From: Johan Bjornson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
I don't know if I'm allowed to make a 'puff' for my
Amiga bitmapped typeface "Flodis"... Anyway. My
starting-point is the XEN 9 pts, fixed-width font from
the Magic Workbench package. Since kick-off I've
tidied up quite a little bit and used quite a large
amount of time ameliorating the font.
By way of example, it's furnished with
o medieval digits
o sigma, omega and pro mil signs
o 66 and 99 styles of quotation marks
o lots of ligatures e.g. fi, fl, ff, ffi, ffl, oe
o integral italic 'f'
o s with 'inverted circumflex'
o Polish 'overstroken' l
o silence mark (three consecutive dots)
Unlike the bulk of bitmapped fonts, "Flodis" complies
with the 'Ép height': the diacritics don't encroach on
the orginal upper-case height.
You'll find the "Flodis" Web space at:
- I guess here's your answer--yes, you're allowed.
From: Eike M. Lang (email@example.com)
First of all:
ArtEffect2.0 absolutely and positively runs on
Picasso96 and has done so for quite some time (the same
applies to Version1.0). You might want to clarify this
in the next issue of AR.
As for the loading capabilities you forgot to mention
that AE2.0 supports Datatypes for image-loading which
makes the range of supported load-formats actually
Secondly I do not agree with your view that the only
Image-saving formats of interest are JPEG and IFF.
Most notably TIFF is still used widely in the
professional world. The additional image formats
provided by SView are more esoteric and will probably
not be used by anybody. Another format that deserves
better than "of little interest" is PNG, which is
recommended for Web-use by the W3C and slowly gaining
As a closing word I have to comment on the new "real
HTML"-AR: I have not yet seen it but I don't like the
idea of HTML-pages being "BrowserXZY-optimized" - this
is a Microsoft-ish attitude IMO. Proper HTML will look
good with any proper browser - specially optimized HTML
contradicts the actual idea behind HTML.
- Correction made, although I was basing my
erroneous P96 compatibility information on a report
from CU Amiga's Mat Bettinson, who informed me of the
problem he was having after I completed my review for
that magazine. As for the HTML being
"BrowserXYZ-optimized", it was a poor choice of words
on my part. The real meaning was that when the pages
were designed they were primarily TESTED using one
particular browser (IBrowse) so we were certain that
the magazine would look good in that browser. Since
5.08 Katie has made a number of changes to the HTML
to better suit the HTML to AWeb and Voyager. (AWeb's
table handling has been better catered to, and
Voyager users shouldn't have any more invisible
From: Emannuel Henn (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thanks for the newest Areport, which AGAIN was full of
important news and informations.
I was a bit disappointed by the "ART EFFECT2"-review,
though, because You only mentioned Photoshop, Art
Effect and ImageFX.
I don`t want to turn down ImageFX, but as You`ve tested
Art Effect, which has a real nice GUI, and compared it
to Photoshop, also GUI, I wonder why You didn`t mention
Photogenics2, too !?
Photogenics2 is sure a real competitor on the market of
Amiga-image-processors, it uses layers, offers great
filters (and many of them!) and is really a joy to use.
- I'm still a big fan of Photogenics2, but with
Almathera out of business and no publisher of the
software, I didn't feel it was responsible or fair to
the currently supported products to feature it as
From: Martin Skowronski (email@example.com)
I read your review of ArtEffect in Amiga Report with
much interest. I would like to commend you on a very
nice job. I would also like to offer you a slightly
different perspective of ArtEffect and how it is really
much more than simply an image manipulation package.
I create all of the graphics that my company uses in
the development of its' business seminars. Before
ArtEffect was released I did all of my 24 bit painting
with a program called Painter by Fractal Design. I was
able to do this courtesy of my Emplant's Mac emulation.
Fractal's Painter is arguably the *best* 24 bit paint
package on any platform. It has powerful natural media
tools (chalk looks and acts like real chalk, water
color brushes *feel* very realistic etc), yet for all
of it's sophistication Painter is extremely easy to
Prior to the introduction of Art Effect, there was
little available for the Amiga Artist as far as purely
software based, natural media, 24 bit paint programs.
Opal Paint was great in it's time, but it required the
Opalvision card and was limited to NTSC screens. Alpha
Paint is also nice, but, requires the presence of the
Video Toaster. That leaves TVPaint and XiPaint, both
of which do not offer true natural media tools.
IMHO, the Amiga is in dire need of a Fractal Painter
type program. Art Effect is definitely a step in the
right direction. It offers many of the best features
of Painter, and is improving all the time. When one
considers the natural media paint tools of Art Effect,
along with it's image manipulation capabilites, one
begins to better appreciate just how valuable Art
Effect is to anyone interested in creating cutting edge
24 bit images with their Amiga.
IMHO, ArtEffect is a must have program for any
Amigaphile who wants to create serious true color
paintings. In that respect it is a bargain.
If Norman Rockwell used an Amiga to do his work, he
would be using Art Effect :-)