Alpha Paint vs Image FX

jac...@aol.com

unread,

Jan 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/21/98

to

Does anyone have any experience with these products? Do
they surpass Toaster Paint 4.1? I have seen Alpha Paint
and like the results.

Thanks
Tony Jacang
CAM1 Productions, Hawaii

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

Gordon Modin

unread,

Jan 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/21/98

to

jac...@aol.com wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any experience with these products? Do
> they surpass Toaster Paint 4.1? I have seen Alpha Paint
> and like the results.

I have both and depending on what you need done, they are each excellent
in their own right. Image FX is better for processing effects like oil
paint, watercolor, and retouching. Not that Alpha Paint can't hold it's
own in this regard, but it is best for operating in 32 bit. Alpha is
easier to learn and operate. It is really a case of apples and oranges,
but if you had to buy only one I would say Alpha. Both are miles ahead
of Toaster Paint except for the convenience of having it already within
the Toaster.

Gordon Modin

Dwightg

unread,

Jan 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/22/98

to

In article <885430321...@dejanews.com>, <jac...@aol.com> wrote:
>Does anyone have any experience with these products? Do
>they surpass Toaster Paint 4.1? I have seen Alpha Paint
>and like the results.

I have and (sometimes) use Alpha Paint. I am very impressed with its brush
and text handling abilities in particular, and with its other functions in
general. It is very well integrated with the Video Toaster, and gives
unique effects with its alpha channel capabilities combined with incoming
video.

Alpha Paint kicks butt over Toaster Paint, the most cumbersome and least
capable paint program for the Amiga since DigiPaint. Toaster Paint remains
the weakest part of the Video Toaster, and NewTek's insistence on
continuing with this program (in the face of Opal Paint, TV Paint, Alpha
Paint, XI Paint et al) is the most disappointing aspect of the Video
Toaster's evolution.

Unlike Alpha Paint (and Toaster Paint, for that matter), Image FX is more
an image processing program than a full-featured paint program, though it
does have a basic set of painting tools and processes (Kermit Woodall will
argue that it has more paint capabilities than I give it credit for).

The other major difference between AP and IFX is in their user interface.
AP looks and feels like a conventional paint program: you paint directly
onto the full-sized image, directly on the screen. IFX gives you an image
in a scalable window, in which you make your image alterations, and then
render those changes--not a very 'painterly' process.

On re-reading this, I apear to give Imagae FX short shrift. I do not mean
to do this, it is an excellent image processor, and should be in anyone's
suite of tools on their Amiga. It is, however, not a paint program; Alpha
Paint is.

--DwightG

SHankel128

unread,

Jan 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/23/98

to

I have experience with both Alpha Paint and Image FX 2.6. I prefer AP to both
ImageFX and Toaster Paint.... It gives realtime output to the toaster output
wereas both Image FX and TPaint have to render the output. I use Image FX
primarily for processing flyer clips via Control tower.