Welcome to TVPaint Community forums !

I'm quite happy with TVP's fill options because I always fill on a separate layer, so I can overfill (extend) to my like.

schwarzgrau wrote:I'm sorry to stress this again, but it's really annoying to export my drawings layer by layer to fill them in Photoshop and export and import the fillings again in TVPaint.
Did someone find time to start working on this topic?

Actually, what your are asking for is much more complex than we expected and does not give good results.

You'll have better results using Smooth option than an AAliasing. At lease, with Smooth + Range, you can control the Aantiliasing.
(Or post-work them, like Slowtiger)

I found that I get best results when filling dark outlines on the same layer when I set the mode to "behind".

These are all workarounds, which may work in some situations, but none of them is a solution, which really works in all cases.
I know some people in the forum say "I doesn't bother me", but every workaround is just there to hide those steppy edges. I can't imagine a flood-fill with Anti-Aliasing is that hard to code, if even Pencil Animation and the current MsPaint got flood-fill with Anti-Aliasing. To be honest I don't even know a software which got Flood-Fill without Anti-Aliasing.

Creating an anti-aliasing can be easily done when drawing with the stylus ( because we have sub-pixels information ). Anything else is just a simulation (fake) anti-aliasing.
Using smooth + range is not a workaround solution (surely less than exporting from TVPaint, importing in Photoshop, filling, exportin from PS and importing in TVPaint...) : it is an AAliasing simulation.

that said, we continue to work.

Elodie wrote:Using smooth + range is not a workaround solution (surely less than exporting from TVPaint, importing in Photoshop, filling, exportin from PS and importing in TVPaint...) : it is an AAliasing simulation.

Maybe I'm just don't understanding the principle of Anti-Aliasing (no irony). But as far as I know with Anti-Aliasing you keep your sharp-edges, just the holes between the sharp stairs get filled with colors of less alpha/less color, to give it a smoother look. If you using smooth or a blur, everything becomes blurred and you loose your sharp edges.
IF I see it correct, then you can't achieve something like an AAliasing simulation by just using a blur/smooth effect afterwards.

Fabrice wrote:that said, we continue to work.

Sorry to ask, I don't got it. Do you mean continue to work on other things or do you still trying to achieve an AAliasing solution?

Sorry to ask, I don't got it. Do you mean continue to work on other things or do you still trying to achieve an AAliasing solution?

Both.

schwarzgrau wrote:IF I see it correct, then you can't achieve something like an AAliasing simulation by just using a blur/smooth effect afterwards.

A simulation of something gets close to that something, but isn't the same, or else it wouldn't be a simulation, but the real thing...
So yes, blur/smooth is a simulation of aaliasing...

Fabrice wrote:

Sorry to ask, I don't got it. Do you mean continue to work on other things or do you still trying to achieve an AAliasing solution?

Both.

Hehe nice to know

ematecki wrote:A simulation of something gets close to that something, but isn't the same, or else it wouldn't be a simulation, but the real thing...
So yes, blur/smooth is a simulation of aaliasing...

Then I had another idea of simulation too

schwarzgrau wrote:Then I had another idea of simulation too :D

So your idea of a flight simulator was this :
You fly to Tokyo with your flight simulator, you step out of it and you're ACTUALLY in Tokyo ?

No my idea of simulation was to test how it would be to fly to Tokyo. Elodies approach otherwise seems to me like flying to Pyongyang. It's seems close, but is something completely different.

Maybe I'm just don't understanding the principle of Anti-Aliasing (no irony).

Unfortunately yes, you do not undestand the principle of AA...
I take the liberty to quote someone's else explanation regarding AA, which is short and sum up the complexity to give AA to a Flood Fill tool
(I don't really have the time to go in a long and technical explanation) :

You'd need some form of subpixel line to create an anti alias boundary.
and without direct pen input you have to create it after the fact.
So you need to somehow create a vector line over the bitmap image.
And reliably translating bitmap drawings into vector is a hard problem.

If you still don't understand, just trust me : modify smooth and range when using Flood fill tool, and you'll have the result you wished for.

The quote you used for Anti-Aliasing sounds logical to me, but this doesn't make smooth the same as anti-aliasing. Plugin-creators tried for years to make a good post-anti-aliasing-plugin, cause anti-aliasing isn't blur. It may look a bit similiar if you use the smooth or blur in a low value, but you just make it muddy and destroying informations. And I tried range and smooth together, but if you consider this a good result the whole discussion makes no sense to me.

I can imagine it's hard to programm, but I guess it would be extremly usefull for an animation and drawing app.

I would totally agree with schwarzgrau. In my opinion, AAliasing is something completely independent from smooth/blur or any other setting - it's either AAliased, or not. And currently it looks like a bug, and workarounds are just, well... workarounds. And in this case it even doesn't produce the same result. I don't know about programming difficulties that come with it, but AAliasing is a basic functionality of any modern graphic program, and there is no future without it