based in reality will be easy the next time.
-= With best regards, Dmitry Groshev, maintainer of mtPaint =-
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
Agreed, naturally - but this is not "quality", this is featureset. Which is an entirely different thing.ttuuxxx wrote:when it comes to plugins Gimp wins over mt paint
Agreed again - this is one reason why I became involved with mtPaint; I needed an image editor doing a better job than GIMP is capable of, and GIMP's codebase is too unwieldy for my taste.But Photoshop CS3 kills Gimp
And here, I have to disagree. No one is entitled to lying in public about other people's work.plus everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion and that is mine.
-= With best regards, Dmitry Groshev, maintainer of mtPaint =-
Before this goes further.
I think ttuuxxx genuinely believes what he is saying so he cannot be lying. It might help if ttuuxxx explained exactly which feature of mtpaint he believes is carried out better by the gimp. This would give Dmitry an opportunity to explain the way this feature works in mtpaint.S: (n) lying, prevarication, fabrication (the deliberate act of deviating from the truth)
Will
contribute: [url=http://www.puppylinux.org]community website[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6c3nm6]screenshots[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6j2gbz]puplets[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/57gykn]wiki[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/5dgr83]rss[/url]
contribute: [url=http://www.puppylinux.org]community website[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6c3nm6]screenshots[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6j2gbz]puplets[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/57gykn]wiki[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/5dgr83]rss[/url]
- ttuuxxx
- Posts: 11171
- Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
- Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
- Contact:
One thing I don't do buddy is Lie, Around Half of the .xpm format's found in ICEWM start menu buttons you can not edit with mtPaint, But with a little program on windows called "Icon Lover" You can, Basically I build my images with CS3 and save them as PSD, Since photoshop for some stupid reason doesn't support XPM either, Then I open the PSD with "Icon Lover" and save them as XPM. The reason why I don't use Linux for it? Because MtPaint,Gimp,Inkscape,Cinepaint,Xara, Can't do it. Period full stop. Also the Image quality is extremely excellent, So much better then converting from PSD-->PNG---XPMwjaguar wrote:Agreed, naturally - but this is not "quality", this is featureset. Which is an entirely different thing.ttuuxxx wrote:when it comes to plugins Gimp wins over mt paint
Agreed again - this is one reason why I became involved with mtPaint; I needed an image editor doing a better job than GIMP is capable of, and GIMP's codebase is too unwieldy for my taste.But Photoshop CS3 kills Gimp
And here, I have to disagree. No one is entitled to lying in public about other people's work.plus everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion and that is mine.
-= With best regards, Dmitry Groshev, maintainer of mtPaint =-
If you are a maintainer of MtPaint why not take it out of the stone ages, Really isn't the windows 3.1 era of paint applications a thing of the past, I know Microsoft is hooked on basic looking paint packages but they did help out a little program called Paint.Net http://www.getpaint.net/screenshots.html
yes its a free paint program for windows, but it has been ported to Linux with mono, But really bit of a pain to do.
Why is it that you have a potential of pleasing the whole Linux community and don't?
Paint.Net has won tons of awards for what it does, Its like #19 out top 100 windows applications from pc world.
The Only difference between Paint.Net and Mtpaint is basically looks, and use of functionality, Why couldn't you give Mtpaint a look and feel of of a basic Photoshop or Paint.Net? Paint.net did and look how far they grew with just a few short years.
Couldn't you have a compression slidebar that gives you real-time results.? Thats one thing I don't like about Mtpaint, Its not precise, you do a few adjustments when you go to save it and have no clue what it looks like until you actually save it and reopen it.
At the end of the day you can shoot your mouth off as much as you want, But If you wake up to the fact that MtPaint Has tons of potential and could be looked upon as an up and coming Photoshop for linux alternative which is a very huge want by around 90% of ex-Windows users, Or Just another run of the mill windows 3.1 Paint program. You decide, all you would need is to
- swallow your pride
- Get a compression slide bar with realtime image preview.
- A proper Layers windows, with the possibility of changing image transparencies/fading color levels/drag and drop movement of layers with a possibility of tiny image previews or naming scheme.
