Good free app for straightening scanned photos

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 09:14:58 -0400, Mayayana wrote:

Yes. That's a showstopper for me. It not only
requires .Net. It was designed to be a showcase
for .Net graphic functionality.

Wow. I didn't know that! Thanks.

It always amazed me that .NET Framework is a Microsoft Windows' abomination
in that a company that makes the operating system can't come up with a
function library that makes sense.

I'm NOT a coder, so I only know what makes sense from the *user*
standpoint.

What makes no sense to me, as a basic user of Windows, is that I have to
load version after version after subversion of .NET Framework, each of
which must surely be huge duplication of the previous versions.

Yet, load them I must.

From a Windows OS standpoint, that makes no sense to me, coming from the
vendor of the OS itself.

Every time there's a
new framework, Paint.Net requires that new one.
They want it to be a demo of "the latest and greatest".

Who is "they". I never wondered or asked "who" makes Paint.NET before.
Googling ... http://www.getpaint.net/index.html they ask for donations.

Are the developers of Paint.NET somehow in bed with Microsoft?

I'm not sure of the details at this point, but I think
the latest is something like v. 4.5, something like 1/2
GB of support libraries,and only runs on Win7+. It's
like making Photoshop running on Java. Because of
that I've never even tried Paint.Net. I'd be curious
to try it if it were not .Net-crippled, but I'm not going
to install such a massive pile of support slop just for
that. (Just as I don't seriously consider installing
anything that requires Java.)

I agree with you.
If there was a better (curved arrow, texting, and boxing) program out
there, I'd install it (trust me I would).

But it's just so good at those three things that I can't.

BTW, as I said, Pinta was *supposed* to be a cross-platform replacement for
Paint.NET, so, when/if Pinta is ready on those three things, I'm in.

I'd never heard of that before. But it's described as
a simpler, cross-platform version of Paint.Net, still
requiring .Net on windows. It looks to me like one
of those projects the open source nuts do to say,
"See! Linux can do that too!"

That's odd that the Microsoft .NET Framework abomination is still used for
the Windows version of Pinta. I would have thought that, to be cross
platform, they'd entirely abolish the .NET Framework abomination.

Interesting that you found out that they didn't.

The whole approach seems unfortunate and misguided
to me. Graphics is process-intensive. It doesn't make
sense to write graphics software on top of bloated
wrapper libraries. I'd guess that most or all of what's
in Paint.net is just .Net wrappers for functions
already available in gdi.dll and gdiplus.dll, the Windows
graphics libraries. There's little, if anything, unique to
.Net. And since they never really made it cross-platform
(It doesn't even support windows versions very well!)
there's really no reason for the inefficiency and bloat
of the .Net wrapper.

I'm not going to disagree.

What I will say is that the click-click-modify approach that Paint.NET has
is the *best* GUI possible.

Better than *anything* out there, free or otherwise.
It's how a GUI should be.

The developers were run by a manager who *knew* how graphics should work.
Most people don't have a clue what efficiency is available in graphics
programs; but they did.

Even the select-and-stretch in Paint.NET is done the right way with the
*fewest* clicks.

For example, many programs allow you to select, but to stretch, you often
have to add an in-place cut-and-paste (control-x control-v) and even then,
some graphics programs put that pasted selection in the top-left corner
(aaaauuurrrgggghhhhhh, which drives me nuts!!!!!!).

But Paint.NET stretch is as simple as click-click-stretch, which is EXACTLY
as it should be (i.e., the fewest strokes possible).

Paint.NET was designed by a genius - at least for *those* features.
(There are a few features in paint.net that I don't like though, and which
Irfanview does better, e.g., the crop in Irfanview is click-click-crop
whereas in Paint.NET it's more strokes).

I think most full graphic editors do that pretty
well.

With all respect, and I *do* respect your judgement, I think you're flat
out wrong. I say this so strongly because I believe it so strongly that the
USABILITY is what matters in this discussion.

Usability is click-click-do in my examples.
That's usability.

Anything else is *not* usability.
So, while I agree with you that the *end result* in most graphic programs
is that they do all these basic things (let's agree - we're talking super
basic stuff here).

Yet, they do them *wrong*.

For example, if you have to define the text box before you can type text,
that's ridiculous - or - if you have to change the text box because the
text runs off the end of the box, that's also ridiculous.

