UI Suggestions

[podperson]

photoline.png

Edit: latest version added...



Oddly enough I decided to try to create a nicer icon for Photoline using Photoline for some of the work (it's mainly done in 3d using Cheetah 3d and Silo) and ran into all kinds of annoyances:

1) Photoline requires you to check boxes to constrain drags, etc. rather than honoring Apple's age-old (i.e. since 1984) human interface guidelines (which tend to be imitated under Windows) and treating the shift-key as constrain. I note that Photoline does honor the option-key (alt-) for leaving a copy behind, why not the shift-key?

2) Invert Selection is called Invert Mask. OK fine, but Inverting a mask is a very different thing from inverting a selection. Photoshop has a "Selection" menu which has all the selection functions grouped together logically (selections are the life blood of this kind of program). Photoline's selection tools are either absent or hidden in strange places.

3) I tried to paste a new layer into a document and Photoline kept overwriting an existing layer. Eventually I managed it, but I'm not sure how. By default, anything you paste into an existing document should get its own new layer.

4) In Photoshop you can restrict an effect channel to work on a specific adjacent layer by option- or alt- clicking on the line that divides the two layers. E.g. if I want to adjust the hue of just one layer (versus every layer below the hue adjustment layer) I just option-click on the border between the two layers. I can't figure out how to do the equivalent operation in Photoline and ended up having to use a destructive edit to do the same thing. Oh well, I tossed out that image anyway.

5) After giving up on using a photograph of a DSLR, I imported a photo into Illustrator and knocked up a quick, stylized version, but Photoline couldn't import the SVG and while it imported the PDF, the result was impossible to work with (it came in tiny, I couldn't select it or rescale it, and pasting the layers into my original document resulted in garbage). Luckily, Illustrator can export to PNG, but someone stuck with less flexible software might not be so lucky.

6) Why on Earth am I forced to use the crop tool when I already have a selection? And when I use the crop tool, why can't I hit Enter to crop, instead of having to click a tiny button?

Even with Leopard's ability to search menus it's very difficult and confusing to find familiar functions. Photoshop's naming conventions are -- for better or worse -- something of an industry standard. And Photoshop was pretty good about co-opting earlier program's terminology (e.g. Deluxe Paint / Studio/32) or terminology from photographic darkrooms (such as "dodge" and "burn"). Filters, in particular, are located seemingly randomly in two different menus and divided into rather strange categories...

Some Suggestions

Histogram Correction should be called Levels. If you want to use the word "Histogram" because, say, it sounds clever or people (on Mars???) are used to it then say "Levels (Histogram)" or something.

Put the Effect Filters and Special Tools items in Filters instead of Effects.

Don't confuse Masks with Selections. If you have to provide the same function twice with different names to avoid confusion, fine.

Add a Selection menu and put all the selection-related commands in it.

So, technically, I produced the texture map using Photoline, but it took much longer than it would have in Photoshop, and I didn't use any particularly advanced functions.

(Note: I have Photoshop CS3, which aside from launch time and license cost, I would use over Photoline for pretty much anything. I mainly use Photoline on my laptop because it's fast, but it's annoying to keep running into odd user interface quirks.)

[greenmorpher]

Hello Poddy

We've raised lots of this stuff before and been told by the developers that they aren't interested in using the "industry standard" terms (or even using their own terms consistently in the manual) or menus that follow the "industry standard" ideas in general because their user base is quite different and their layout and general ideas of the way to do things are superior. Yeah, right.

It is nutty in business terms -- people who come to Photoline are NOT "image/graphics virgins" -- just about everyone gets some sort of image editor with their digital camera, or they download something which they use for a while, and all those programs follow the "industry standard" to a significant degree.

Then people come to Photoline -- it is a step up. And they have to fight their way through the interface which is not just "idiosyncratic" -- it often appears to have no logical underpinning. They have to throw out everything they have learned and learn Photoline from the ground up. It is just a waste of people's time and effort.

There is no question that hidden behind a really difficult interface is a first class program which has the potential to go a long, long way. But it is constantly held back because it is so bloody difficult to adopt the program. You have to throw out virtually everything you have so painfully learned in other programs, the manual is lousy and there is great lack of tutorials but because of the non-standard nomenclature it is very difficult to look at e.g. Photoshop tutorials, and work through them in Photoline so you can learn the program.

