Page Layout

[Martin Huber]

Difference? Aside from not being able to have different colored line objects on a single layer? Aside from having several hundred layers of individual objects that are difficult to organize? Not much.

When I do technical drawings, I organize sub parts into their own layers. This is an easy way to turn off/on these sub-parts for creating breakaway enlargements or cut-away parts of the drawings. Some of those lines will be different colors but reside on the same layers.

I may be stupid or don't know Illustrator enough, but I still don't see the difference between an Illustrator layer and a PhotoLine group.

Martin

[photoken]

Both Illustrator and CorelDraw happily continue to add newly created vector objects to the same layer until you manually create a new layer to hold subsequently created objects. PL works just the opposite -- blithely adding each object as its own layer until you manually combine the objects into a single layer. I much prefer the method used by AI and CDR.

For vector shapes there's a tool option to draw into the current layer, but it's missing for vector lines.

I'm talking about having an option in the Tool Settings panel, rather than having to hold down a key. Sorry about my wrong choice of words....

This is probably a moot point, however -- see my reply to Martin.

[photoken]

In PhotoLine every drawing operation adds a new vector layer to the active group, and in Illustrator every drawing operation adds a new vector object to the active layer.

(Emphasis added)

Aha! I never thought of creating a "group" for the first vector object. Once I do that, then the drawing of vector objects does duplicate the behavior of Illustrator and CorelDraw. Thanks a million for that tip -- it's great stuff!

[photoken]

I still don't see the difference between an Illustrator layer and a PhotoLine group.

Neither do I. The organization principle is the same, and the effects can be applied as desired. In this sample, the blue and the red lines are in their own PL group, the green line is in its own PL "group". The end result is that vector objects can be drawn and organized as needed.

lines.png

PL still needs the ability (as requested by Herbert123) to select individual objects that are in different groups. For example, groups are created which separate line work from fill colour by having a duplicated vector object -- the top vector object having a line colour without a fill colour, and the bottom vector object having no line colour but a fill colour. It would be great to select only those vector objects having only the line colour for exporting, etc.

[bkh]

I'm talking about having an option in the Tool Settings panel, rather than having to hold down a key. Sorry about my wrong choice of words....

Yes, I think that that's what Hoogo means as well – if you select the rectangle, say, then there is such an option in the tool settings (the rightmost icon). Problem is that when using the Curve Creation tool, you can't use a similar option right now because there's no way for PL to know if you want to add points to the current curve or start a new one. (In Inkscape, by contrast, you have to click the starting point to close the curve and the next click will start a new one.) As I wrote, I would welcome if PL behaved the same way as Inkscape (and probably Illustrator ) …

Cheers

Burkhard.

[bkh]

Aha! I never thought of creating a "group" for the first vector object. Once I do that, then the drawing of vector objects does duplicate the behavior of Illustrator and CorelDraw. Thanks a million for that tip -- it's great stuff!

… once you figured it out … and you still have to remember to group the first object and enter the group. From a workflow perspective, this is far from ideal, and far from obvious … you'd really want to create the group ("layer" in Illustrator lingo) first, then add objects to it. Maybe something as simple as a "New Group" command, which creates a group and a transparent (vector) background layer in it and enters the group, could be useful?

Cheers

Burkhard.

[greenmorpher]

I for one would welcome a couple more vector tools in Photoline that would improve the usability of those: a knife tool, an inset/outset tool, a variable stroke pen tool. Otherwise PL is actually already quite capable - especially with imported vector work.

The list could go on and on, of course, and would.

For layout a master pages option and a "share layer with other pages" option would be extremely handy. Also a more comprehensive guide editor with automated guide creation option like the aforementioned guideguide Photoshop plugin. And guides should ideally be part of individual layers, so we can hide and show sets of guides. The current guide system is very inflexible.

And there we go with the list going on and on. What wold PL end up being?

@Greenmorpher: Canvas! Sure brings back memories - I discovered last month it still exists, and downloaded the newest version for Windows. Installed, played around with it, and uninstalled it: time has been unkind to Canvas indeed. It felt extremely outdated and awkward to use compared to other design software. ACDSee: what have you done to it?! A friggin' shame - Canvas used to be a pretty good piece of software.

And then you want PL to have the same sort of capabilities? You can't have it both ways. As I said, I use Canvas X on Mac all the time -- sure it is a bit slow nowadays but it still does wonders. I don't know what it is like on Windows -- but I have always found everything awkward on Windows -- including Windows itself.

I suspect ACDSee has not given Canvas the updating it deserves along the way. Certainly, they have not put the resources into it that they should have done. They have also taken some wrong turnings with their photo editing software.