It should be click-text and that's it!

I know usability extremely well.
I have NEVER seen a graphics editor that comes close to the usability of
Paint.NET on the three things that I mentioned, and particularly on the
latter two, and specifically on the curved arrows.

My old version of PSP5 does it all, except that
it predates making curves easily.

Exactly my point.
The Gimp does it all too.
But the number of clicks is horrendous to just draw an open box in The
Gimp.

Which is my only point.
Paint.NET, for all its slow speed and ridiculous Microsoft .NET Framework
flaws, is the best, bar none, for USABILITY on the three things I do most
to images.
1. text (it's not that much better though than most)
2. open boxes (it's better but not much better than most)
3. curved arrows (it's far better than anything on the planet)
4. stretching selections (it's better - but not much better than most)

OK. So that's 4 things.

But I often use it
for that kind of purpose. I make most of my income as
a carpentry contractor. A typical thing for me to
do is to make diagrams of steps, bookcases, cabinets,
etc in PSP using shape and line tools. Then I label the
details using the text tool.

For you, then, usability is *not* the issue.
To me, usability is the issue because I want the edits to take seconds.

| Pinta, last I checked, was a huge disappointment in that arena.
| Maybe they have improved it over the years?

I don't know. I'm not going to download .Net to
find out. But I think it makes sense to define
categories. Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, GIMP....
those are in the category of graphic editor. They
can accomplish most any task that can be done
on a computer.

I agree. There are multiple categories for editors.
In my installation hierarchy, I have these folders under
C:\data\software\editors\pic\{type of image editors}\

http://i.cubeupload.com/h4kmeP.gif

are never going to spend the time to learn those
tools. So there's a profusion of simpler programs
to do things like remove red-eye and apply one-click
alterations -- programs meant to provide a few
simple options to people snapping photos who
don't really work with computer software. If they
try to add too many tools then the target audience
can't use the software.

I understand. I use about 3 or 4 editors, in general, each of which does a
specific task extremely well. Usually only one editor at a time, but
sometimes two editors, rarely three in sequence.

You use a single editor, which has value to you, which is a different use
model, but perfectly valid also.

PS: As a favor to the "Good Guy", I crossposted to his suggested ng's.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 2016-07-22 00:14:43 +0000, RichA said:

picassa

Picassa is now defunct.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Gimp straightens photo easily and beautifully.

Russell

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Russell D. wrote:
Gimp straightens photo easily and beautifully.

Russell

Details ?

Which menu or menus ?

Is this an optional plugin you download
or something built-in to 2.8.16.

I could find reference to an old plugin,
where someone had managed to find the
original source and archive it, before
it was lost. That's an example of a more
obscure route.

I wouldn't ask this question, except in a
quick scan, I don't see a menu item.

Paul

In message , Russell D.
writes:
Gimp straightens photo easily and beautifully.

Russell

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

I think some would disagree with your "easily".
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the
law." - Winston Churchill.

On 23/07/2016 05:16, Paul wrote:
Russell D. wrote:
Gimp straightens photo easily and beautifully.

Russell

Details ?

Which menu or menus ?

Is this an optional plugin you download
or something built-in to 2.8.16.

I could find reference to an old plugin,
where someone had managed to find the
original source and archive it, before
it was lost. That's an example of a more
obscure route.

I wouldn't ask this question, except in a
quick scan, I don't see a menu item.

Paul
Layer|Transform|Arbitrary Rotation

Me wrote:
On 23/07/2016 05:16, Paul wrote:
Russell D. wrote:
Gimp straightens photo easily and beautifully.

Russell

Details ?

Which menu or menus ?

Is this an optional plugin you download
or something built-in to 2.8.16.

I could find reference to an old plugin,
where someone had managed to find the
original source and archive it, before
it was lost. That's an example of a more
obscure route.

I wouldn't ask this question, except in a
quick scan, I don't see a menu item.

Paul
Layer|Transform|Arbitrary Rotation


Which is fine for *manual* correction of rotation,
but is not completely automated. For example, if
you're scanning a 50 sheet document, you don't have
an autofeeder, you place the sheets on the platen
and each time, they're off a bit, you want an
automatic corrector.

It's possible an older plugin does just that.

Paul