And then, of course, you strike things like I did a little while ago. I asked whether it was possible to mimic in PL32 a certain outcome achieved in Canvas (which is where I am coming from). In response, one of the developers dumped a result into the forum ... but with no explanation of how it was achieved! Just sheer arrogance and lack of interest in customer's needs. Ultimately, a fellow user had to explain it.

I had been seeking the information so I could present it to my fellow Canvas users and promote PL32 to them. I vowed right there and then that I wouldn't be fighting my way through Photoline's idiot and illogical interface any more and promoting the program to the world. I'll just use it as I need it to do a little low level image editing, and if the interface isn't fixed and the developers don't start showing some interest in their customers, I'll move to something else. PL32 was ahead of many of the image editors available on Mac a year or so ago, but the gap is closing rapidly -- the editors based on the core image stuff in OS X are rapidly maturing and are very competitively priced.

With these competitors looking so good, why should I beat myself to a pulp trying to master PL32 when the developers clearly don't give a damn? Why should any Mac user? Why should Windows users, if it comes to that, there's a bit of competition happening there too, isn't there?

Cheers

Geoff

MarketNOW with Geoffrey Heard
Practical, Ethical Marketing - PR - Advertising
http://www.marketnow.com.au

10:44 AM, May 21, 2008

[podperson]

Hmm. That's depressing. So far, I've found the developer(s?) very helpful and responsive (he has/they have fixed bugs and user interface issues very quickly in response to some of my emails -- except for adding a "Stroke..." command).

I agree that the Core Image editors -- well, Pixelmator anyway -- are nipping on Photoline's heels (and of course there's always Photoshop and Photoshop Elements, the latter of which is actually cheaper than Photoline).

[greenmorpher]

Pixelmator -- that's the black one. Ugh! I would go into depression working with that interface. No thanks! But there are others. The point is that they are all over the place and becoming more numerous on both platforms by the day.

Cheers, Geoff

Geoffrey Heard, Business Writer & Publisher

"Type & Layout: Are you communicating or just making pretty shapes" -- Revealed! The secrets of how you can use type and layout to turbocharge your messages in print. See the book at http://www.worsleypress.com

[lutz]

Hello,

I do not have the MAC perspective but I do not agree with Geoffs, a bit too negative, depiction. I believe nobody is helped with a photoshop-"clone". Despite all its power it is an unintuitive monster to me (people who have invested years in learning the intricacies will certainly disagree). Paintshop Pro has always offered a far more workable and user-friendly alternative for me but unfortunately it has been degenerating now for years. My PSP experience made the switch to PhotoLine relatively easy and I very much enjoy many tools that work differently and more straightforward in PhotoLine than in PS and PSP (just for example the easy application of tools to a selected channel, etc.). Please see: http://www.pl32.com/forum3/viewtopic.ph ... view#p5836

As one can expect, not always can the Computerinsel-way come up with better solutions and the expectations are often very different and contradictory for users coming from either photoshop, paint shop pro, or canvas, or XYZ backgrounds. And, as a mature application, PL has certainly many users accustomed to the PL traditions. That said, I have found the PL creators to be open towards constructive suggestions, especially if several board members happen to agree in some points. They are providng help and discussing here almost daily - this can hardly be any better.
One thing I have noticed is, that when translating from a German background into English, things often sound a bitter rougher (may I say "less friendly"?) than they were intended originally (this applies to my communications too).

While I have my problems with the terminology, I believe there is no clearcut perfect option. "Histogram tool" is, for example for me a more intuitive term than levels and it is also used in PSP. Similarly, still using the terms dodge and burn really seems very outdated. I do agree that PhotoLine still contains quite a lot of "germanisms" and that there is a need to better deal with the "standard" PS terminology. For example, I believe it is necessary that the PS terms can be found in the HELP files, to be able to quickly figure out the equivalent PS tool. Perhaps the tool tips should additionaly show PS terms in brackets? And in several cases the PS terminology is clearly better anyhow.

