Neue Testversion 18.90b9

[Martin Huber]

Habt ihr an der Arbeitsebene "Graumixer" etwas geändert? Bei mir laufen schnell die Schatten zu, man sieht den Effekt auch, wenn man sie auf einen Graukeil anwendet (obere Bildhälfte), und zwar egal, was ich in den Voreinstelllungen als Grauprofil einstelle ("System" oder Generic Grey 2.2 oder "None"):

grey mixer.png

In der PL 18.53 tritt der Effekt nicht auf.

Da du richtig angemerkt hast, dass man keine definierten Ergebnisse bekommt, wenn der Graumixer auf dem aktuellen Grauprofil basiert, habe ich ihn in dieser Version auf L des Lab-Farbraums umgebaut, aber offensichtlich nicht ganz richtig. Ich sehe mir das nochmal an.

Martin

[Martin Huber]

Warum ist das Popup überhaupt in den Möglichkeiten eingeschränkter als das Fensterchen für die Farbliste?

Momentan wird das Popup automatisch geschlossen, wenn es den Fokus verliert (also durch einen Klick irgendwohin oder durch Auswahl einer Farbe). Wenn es alle Möglichkeiten bietet, dann geht das nicht mehr und man muss es ausdrücklich durch einen Klick auf den Aufklapppfeil schließen. Und da ich mir dachte, dass man viel öfter eine Farbe einstellt als eine neue anlegt, wird das Popup automatisch geschlossen, und zum Verwalten muss man die Farbliste benutzen (oder die Farbauswahl).

Martin

[Martin Huber]

Btw, small bug in relation to tints:
- create a base spot colour swatch
- then create a new tint, and select the previous spot colour as the base colour.

The tints fail to update automatically. The use has to click on one of the tints to update the tints preview.

Also, existing tints that are based on an original base spot colour do not update when the original base spot colour is changed. This may lead to unintended additional spot colours.

I think I fixed the problems. Nevertheless I would appreciate a small sample document (to support@pl32.com) to check whether the problem is really gone.

And could we please have an option to add all the tints to the swatches in one go with a click on a button? Currently the user is forced to add one at a time, which is a painstakingly slow process, and prone to errors.

Why do you need all tints and what are "all the tints"? 5% steps or 10% steps?

One more thing: currently it is not possible to drag colours to the document colors pane, or even to copy and paste existing colours? Would be great if those basic functions would be added as well.

You should be able to drag or copy colors to the Document Color List. You can't copy/drag colors to the popup window that appears on clicking the arrow beside the color field.

Martin

[Hoogo]

Momentan wird das Popup automatisch geschlossen, wenn es den Fokus verliert (also durch einen Klick irgendwohin oder durch Auswahl einer Farbe). Wenn es alle Möglichkeiten bietet, dann geht das nicht mehr und man muss es ausdrücklich durch einen Klick auf den Aufklapppfeil schließen. Und da ich mir dachte, dass man viel öfter eine Farbe einstellt als eine neue anlegt, wird das Popup automatisch geschlossen, und zum Verwalten muss man die Farbliste benutzen (oder die Farbauswahl).

OK, dann ist der Color editor wohl die Ausnahme. Mir scheint aber, daß + und - als Buttons und das Kontextmenü der Farbliste aber ohne Beinbruch funktionieren könnten.

Herbert meint mit "add all tints" wohl, daß man nur Farbe für Farbe in die swatches scheiben kann. Die Harmony hat ja einen Button "to color list", um alle 5 Farben in einem Rutsch der Farbliste hinzuzufügen.

"Tint" und "Harmony" müssten imho auch irgendwie an ähnlicher Stelle erscheinen, ich hab mich grad wieder blöd nach tint gesucht. Eigene Reiter scheinen mir erstmal naheliegender.

[photoken]

But really, try Expression 4.4. It is missing some neat features from Expression 3.3, but the stroke engine is really quite impressive. I wish Photoline would have a similar stroke options.

OK, I'm testing Expression Design 4 (version 8.0.31217.1), and I think PL's variable width stroke is much better:

• Design 4 only can create variable width strokes if you use a graphics tablet. PL can create variable width strokes with or without a graphics tablet.
• Design 4 cannot change the width at points along the line once the line has been created. PL's method, of course, allows this.

The pen pressure sensitivity is slightly different between the two programs, but not enough to make much difference when drawing.

I'm also testing the ClipStudio Paint Pro program you mentioned, and the those same points apply to it as well.

Those two programs have neat effects that can be applied along the drawn line, which are similar to the effects Illustrator and CorelDraw have. If those are the "stroke options" you referred to, then Yes, they're nice.