Does anyone remember Freehand? Photoline could ideally offer those features (it's about 85~90% there), and old Freehand users would flock to Photoline (probably). That community is still lamenting the loss of Freehand, and still on the outlook for an alternative.

Oh come on! FreeHand was pretty good in many respects and had a couple of tools I haven't see elsewhere, but it wasn't that great. Ole Kvern DTPed his 800+ page FreeHand 8 guide in the program itself which was a bit of an amazing tour de force, but then Ole used to do stuff like write in his own postscript for special gradients. He probably beat himself with barbed wire for a hobby! (mind you, he is dead right about unoaked white wines and the predilection for Australian wine makers to spoil excellent whites with oak.)

I suspect that if you had FreeHand today you would find it wanting. I tried some DTP with it back in the day (my primary DTP program back then was PageMaker which I had used since v.1.1) and found it to be a nightmare. And, of course, FreeHand couldn't do anything with rasters.

Personally, I don't want to see PL try to become a DTP program, or even a more vectorish program, much as I love Canvas and find it a joy to work with its fully integrated interface. I would like to see more development of some of its tools for image work, like HDR, which I feel has never been fully developed, plus some more automation -- don't ask me what, specifically, because I don't know.

The other thing is that if PL is to go in any "publication" direction, then rather than print, I would suggest the web and HTML5 is the way to go first. Are there openings in the market? Have a look at Sandvox -- a template-based website builder. I now use it (instead of Canvas) and find it excellent. e.g. http://www.bushtrackpng.com. It has some quite severe limitations (in fact, Canvas is more capable in some respects, less capable in others) but you can inject code to overcome most of these.

But really, the big thing is the images. That's where PL's future lies, I believe.

Cheers, geoff

[photoken]

… once you figured it out … and you still have to remember to group the first object and enter the group. From a workflow perspective, this is far from ideal, and far from obvious … you'd really want to create the group ("layer" in Illustrator lingo) first, then add objects to it. Maybe something as simple as a "New Group" command, which creates a group and a transparent (vector) background layer in it and enters the group, could be useful?

Perhaps. In the meantime, I've created an action that does the grouping for the active vector object and activates the appropriate layer:

Group subsequent vectors.actions

On my machine, I assigned the keyboard shortcut of Alt+G to that action and it works like a charm.

[photoken]

Problem is that when using the Curve Creation tool, you can't use a similar option right now because there's no way for PL to know if you want to add points to the current curve or start a new one.

Yep. Your previous suggestion of using the "Enter" key to end the curve creation makes a lot of sense.

[Herbert123]

I for one would welcome a couple more vector tools in Photoline that would improve the usability of those: a knife tool, an inset/outset tool, a variable stroke pen tool. Otherwise PL is actually already quite capable - especially with imported vector work.

The list could go on and on, of course, and would.

I am just saying a couple of additional vector tools would make life a lot easier in PL - I am not asking it to compete with Illustrator, Xara, CorelDraw.

For layout a master pages option and a "share layer with other pages" option would be extremely handy. Also a more comprehensive guide editor with automated guide creation option like the aforementioned guideguide Photoshop plugin. And guides should ideally be part of individual layers, so we can hide and show sets of guides. The current guide system is very inflexible.

And there we go with the list going on and on. What wold PL end up being?

I am not asking for entire new feature sets, but merely requesting to improve the current existing tools so they become great to use. Master pages are a very basic component of making the pages system in PL a hundred times more usable. The current guide tools do not allow the user to automatically create grid systems, columns, rows, etcetera. Again, a basic improvement.

@Greenmorpher: Canvas! Sure brings back memories - I discovered last month it still exists, and downloaded the newest version for Windows. Installed, played around with it, and uninstalled it: time has been unkind to Canvas indeed. It felt extremely outdated and awkward to use compared to other design software. ACDSee: what have you done to it?! A friggin' shame - Canvas used to be a pretty good piece of software.

And then you want PL to have the same sort of capabilities? You can't have it both ways. As I said, I use Canvas X on Mac all the time -- sure it is a bit slow nowadays but it still does wonders. I don't know what it is like on Windows -- but I have always found everything awkward on Windows -- including Windows itself.

I suspect ACDSee has not given Canvas the updating it deserves along the way. Certainly, they have not put the resources into it that they should have done. They have also taken some wrong turnings with their photo editing software.

No, I believe Photoline already has a much more flexible framework in place than Canvas - and I do not feel Photoline should become a second Canvas. I would like to see a couple of improvements for layout design and creation that would benefit everyone - not turn PL into a InDesign or Quark derivative. Just make it friendlier and improve the general user experience in that regard. To shave off the rough edges, so to speak.