[Martin Huber]

As one can expect, not always can the Computerinsel-way come up with better solutions and the expectations are often very different and contradictory for users coming from either photoshop, paint shop pro, or canvas, or XYZ backgrounds. And, as a mature application, PL has certainly many users accustomed to the PL traditions.

That is a very good description of our situation (a better one than I could have given).

That said, I have found the PL creators to be open towards constructive suggestions, especially if several board members happen to agree in some points.

"I want that, too" or "I don't want that" postings are very important for us to realize whether a comment of a user is a single or a widespread opinion.

Martin

[Martin Huber]

1) Photoline requires you to check boxes to constrain drags, etc.

PhotoLine doesn't require you to check boxes. The boxes are usually just a preference that can be overriden by a modifier key. By holding the Alt key you can switch from proportional scaling to non-proportional. The available modifiers should be listed in the Online-Help of the tool.

rather than honoring Apple's age-old (i.e. since 1984) human interface guidelines (which tend to be imitated under Windows) and treating the shift-key as constrain. I note that Photoline does honor the option-key (alt-) for leaving a copy behind, why not the shift-key?

Well, in PhotoLine it is the Alt key, but you have given a good reason for using the Shift key instead. We will discuss this.

2) Invert Selection is called Invert Mask. OK fine, but Inverting a mask is a very different thing from inverting a selection.

Why?

Photoshop has a "Selection" menu which has all the selection functions grouped together logically (selections are the life blood of this kind of program). Photoline's selection tools are either absent or hidden in strange places.

I am not sure, that one more menu is a good thing. There are already that many. What entries should be in the "Selection" menu in your opinion?

3) I tried to paste a new layer into a document and Photoline kept overwriting an existing layer. Eventually I managed it, but I'm not sure how. By default, anything you paste into an existing document should get its own new layer.

I can't reproduce that error here. If you copy the active layer (Cmd+C) and paste it with Cmd+V you don't have duplicated the active layer? Or do I have to do something different in order to reproduce it?

4) In Photoshop you can restrict an effect channel to work on a specific adjacent layer by option- or alt- clicking on the line that divides the two layers. E.g. if I want to adjust the hue of just one layer (versus every layer below the hue adjustment layer) I just option-click on the border between the two layers. I can't figure out how to do the equivalent operation in Photoline and ended up having to use a destructive edit to do the same thing. Oh well, I tossed out that image anyway.

In PhotoLine you can restrict the working layer by grouping the two layers and activating "Draw Isolated" in the Attributes dialog (View/Dialogs/Attributes).

5) After giving up on using a photograph of a DSLR, I imported a photo into Illustrator and knocked up a quick, stylized version, but Photoline couldn't import the SVG

The current version of PhotoLine is not able to import SVG.

and while it imported the PDF, the result was impossible to work with (it came in tiny, I couldn't select it or rescale it, and pasting the layers into my original document resulted in garbage).

Please send the PDF to support@pl32.com, so we can see, what's going on. We are interested in the SVG, too.

6) Why on Earth am I forced to use the crop tool when I already have a selection?

You aren't. There is the menu command "Tool/Lasso/Crop" and the Lasso tools do have a "Crop Lasso" button in the Tool Settings. Furthermore if there is a selection, the context menu of the document contains the Crop command, too. In PhotoLine the context menu (not only in the document window) can be very useful.

And when I use the crop tool, why can't I hit Enter to crop, instead of having to click a tiny button?

You can crop by double-clicking and by using the context menu, but I don't mind supporting additionally the Enter key.

Even with Leopard's ability to search menus it's very difficult and confusing to find familiar functions. Photoshop's naming conventions are -- for better or worse -- something of an industry standard. And Photoshop was pretty good about co-opting earlier program's terminology (e.g. Deluxe Paint / Studio/32) or terminology from photographic darkrooms (such as "dodge" and "burn").

In my opinion Photoshop terms are good for switchers and bad for newcomers. The same is true - still just my opinion - for the way the menus are structured.
I don't mind replacing one expression with another, but it is hard for us to find better ones than the existing.
The whole text of the English version can be found in PhotoLine.app in the English.lproj folder (in the *.str und *.stb files), so you could create a version that fits your needs better. Others could then use your files to tell us, if they like them better.