- Nice color wheel that isn't hidden, That can be permanently docked on the right side with the layers menus, same size. So when you open mtpaint you see the layers and color wheel
- Nice tool bar side panel with tools that actually Look like the Adobe counterparts. (this is where gimp truly fails. People spend years on Photoshop, They teach it in schools etc, Then people come to Linux for a look and everybody says," If you looking for a Photoshop type tool use GIMP!", What a joke anybody and everybody says," what is this #$#@$", It looks nothing like Photoshop. etc and then they walk away disappointed. Unlike Mtpaint they feel at home with paint. But seriously think about it, Just a few minor changes and your program would be on every Linux pc, not just because it looks good, but because it small size, Quick Loading and people can relate to it.
Prime example a pole on LinuxQuestions.org that has a permanent sticky
" What programs would you like to see ported to Linux?"
Top of the list every time Photohop&Dreamweaver
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions ... ux-105955/
Why because they are excellent programs. Linux alternatives listed above for the Photoshop and for Dreamweaver grrrr NVU/Compozer.
Let me guess your part of the NVU/Compozer team also?
If so install a descant Ftp Program like Fire FTP (Firefox plugin, small but works excellent:) And do something about the CSS system.
I am just personally tired of Using Adobe programs for Mac and Windows only, Because the Linux alternatives are confusing / Not as functional/ about 10yrs behind. Sure it might easy for the younger Generation to grasp the Linux alternatives but people in their30's + with families and Jobs etc don't really want to start all over again. I personally can use the Linux versions because I sat down and forced myself, Where as my wife says "No Way am I learning that, It was bad enough to learn others in school!"
Hope this helps
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
Dmitry,
I too hold you responsible for the shortcomings of the gimp, NVU and Compozer.
ttuuxxx,
I passed on the details of the XPM problem to Dmitry the other day. He has already said that he will relax the constraints applied by the parser so that mtpaint can open the files you mention, I should have passed this back to you.
I too hold you responsible for the shortcomings of the gimp, NVU and Compozer.
ttuuxxx,
I passed on the details of the XPM problem to Dmitry the other day. He has already said that he will relax the constraints applied by the parser so that mtpaint can open the files you mention, I should have passed this back to you.
Will
contribute: [url=http://www.puppylinux.org]community website[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6c3nm6]screenshots[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6j2gbz]puplets[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/57gykn]wiki[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/5dgr83]rss[/url]
contribute: [url=http://www.puppylinux.org]community website[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6c3nm6]screenshots[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/6j2gbz]puplets[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/57gykn]wiki[/url], [url=http://tinyurl.com/5dgr83]rss[/url]
Refusing to recognize broken XPMs written by some obscure tool, while not a good thing in principle, is a quality issue only for the freaky program which writes them that way. If the program in question is this "Icon Lover", you may thank its developers for being too clever for their own good.ttuuxxx wrote:Around Half of the .xpm format's found in ICEWM start menu buttons you can not edit with mtPaint, But with a little program on windows called "Icon Lover" You can,
To support loading a perverted variant of an image format, I first have to be aware of the perversion's existence. Which wasn't the case till the day before yesterday - and BTW, if you're that concerned about the problem, then how come that the person reporting it was *not* you?
If I had Microsoft sponsoring the awards for my program, mtPaint would have been #2 Windows application, right beside MS Office.Paint.Net has won tons of awards for what it does, Its like #19 out top 100 windows applications from pc world.
I know the only thing most users understand is the looks - but I myself am not an artist, and besides, mtPaint's absolute portability comes with a price; even now, I have to work around quirks of buggy theme engines, and were I to try anything fancy, surely a dozen or two of them would fail spectacularly at displaying it.The Only difference between Paint.Net and Mtpaint is basically looks, and use of functionality, Why couldn't you give Mtpaint a look and feel of of a basic Photoshop or Paint.Net? Paint.net did and look how far they grew with just a few short years.
Besides, I just plain do not like Photoshop's interface.
Still, I'm not at all averse to improving mtPaint's interface, if a suggested improvement does make sense to me. But "mtPaint must imitate Photoshop" is a suggestion which doesn't.
