Hi,

I took a quick look at it, and I can see it's still a work in progress :) . .
--->Always. But its very functional as it stands right now. The manual that comes with the distribution is very helpful :-)
Just a few interface things you should address before spending more time on features:
.
1) allow resizing of the file/picture load box. Some people have a *LOT* of files in their directories :) Also, try to use the updated common dialog box if you can. It's sort of "annoying" on xp type systems to have a 95 style box. :) . .
--->I'll work on that. I think its a simple commdlg API call.
2) Your resizing of the main window is off by a bit. When I scaled the grid pattern up, it overwrote the color checker, and the loaded picture. Actually, you don't allow resizing of the main window, so the components overlap. *please* spend a bit of time working on these interface aspects, making windows behave as most windows users expect.
--->I have no idea what youre talking about :-) What resolution are you in? If by overlap, you mean the grid, palette & picture components overlap, this is by design. You can move them wherever you want them to go. The "work area" is designed to operate like a "desktop" with free movement of all components.
*now* if you can load the picture as you did, and overlay the grid on it, and click "snap colors to grid" it would be a quick way to "scan" in a picture. :) Not perfect, but a good trick. Most image software is good enough to scale a picture down, properly. So, if a user wants a 60x70 bead workspace, their image needs to scale down to 60x70 pixels. --->I disagree slightly. While it may be nice to have a "wizard" that would do this (which is a very good idea and already in the back of my mind), for the most part, if you wanted a 60x70 pattern and had a 120x60 picture, the pattern would look horrific scaled to the proportions of your pattern. If they can't do that in photoshop, psp, or one of the other picture tools, there is no way *you* are going to be able to do that on your own. But, once they get the image scaled down, importing it into a bead grid should be easy for loom stitch. --->The picture is easily scaled with the SHIFT+RMB while dragging. Another way should be available though. To convert to peyote or brick, you might have to come up with a "best fit" algorithm, and that will require some thought, and trial and error. --->Converting between the 3 types is easy. just select the type you want from the Pattern properties. If it doesnt look right after you changed stitch types, re-assimilate.
But, the key here, is to allow the best photo manipulation programs reduce the image into a "grid" of pixels that your program can then import, and simply shift the colors into the bead grid. --->As mentioned earlier, Assimilation has already been implemented since version 1.0


3) Also, you need to let the right-click unselect a bead, and set it back to background.
--->I dont know what you mean. Could you explain?
4) The "finger paint" feature I mentioned is already built in. I love that :)

Keep working. It has potential, if you don't get sidetracked by the little things. ;)

========

I just was playing with the interface some more, and shrunk the grid way down. THen I used the mouse to pull it over the picture.

If you had a way of taking a "snapshot" of that, it would give a great starting point for work! The jaggies are something that would have to be manually worked on, but that's what no one tells you :) --->Already done: Assimilation.

All those great wonderful patterns in the stores, that were made with the programs, were all majorly tweaked by hand to get the details looking right. The import/scan features were only a starting point, not an end point. If it was the end point, people would be scanning in everything from moon shots to celebrities, and they aren't. There's a reason -- it's *not* easy to tweak up.
--->Agreed
Since a picture is worth a thousand words, here's a screen cap of what I'm talking about. If that could be "auto-filled" then you have what people want. A good place to start.
--->As before, this is called appropriately "Assimilation".
Then, if you enforced colors, eg: you had the list of Miyuki, Delica, Toho, etc colors, as pallets, when someone clicked a color, the program did a "best fit" within that pallet, and gave people a choice to change that color to.
--->Pretty complicated but certainly do-able some time in the future.
Having an automated "best fit" for all those left over bead colors (like the "auto play" feature on solitaire). Once you've adjusted the important colors, you can have the program automatically pick the others.
--->VERY much agreed. This will be my next major effort.
Reduction of colors *should* be done in the photo manipulation program, since there is no way you'll ever write an algorithm as good as those.... This is supposed to be a bead pattern tool, *not* a photo manipulation program, so only build what can't be had elsewhere :)
--->Agreed also. Im still looking into dynamic image manipulation libraries.
Good luck! Thanks

2) Your resizing of the main window is off by a bit. When I scaled the grid pattern up,
it overwrote the color checker, and the loaded picture. Actually, you don't allow
resizing of the main window, so the components overlap. *please* spend a bit of time
working on these interface aspects, making windows behave as most windows users expect.
--->I have no idea what youre talking about :-) What resolution are you in? If by overlap,
you mean the grid, palette & picture components overlap, this is by design.
You can move them wherever you want them to go. The "work area" is designed
to operate like a "desktop" with free movement of all components.

3) Also, you need to let the right-click unselect a bead, and set it back to background.
--->I dont know what you mean. Could you explain?

*now* if you can load the picture as you did, and overlay the grid on it, and
click "snap colors to grid" it would be a quick way to "scan" in a picture. :)
Not perfect, but a good trick. Most image software is good enough to scale a
picture down, properly. So, if a user wants a 60x70 bead workspace, their
image needs to scale down to 60x70 pixels.
--->I disagree slightly. While it may be nice to have a "wizard" that would do
this (which is a very good idea and already in the back of my mind), for the
most part, if you wanted a 60x70 pattern and had a 120x60 picture, the pattern
would look horrific scaled to the proportions of your pattern.

   |------|       |-------| 
   |  A   |-------|       | 
   -------|   B   |-------|  
   |  C   |-------|       | 
   |------|       |-------|  
   |      |-------|       | 
   |------|       |-------|