Filters, in particular, are located seemingly randomly in two different menus and divided into rather strange categories...

In the past the filters were organized similar to PS, but we go a lot of complaints. After splitting them up, we got quite a lot of positive feedback, but other people now think, they are "divided into rather strange categories". Life is not easy
We know that the current structure of the menu is not perfect, so we are interested, how you (or other users) would structure it.

Some Suggestions

Histogram Correction should be called Levels. If you want to use the word "Histogram" because, say, it sounds clever or people (on Mars???) are used to it then say "Levels (Histogram)" or something.

Put the Effect Filters and Special Tools items in Filters instead of Effects.

Don't confuse Masks with Selections. If you have to provide the same function twice with different names to avoid confusion, fine.

"Expand Mask" and "Contract Mask" are named incorrectly. What's wrong aside from that?

Martin

[greenmorpher]

Hiya Lutz

I don't want to argue, but I did not say PL should be a P'shop clone and would not suggest that. I bought PL32 precisely because it was not an overblown P'shop clone. I did say it should use the terms made common by P'shop which have become the jargon of image editors, in respect of image editing. These terms are widely used by other image editors. Almost everyone who starts to use PL32 must have had some contact with other image editors first. They are ubiquitous. PL32 users are not ubiquitous. PL32 uses some of the common terms of course -- Alpha Masks and Channels, for example. Why doesn't it use more of them?

HISTORGRAM OR LEVELS -- AN EXAMPLE

Now, the term "Histogram correction" is fine by me because I have a bit of maths and I know what a histogram is. But then I look at the actual "Histogram correction". A histogram is a bar chart in my maths definition. I don't SEE a bar chart. A frequency distribution? Whatever -- if it is NOT a bar chart it is arguable whether it is a histogram. So why NOT call it "Levels", which is common nomenclature in this field since it is used in other programs. Why use the long word, accurate or not, if it is meaningless to most users?

THE HISTOGRAM TOOL IN USE

"Input" and "output" are pretty much meaningless terms and are not explained (see below under "Manual").

In addition, what's with dragging GREEN lines? For a start, one of the curves is green -- which refers to the color green, I presume, and is quite separate from the green lines. I think. Don't use green lines. Secondly, the lines are virtually invisible. Don't use fine lines. Why not use arrow tags set at the bottom of the graphic boxes?

And what about one in the middle to move the midtone effects without affecting the extremities?

"You can switch between hue, intensity and saturation." Nope. According to the menu, you can switch between "Color type, intensity and saturation". Inconsistent again. I had to make an unnecessary trip to the manual to fine out that "color type" actually meant "hue". Hue is NOT color type -- or at least, only in the very loosest sense.

Finally, what are those buttons at the bottom of the dialog box? Okay and Cancel, I get. The eye, I get, but I would prefer to see the words "Full preview". The reset I get, but just a circular arrow would be more obvious; and why not say "Reset to last saved" so there is no doubt? But what is the other box with the selection lasso in it and the arrow, which seems to be some kind of okay?

I have attached a picture of the Canvas "Levels" dialog. It does not provide for hue, intensity and saturation -- that is taken care of in the Hue & Saturation tool, like PL32's "Hue/Saturation" tool in the "Color" sub-menu.

By the way -- the Hue/Saturation tool has "Hue, Brightness, Saturation". Is "Brightness" the same as "Intensity"? And if so, why the difference in the name between the two menus?

WHAT IS A LAYER, A PAGE, A DOCUMENT?

There is a giant heap of stuff where PL32's interface falls down. A while back we tried to work through the differences between layers, pages, and documents when scaling them or changing their sizes. This is a minefield IN PL32, from where I sit.

WHAT IS A SIZE?

The notion of having a page analog which is seen by the program as 300 dpi and its scaling on the screen = (screen res / 300 dpi) is simply off the planet. A4 size is A4 size regardless of resolution. I prepare an A4 size for printing, and it prints out the same size regardless of whether I print it at 300 dpi, 600 dpi, 1200 x 600 dpi, or 1200 dpi (the choices on my printer). To have it appear on my 60cm wide screen at 87% of actual actual size (21 x 29.7 cm), and to have that characterised as 26.2% zoom is just plain ridiculous. A4 is a fixed, external reference. Ask Napoleon! Note that the rulers reading in cm are at their real world size; they are not dependent on screen resolution. They, of course, are fixed, external references too.