Proven again - even a stupidest flame can result in something useful. Yes, JPEG compression preview (if this is what you were talking about) can be a nice feature - I added it to my to-do list.Couldn't you have a compression slidebar that gives you real-time results.? Thats one thing I don't like about Mtpaint, Its not precise, you do a few adjustments when you go to save it and have no clue what it looks like until you actually save it and reopen it.
Cannot be done. Any Evil Russian Hacker (tm) has a pride far too large to be swallowable; I'm not an exceptionYou decide, all you would need is to
- swallow your pride
Layer transparencies we have since version 2.00; drag and drop layer reordering would be nice, but making it work is nontrivial - GtkList widget uses it internally, for item selection; as for "fading color levels", please explain what exactly it does mean.- A proper Layers windows, with the possibility of changing image transparencies/fading color levels/drag and drop movement of layers with a possibility of tiny image previews or naming scheme.
Already done in 3.30 development branch - don't know how "nice" it is, but surely more Photoshop-like (and KDE-like) than GTK's builtin wheel used before.- Nice color wheel
Looking like Photoshop isn't in itself a recipe for success. There are hundreds of freeware and shareware Photoshop clones on Windows, but none of them really successful. If not for Microsoft promotion, Paint.NET wouldn't have stood out from that crowd either - technically, it's somewhere below average.- Nice tool bar side panel with tools that actually Look like the Adobe counterparts.
No, I barely can find enough time for mtPaint.Let me guess your part of the NVU/Compozer team also?
It does, a bit.Hope this helps
But my point still stands - speaking of "quality" while meaning by it the degree of likeness to Photoshop is misleading at best.
-= With best regards, Dmitry Groshev, maintainer of mtPaint =-
- ttuuxxx
- Posts: 11171
- Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
- Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
- Contact:
ummmm I did state around half of the xpm used in icewm menu buttons weren't editable, I personally do not even come close to 1/2 the themes, try 1/100 lolwjaguar wrote: Refusing to recognize broken XPMs written by some obscure tool, while not a good thing in principle, is a quality issue only for the freaky program which writes them that way. If the program in question is this "Icon Lover", you may thank its developers for being too clever for their own good.
To support loading a perverted variant of an image format, I first have to be aware of the perversion's existence. Which wasn't the case till the day before yesterday - and BTW, if you're that concerned about the problem, then how come that the person reporting it was *not* you?
Its just not my xpms in icewm its 1/2 of all people building them, and I can honestly say they are not using "icon Lover" to convert formats, because it isn't a well known program.
If I had Microsoft sponsoring the awards for my program, mtPaint would have been #2 Windows application, right beside MS Office.Paint.Net has won tons of awards for what it does, Its like #19 out top 100 windows applications from pc world.
No orginally Paint.Net was just a program 2 guys came up with, once it got some limelight Microsoft donated some funds in hopes that it might use it as the default paint program for future Windows Operating systems.
I know the only thing most users understand is the looks - but I myself am not an artist, and besides, mtPaint's absolute portability comes with a price; even now, I have to work around quirks of buggy theme engines, and were I to try anything fancy, surely a dozen or two of them would fail spectacularly at displaying it.The Only difference between Paint.Net and Mtpaint is basically looks, and use of functionality, Why couldn't you give Mtpaint a look and feel of of a basic Photoshop or Paint.Net? Paint.net did and look how far they grew with just a few short years.
Besides, I just plain do not like Photoshop's interface.
I'm starting to think your not telling the truth, Come on Photoshop's interface is second to none, But I do have an idea how to remedy this, Why not PM me with the default icon set tar.gz and I'll build you a new set from scratch? And you can try the icons, if you like them and if not just delete the icons.
Still, I'm not at all averse to improving mtPaint's interface, if a suggested improvement does make sense to me. But "mtPaint must imitate Photoshop" is a suggestion which doesn't.
I'm not saying imitate, Just function somewhat similar, It almost does now, A few features, a small change in layout, New icons. And you'll have a winner on your hands.
Proven again - ttuuxxx always gives something useful. Yes, JPEG compression preview (if this is what you were talking about) can be a nice feature - I added it to my to-do list.Couldn't you have a compression slidebar that gives you real-time results.? Thats one thing I don't like about Mtpaint, Its not precise, you do a few adjustments when you go to save it and have no clue what it looks like until you actually save it and reopen it.