Does anyone remember Freehand? Photoline could ideally offer those features (it's about 85~90% there), and old Freehand users would flock to Photoline (probably). That community is still lamenting the loss of Freehand, and still on the outlook for an alternative.

Oh come on! FreeHand was pretty good in many respects and had a couple of tools I haven't see elsewhere, but it wasn't that great. Ole Kvern DTPed his 800+ page FreeHand 8 guide in the program itself which was a bit of an amazing tour de force, but then Ole used to do stuff like write in his own postscript for special gradients. He probably beat himself with barbed wire for a hobby! (mind you, he is dead right about unoaked white wines and the predilection for Australian wine makers to spoil excellent whites with oak.)

I suspect that if you had FreeHand today you would find it wanting. I tried some DTP with it back in the day (my primary DTP program back then was PageMaker which I had used since v.1.1) and found it to be a nightmare. And, of course, FreeHand couldn't do anything with rasters.

I actually still have Freehand MX installed on my machine - the basic vector tool set is great, though of course it cannot compete with more current applications. Nor do I want to see Photoline turned into an Illustrator competitor - but again, a couple of additional vector tools in Photoline akin to the old Freehand would improve the drawing experience manifold. Freehand's scope is, I think, very achievable.

Personally, I don't want to see PL try to become a DTP program, or even a more vectorish program, much as I love Canvas and find it a joy to work with its fully integrated interface. I would like to see more development of some of its tools for image work, like HDR, which I feel has never been fully developed, plus some more automation -- don't ask me what, specifically, because I don't know.

I agree with you - the only thing I would like to see is the current layout and vector tools to see a bunch of improvements that would take the entire application to the next level of usability.

The other thing is that if PL is to go in any "publication" direction, then rather than print, I would suggest the web and HTML5 is the way to go first. Are there openings in the market? Have a look at Sandvox -- a template-based website builder. I now use it (instead of Canvas) and find it excellent. e.g. http://www.bushtrackpng.com. It has some quite severe limitations (in fact, Canvas is more capable in some respects, less capable in others) but you can inject code to overcome most of these.

Ah, there's the rub: the web export could be improved so much with a couple of additions:
1) multiple layer selection across layer groups;
2) a method to assign web export options (jpg, png, svg, webp) for each layer.
3) export sets

Then exporting assets would become awesome in Photoline.

Improved HDR options would also be very welcome.

But really, the big thing is the images. That's where PL's future lies, I believe.

Cheers, geoff[/quote]

Yes. It can only get better in that regard. Photoline already does not have to shy away from Photoshop.

[bkh]

Is there any possibilities PL to move toward page layout direction? Adding master pages, headers, footers, page numbers, footnotes, TOC, table of indices, tables...

I guess that a lot of the master page functionality plus headers, footers, page numbers can already be achieved using virtual copies. (Create a first page containing a group with all elements that you want to appear on every page, then create a second page containing a virtual copy of that group. From then on, just copy that 2nd page as needed.) Maybe an additional command to place copies/virtual copies of elements to every/every odd/every even page might be useful in this context.

Changing column widths seems more difficult, although I could imagine a tool setting in the layer tool which allows to move layers at the same position on all pages simultaneously.

Am I missing an important feature of master pages? Just trying to think how to integrate the masterpage functionality with the UI metaphors already available in PL.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[5ar5renko]

Am I missing an important feature of master pages?

Yes, you are missing. What about page numbers? How do you think they will be changed on every page? Manually? What about if you later decide to add/delete some page(s)? Or what about if you later decide to divide the book into sections with different numbering (arabic, roman, letters...)?

[bkh]

Am I missing an important feature of master pages?

Yes, you are missing. What about page numbers? How do you think they will be changed on every page?

PL already has automatic page numbers (Layout -> Text -> Insert text fields) – put a (virtual) copy on another page and it will show the correct page number.

What about if you later decide to add/delete some page(s)?

No problem, this already works as expected.

Or what about if you later decide to divide the book into sections with different numbering (arabic, roman, letters...)?

You'd need a new "master" layer group for each section, then (and a possibility to place virtual copies on a range of pages). PL currently doesn't have different number styles, but adding these should be a minor problem if needed by a sufficiently many people.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[5ar5renko]

PL already has automatic page numbers (Layout -> Text -> Insert text fields) – put a (virtual) copy on another page and it will show the correct page number.

And you do the same to the other 325 pages (more or less) manually in 5, 6 seconds? Very quick and easy.

[5ar5renko]

PL developers have done an excellent job with image and photo processing, and I know that they are going to do the same with page layout features in near future. And yes, if they can compete with Photoshop why shouldn't they compete with some DTP program also?