TOOL, FILTER, EFFECT

Then, of course, there is the confusion about what is and is not a tool or a filter or an effect. Obviously, these could be much better organized. A number of programs come to grief in the use of the word "tool" in that they have a tool bar which does not include many of what are clearly tools. How about naming as tools what goes into the toolbar and naming the other tools something else. Such as "Effects Tools". What is the difference between a tool and a filter? I have no idea. Does the confusion in Pl32 reflect the confusion in other programs. But PL32 certainly has its on cofusions -- the "Effects" menu includes "Effects Filters" and "Effects" (huh?), "Special tools" (yes?), "Shape Tools" (which includes 5 "distort" functions), "Distort" (is this distortion different from the distortion under Shape Tools?) and so on the confusion goes.

I am not saying these tools are not very good, I am saying they are bloody difficult to access unless you learn the program inside out, so you learn each individual path well, and workwith the full capabilities of the program 24/7. The rest of us, who use effects only from time to time and for whom PL32 is simply one of several tools, rely on logical groupings of stuff to be able to find our way back to something we last did a month ago. But logical grouping is not what we have.

ILLOGICAL HANDLING

There is also some illogical handling of stuff. Everything is a layer ... except stuff like shadows and what not. You do stuff to pictures, then you can't place that stuff elsewhere by copying and pasting because the stuff expands outside the bounding box. Why doesn't the bounding box expand to incorporate the new dimensions when, e.g. you distort the image and twist it -- or even do something as simple as adding a shadow to it? Of all things, I find a shadow not being a layer illogical.

THE MANUAL

And don't even get me started on the manual. Look at "Histogram Correction"

What does: "Gamma controls whether the compensation happens linear or is strengthened or weakened." mean? Maybe I can work it out, but maybe not. Now: "The large curve is showing the distribution of the selected component." Which "large curve"? Is there a small curve? "Output Levels controls the destination range." Meaning that if you change the levels with the other part of this tool, it won't affect what is ouput to, e.g. a printer? Of course it will, that's why this is meaningless to the ordinary user -- i.e. me. (Fortunately, it is explained in the Canvas manual. Why must users bring this knowledge to PL32? Don't the Hubers suggest that PL32 users are graphics virgins -- they don't know terms from other programs? But they are supposed to understand the complex stuff? Yeah, right.)

We've raised this stuff before and had it dismissed, Poddo, with the same sort of rubbish Martin comes up with in his post above:

In my opinion Photoshop terms are good for switchers and bad for newcomers.

Martin, as I have demonstrated above, you are not even consistent in your use of terms -- we don't know what you mean from one tool to another! Just use the P'shop terms for the same or similar tools and let us users get on with doing our w9ork instead of having to learn SEVERAL new terms for the same thing!

And what newcomers? Virtually everyone has some experience of some basic image program before they come to PL32, I would suggest. In any case, even if they did not, because PL32's manual is so crummy and there are so few tutorials available, even image/graphics virgins would be forced to use P'shop or PSP tutorials available on the web to get up to learn what PL32 can do. But, of course, they cannot use those tutorials because PL32 uses different names for the same tools/effects/whatever. Do what you like in German and let your German users glory in the difference, but in English, for God's sake, get smart and use the well known terms.

In sadness for a program with excellent capabilities which is being squashed by its creators who couldn't care a damn about making it easy for paying customers to become dedicated users and supporters.

By the way -- I have taken down the very favourable review of PL32 I had up on my website.

