I didn't find that capability in ClipStudio Paint Pro, either. Am I missing something?Herbert123 wrote:True, Expression lacks the variable width control after drawing the stroke. Expression 3.3 did have more control after drawing a stroke.
Yes, I was aware of the "width points" tool introduced in Illustrator CS6. When I first broached the subject of variable width lines in PL a couple of months ago, that was what I was thinking of. However, the Hubers outdid my paltry idea -- shows that it pays to ignore my attempts at prescribing a solution!Herbert123 wrote: Have you seen Illustrator's variable width tool in action? It is far more user friendly than a hidden curve display in two modal dialogs. In Illustrator the overall width can be easily controlled, as well as for specific parts of the stroke.
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/illustra ... th-strokes
I just fail to see or understand how on-canvas controls are supposedly inferior to a curves display that is hidden two layer deep in a model dialog, and which forces the user to abide by trial and error to control the thickness of a specific part of the stroke. That dialog is completely disconnected from the stroke that is displayed in the view.
IMO, Illustrator's "width points" method is inferior to PL's method because AFAIK you can't draw variable width lines using pen pressure in Illustrator.
You're wrong about PL forcing "trial and error" and being "completely disconnected". Now that we have a live preview in the main editing window, everything is great.
Modal dialogs are a somewhat different matter than the implementation of the variable width. It's really no big deal to simply click twice to return to the main editing window. If using the dialogs is the price to pay for having the ability to draw variable width vector lines directly with pen pressure, it's well worth the cost.Herbert123 wrote: And before the user can return to drawing, those dreaded modal dialogs must be closed again! In illustrator a quick shortcut key switches to the variable width tool, and it is completely interactive and fully controllable as well, because a double-click allows for precise values in dialog.
Don't misstate my argument -- I couldn't care less about what some consider "intuitive" or "efficient". Intuitiveness and efficiency are not the most important things. Functionality is. You do a variable width line once in PL and now you know how to do it. No problem. Same as editing a colour.Herbert123 wrote: Now, how can PL's approach ever be called intuitive or efficient compared to that? This is the reason why I was stating it is a logical implementation seen from a programmer's mind, not from a user perspective.
I agree that it would be nice to avoid the modal dialogs. I haven't thought this through very thoroughly, but here's my right panel (this is on my notebook PC, so it's probably close to the maximum available space -- I had to reduce this image by 5% to conform to the forum's posting regs): It looks like the obvious place for a modal dialog replacement would be that the "Tool Settings" panel could have another tab called "Edit Tool Properties" or something that would be where all the functions now done by modal dialogs would occur. Obviously, it would have to be a "smart" tab whose content would change as appropriate for the item being edited. Come to think of it, its width would also have to expand past the width of the right panel to accommodate things like the Curves adjustments, etc. Sounds complicated....Herbert123 wrote: If anything PL NEEDS a non-model panel that controls the stroke options. Better would be a dedicated tool, or expanding the current vector point tool to allow us to control the width of a stroke. Modal dialogs should be avoided as much as possible, in my opinion. And it would be great if we could assign different brushes to a vector stroke (like expression, illustrator, and many other illustration tools).