Layer transparencies we have since version 2.00; drag and drop layer reordering would be nice, but making it work is nontrivial - GtkList widget uses it internally, for item selection; as for "fading color levels", please explain what exactly it does mean.- A proper Layers windows, with the possibility of changing image transparencies/fading color levels/drag and drop movement of layers with a possibility of tiny image previews or naming scheme.
"fading color levels" Gradient controls, with the ability to fade the gradient on the layers.
Already done in 3.30 development branch - don't know how "nice" it is, but surely more Photoshop-like (and KDE-like) than GTK's builtin wheel used before.- Nice color wheel
Looking like Photoshop isn't in itself a recipe for success. There are hundreds of freeware and shareware Photoshop clones on Windows, but none of them really successful. If not for Microsoft promotion, Paint.NET wouldn't have stood out from that crowd either - technically, it's somewhere below average.- Nice tool bar side panel with tools that actually Look like the Adobe counterparts.
No I don't agree with it being below average, for the size of it compared with gimp its around 1/5 the size plus it has nice color level features.
No, I barely can find enough time for mtPaint.Let me guess your part of the NVU/Compozer team also?
It does, a bit.Hope this helps
But my point still stands - speaking of "quality" while meaning by it the degree of likeness to Photoshop is misleading at best.
I think the Quality would be excellent if you did add a compression preview.
also I think people would take your program more serious if it had a modern user interface (Look&Feel).
Really its a paint program where you build "Bling" but doesn't have any "Bling" itself. Strange.
Like I said I would be happy to build a set of icons for you if you sent me the originals icons used, tar.gz That way I would have the sizes, looks, formats. etc
thanks for your time ttuuxxx
-= With best regards, Dmitry Groshev, maintainer of mtPaint =-[/quote]
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
Still, not one graphics program I ever encountered writes XPMs that way. Which makes me wonder how those strange XPMs came into existence.ttuuxxx wrote:Its just not my xpms in icewm its 1/2 of all people building them, and I can honestly say they are not using "icon Lover" to convert formats, because it isn't a well known program.
Yes, and Linux was originally created by Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus.No orginally Paint.Net was just a program 2 guys came up with, once it got some limelight Microsoft donated some funds in hopes that it might use it as the default paint program for future Windows Operating systems.
The more believable scenario is that Paint.NET came to be as a part of MS promotional effort for C# and .NET. After all, who would have wanted to install the huge .NET runtime, if no useful apps required it?
I still vividly remember wrestling with that interface in the Photoshop 4.0 days. For me, anything up to and including writing an image editor of my own is preferable to touching that thing ever again.I'm starting to think your not telling the truth, Come on Photoshop's interface is second to none,
So I guess this is a matter of individual preference.
If what you're talking about is what's called "layer masks" in Photoshop, then mtPaint has it, by other name, since version 3.00. In mtPaint, layer's alpha channel serves as layer mask - to get layer to fade into background, just switch to editing its alpha channel and draw a gradient in there."fading color levels" Gradient controls, with the ability to fade the gradient on the layers.
For a proper size comparison, the size of .NET runtime has to be added to Paint.NET, and the size of GTK+ runtime to GIMP.No I don't agree with it being below average, for the size of it compared with gimp its around 1/5 the size plus it has nice color level features.
And Paint.NET *is* below average technically, because of substandard implementation of image processing algorithms; even its "Gaussian blur" is a coarse approximation, not the real thing. And even with that, it's quite slow.
(Footnote: Paint.NET's inherent slowness is somewhat offset on multicore systems by latest .NET runtime auto-parallelizing its processing - which mtPaint, for my shame, still is unable to do; to get the same speedup for mtPaint, I'll need to make use of OpenMP extensions in GCC 4.2.)
Thanks, I'll take you up on your offer. The icons are the largest source of complaint about mtPaint, even if I myself am content with them as they're now.Like I said I would be happy to build a set of icons for you if you sent me the originals icons used, tar.gz That way I would have the sizes, looks, formats. etc
-= With best regards, Dmitry Groshev, maintainer of mtPaint =-