Geoff

MarketNOW with Geoffrey Heard
Practical, Ethical Marketing - PR - Advertising
Tel: (03) 9583 0788 / 0418 330 911
Email: marketyman@googlemail.com
http://www.marketnow.com.au

[Hoogo]

I just had a look into the most popular german dslr-forum (>100.000 members, >3 million posts...)
-Someone made an overview about popular photo editing software - no Canvas in it.
-Then I searched for canvas, most hits about "Canvas and layers in ps" or "Printing on canvas". Once "Canvas lite 1.1" was mentioned for noise reduction, one post was"Foto Canvas 3.0 => Have you ever touched PS or PS Elements with your own hands? Then forget it " (Whatever may be the reason for such a post).
-German Wikipedia: No Canvas. (In opposite to the english Wikipedia - There is no Photoline)
-Homepage of ACDsee - No link to Canvas.
-In the end I found the ACD forum for Canvas. Not too much live in it.

So all in all I wonder why you always mention Canvas when it comes to terms of a standard for naming? If I had to look for the most common terms for some tools, I would look at PSP, Gimp, PS - In that order, because quite some people switched from PSP to PL. Well, maybe Corel or AI if it comes to functions in PL that cannot be found in the above. But I bet that these do not use the same terms! I don't have my old PSP anymore, so I can't have a look at it. But I am very common with the term "histogram correction" (and ThumbsPlus surely uses this term), and I think I learned it from PSP. Sure, PS is something like the leader in terms, but (at least in the german version) Adobe changes these terms even for layer modes, and when you compare engish to german versions of PS you find some really weird translations, even inconsistent in their meanings. And that by a company that increased the price of a german PS by >$100 because of the expensive german localization.

So overall I really wonder why you insinst on such exhausting discussions about a few words? Your terms may make live easier for some, but harder for others.

(Sorry, but I have to break here... Writing takes a while, and I need to go to town... Need a belt for my new camera )

[lutz]

Hello Geoff,

I certainly agree with many of your points (while I do not see any problems with the histogram tool, for example).
But on the other hand, I have not come across any software that gets close to being perfect and especially regarding consistency in terms of UI and terminology. I tried to help a student with some just a bit advanced tasks in MS Word two days ago; my impression was that of some pretty confused UI guidelines, inconsistent terminology and finally lack of some simple features in a program that has made billions. Other software I am using at work (for research) that is offered by gigantic companies is generally also far from perfect.
PhotoLine is a complex program and especially the English language documentation should be improved. (But have you tried the meandering Help-system of Word? - I usually have already forgotten my original question when I finally stumble on a helpful answer there).

It is certainly possible that 50 years from now, when nobody remembers anymore what a darkroom was, people will still be tortured with terms like "dodge and burn" in their software. PhotoLine is likely not going to change this and a general compliance with the majority of webtutorials and the literature seems indeed important.

[greenmorpher]

Hey Hoogo

If you didn't see Canvas on ACDSystems.com, you weren't looking. A screen grab of the home page is attached.

Nevertheless, you identified the problem with Canvas -- a few years ago, ACDSystems bought the Deneba company that started Canvas back in the 1980s. It has killed off Canvas for Mac, is squeezing Canvas for PC to death too and basically, it is mining Canvas for code to augment its photo editing programs which themselves are being squeezed out of the crowded image editing market. It ignored Canvas' established market (it had about $17 million in sales the year the Deneba guys sold it). Consequently, ACDSystems is going broke. Stupid, but there you go.

And THAT is the reason why I bought PL32 -- because it gives me the image editing upgrade that ACDSystems did not when they brought out the final version of Canvas for Mac.

Hoogo, beforey ou put down Canvas too much, have a look at what people can do with it. Check out my marketing website: http://www.marketnow.com.au. Built entirely in Canvas then saved using its HTML filter -- HTML 4 Centred Tables. Check out a client's site: http://www.malliabuilders.com.au. Also built in Canvas, saved using the Canvas HTML filter as CSS2. Have a look at a PDF of sample pages from my book "Success in Store" -- the entire thing done in Canvas including some cunning image editing stuff for the cover which involved turning an Australian "drive on the left" photograph into an American "drive on the right" scene. http://www.worsleypress.com/successinstore/index.html (no, I didn't build that site in Canvas; I am rebuilding it, though). Check out Dave Rumfelt's Canvas work: http://www.spotillustrator.com > My Portfolio > Technical Illustrations. Dn't miss the Ferrari. And Peter Lembrechts' work: http://www.lembrechtsart.be/.

But that's not really the point:

* I did NOT suggest Canvas should be a standard; I illustrated how Canvas did the Levels/Histogram tool because its sliders are easier to see and easier to grab than PL32's -- and furthermore, it offers a middle slider for mid-tones. Anything Canvas can do on image stuff, PL32 SHOULD do better and -- IF YOU CAN IDENTIFY AND LOCATE THE TOOLS -- it does do better in most cases. That doesn't mean Canvas can't do a few things better, particularly in respect of the interface. The Levels sliders is one example.

* I said Photoshop and P'Shop Elements are the standard. They are. Whether you like Adobe or not, there is no question that they are the biggest by far in the image editing field, and that vast numbers of people are familiar with the terms they use. (Yes, I know PSP is an excellentg program and uses some different terms from Photoshop and P'shop Elements, but PSP has had a much smaller circulation than P'shop and Elements. P'shop and Elements are so much the standard that people commonly talk in English about "photoshopping a picture". They mean editing it in any image editor, of course.)

* You say Adobe's localisation of Photoshop to German is poor. Does that mean PL32's localization to English must be bad -- as some kind of revenge or what? The only people PL32's poor localization to English hurts is people who have REJECTED Adobe and chosen PL32! And it hurts the makers of PL32, of course. They lose sales.

* The makers of PL32 do two major things wrong when translating to English:
-- They ignore the well known, "standard" terms used by programs that originated in English. This makes learning PL32 more difficult for most users. It means they cannot easily use the huge store of knowledge of image editing based on Photoshop which is freely available on the internet. This would not matter so much if the makers of PL32 and its users had made available a large store of tutorials based on PL32 -- but they have not. There is a handful only.
-- They are NOT CONSISTENT in their use of terms. They keep using different names for the same things, as I demonstrated in my previous post. This is a cardinal sin of translating technical material. It means you cannot even use the manual, poor as it is anyway, to learn the program, because often the term used in a menu item is not referred to in the manual. A different term is used there! And there is further confusion when different menus use different terms for the same item or action. This is just ridiculous.

Speaking as a user, a marketer and a translation expert (see below), I am simply suggesting:
* PL32 should use the "standard" terms in identifying things.
* PL32 MUST be CONSISTENT in its use of terms.
* PL32 desperately NEEDS A MUCH BETTER manual. Here Canvas IS a valid comparison. Its manual is 932 pages. Now, 96 pages are devoted to GIS and Seismological and Scientific imaging which PL32 cannot do, so let's ignore those and say it has 836 pages devoted to its general graphics features. PhotoLine's manual is 280 pages. Some of Canvas' extra pages have to do with the fact that Canvas can do much more than PhotoLine on the vector graphics side, but a lot of the extra has to do with the fact that the Canvas manual is much more detailed and gives more explanation of functions than does the PL32 manual. I gave an example, picked at random, in my last post.

The makers of PL32 are open to using Photoshop terms -- the example is HDR, changed in v.14 from whatever it was in v.13. Good. But let's go through the whole program and do that.

And by the way -- here is something PL32 has not got, which Canvas has, which is pretty well unforgivable. It does NOT do "registration". In the manual, it says CMYK is an important function if you want to print separations. True. But sorry, NOBODY can print separations properly unless registration information is provided. PL32 does not have a "registration" colour and does not have provision for printing registration marks. That means PL32 cannot stand alone as a colour print production tool. Canvas does registration marks two different ways.

Regarding translation: I am well qualified to talk about this; I have done significant work writing semi-technical material in English for translation and supervising translation (about the level of the manuals for PL32 or any other program). Further, I have spent 17 years of my life working in, training people for, and managing news rooms operating in scores of languages simultaneously, ranging from languages that have never been written in Papua New Guinea, to every European and the major Asian languages in Australia. Check out the Special Broadcasting Service in Australia at http://radio.sbs.com.au which now operates in 68 languages. It was operating in about 50 languages when I helped set up the news service there 20 years ago. Choose your own language and download podcasts. German is http://radio.sbs.com.au/language.php?language=German. By the way, translating from English to German and German to English is one of the simplest of translation tasks because of the amount of language, culture, history and technology German and English speakers share.

Cheers

Geoff

MarketNOW with Geoffrey Heard
Practical, Ethical Marketing - PR - Advertising
Tel: (03) 9583 0788 / 0418 330 911
Email: marketyman@googlemail.com
http://www.marketnow.com.au

11:02 AM, May 25, 2008

[greenmorpher]

Hiya Lutz

You are right about terms like "dodge" and "burn" -- but as you say, when the memory of doing photos in the darkroom is gone, it won't matter because a new generation is learning that "Dodge" means doing a particular thing in an image editing program. (As it happens, just yesterday I was showing my daughter an old print I made with particularly tricky -- and clumsy -- dodging and burning in it. Thank goodness for digital cameras and image editing programs! On the other hand, film cameras give much nicer effects generally when the sun hits the lens.)

I do know how bad manuals can be, and particularly Microsoft manuals. It is one reason why I do not have any Microsoft programs on my computer! I have used Nisus Writer (multilingual word processor) since the late 1980s, and currently use Nisus Writer Pro http://www.nisus.com on OS X.4.11. I had the early MS Word for quite a time, but stopped at 5.1a, an excellent program (although not as good as Nisus Writer for most of my work), but Word went downhill after that. I use Tables by Daniel Schwill http://www.x-tables.eu/more/overview.html for a spreadsheet. I used to rely on AppleWorks, a great program.

I am looking with great interest at Papyrus, though. Have you seen it? The German address is http://www.papyrus.de and the English one is http://www.rom-logicware.com. It is about to go into v.13 (or v.14; if they are feeling particularly superstitious on the day they will skip 13, they told me with a smiley) and it is a stunningly efficient program -- it does word processing, database and tables (which make a pseudo spreadsheet), yet the program itself is a tiny 7.3 MB and the folder with bits and pieces like dictionaries, help, tutorials, etc., is 16.4 MB. You can run it off a small USB stick on either PC or Mac and it runs lightning fast on either platform.

I really like well-made things, and to have that kind of coding makes Papyrus what we call "the sharpest tool in the shed". In fact, the same applies to PL32 -- apart from its capabilities, which I wanted, one of the things I liked about it from the start is that it is a small size for what it does. That means good coding. I like that; I like using well made things. The thing that hurts is that it is so good in so many ways, but it is so hard to use because the interface needs some fairly simple work on the menus and stuff, the use of terms needs to be made "industry standard" to make it easier to learn, and the support, manual and tutorials, need work. Compared with actually building the program, these are minor things, but they make an excellent program difficult to use. It is like having a chisel made of beautiful Solingen steel, but with a wooden handle that splits when you hit it with a hammer because in Solingen they make steel -- they don't care much about wood.

Cheers

Geoff

MarketNOW with Geoffrey Heard
Practical, Ethical Marketing - PR - Advertising
Tel: (03) 9583 0788 / 0418 330 911
Email: marketyman@googlemail.com
http://www.marketnow.com.au

11:43 AM, May 25, 2008

[lutz]

Localiszation files:

The whole text of the English version can be found in PhotoLine.app in the English.lproj folder (in the *.str und *.stb files), so you could create a version that fits your needs better. Others could then use your files to tell us, if they like them better.
Martin

For the PC version this seem to be the files in the : " > Program Files > PhotoLine14 > hlp > English " folder.


Hello Geoff,
I assume Payrus Office itself works better than their webserver. Currently the german site is completely down and the downloads are not working at their english language site. I will try again later. This might be nice of for personal usage - but at work there is no way to deviate from the "standard".

[Xyzzy]

We've raised lots of this stuff before and been told by the developers that they aren't interested in using the "industry standard" terms (or even using their own terms consistently in the manual) or menus that follow the "industry standard" ideas in general because their user base is quite different and their layout and general ideas of the way to do things are superior. Yeah, right.

And that made Adobe a buyer. I have money to pay for PS 10 times the price of PL, but neither the time required to comprehend the quirks od PL, nor will to do that :/

X.

[lutz]

And that made Adobe a buyer. I have money to pay for PS 10 times the price of PL, but neither the time required to comprehend the quirks od PL, nor will to do that :/ X.

Congratulations, seems like you found your match.
(Have fun memorizing the keyboard shortcuts).