Btw, I do like the variable width option. It is just that the current implementation and GUI remind me of how a programmer would solve this problem! A creative mind (artist) would want easy to use direct manipulation of the variable thickness on the canvas - not hidden away in an obscure modal dialog.

This, I feel, also touches other parts of Photoline's interface. Most filter and effect operations in Photoline would benefit from direct on-canvas manipulations, working together with a non-model parameter/properties panel that adapts to the presented context. The modal dialogues approach is a tad old-fashioned, and feels very clunky.

There's nothing inherently wrong with "how a programmer would solve this problem". In fact, PL's method gives more flexibility, as I noted. Just because "artists" don't want to think logically at times doesn't mean that always manipulating things directly on-canvas is the best. At times it is (applying gradients, for example), but sometimes it's just more powerful, and flexible to use a properties panel. You're right that the modal dialog box can get in the way at times -- maybe PL could implement a "Properties" (or "Effects", or "Tool Editor") panel where appropriate....

[photoken]

When drawing a vector shape that is not closed, the fill colour will cross the gap between the start and end points in a straight line. Often, this is not desired:

vector fill proposal.png

In this example, it would be nice if the fill colour followed the continuation of the curves of the shape (as shown by the dotted line).

I'm not sure of the best way to accomplish this, but perhaps when the start point or end point is selected there could be a context menu option to "Add second control handle"?

Added:
My example was drawn with the Vector Drawing tool, which would probably be the most common way to draw an expressive unclosed shape. I just noticed that an unclosed object drawn with the Curve Creation tool has two control handles for the start and end points, but one control handle has no effect when the shape is not closed....

[Hoogo]

Why don't you just close the line?

[photoken]

Why don't you just close the line?

If I close the shape, the thin end will butt up against the thick end and the shape will look strange. Also, when drawing a cartoon, there are cases where it's more expressive to leave a gap in the black line -- for example, in the eyes.

[bkh]

I'm not sure of the best way to accomplish this, but perhaps when the start point or end point is selected there could be a context menu option to "Add second control handle"?

You can use the "Convert Vector Points" (~ <-> _) tool to create the additional control points (just click on the straight line). However, as in the case of vector curves, that doesn't change the way the fill is drawn.

I've come across a few cases where i would have preferred the drawing behaviour which you are suggesting. So far, I have solved this by using two copies of the vector path, one open with the border and one closed with only the fill, but of course, this is not convenient of you need this frequently. So imo, it makes sense to change PL's drawing behaviour.

However, in principle there is a problem with backward compatibility, if anybody actively used the feature that control points are ignored for open paths. (Of course, this could be fixed easily using "Convert Vector Points").

Cheers

Burkhard.

[photoken]

I've come across a few cases where i would have preferred the drawing behaviour which you are suggesting. So far, I have solved this by using two copies of the vector path, one open with the border and one closed with only the fill, but of course, this is not convenient of you need this frequently. So imo, it makes sense to change PL's drawing behaviour.

Yes, I've used that workaround, also. Although it works fine if the result will be saved as a bitmap image, I have questions about what happens if it is exported as a vector: Will those overlapping copies screw up when exporting to PDF? Will that PDF cause problems with the software used by service bureaus to create their printing plates?

[bkh]

Although it works fine if the result will be saved as a bitmap image, I have questions about what happens if it is exported as a vector: Will those overlapping copies screw up when exporting to PDF? Will that PDF cause problems with the software used by service bureaus to create their printing plates?

This shouldn't be a problem – PL always creates separate PDF layers for fill and line colours, with the outline overlapping the fill colour, so doing this manually doesn't change the resulting PDF.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[photoken]

Although it works fine if the result will be saved as a bitmap image, I have questions about what happens if it is exported as a vector: Will those overlapping copies screw up when exporting to PDF? Will that PDF cause problems with the software used by service bureaus to create their printing plates?

This shouldn't be a problem – PL always creates separate PDF layers for fill and line colours, with the outline overlapping the fill colour, so doing this manually doesn't change the resulting PDF.

That's good to know. Thanks.

[Herbert123]

OK, I'm testing Expression Design 4 (version 8.0.31217.1), and I think PL's variable width stroke is much better:

• Design 4 only can create variable width strokes if you use a graphics tablet. PL can create variable width strokes with or without a graphics tablet.
• Design 4 cannot change the width at points along the line once the line has been created. PL's method, of course, allows this.

The pen pressure sensitivity is slightly different between the two programs, but not enough to make much difference when drawing.

I'm also testing the ClipStudio Paint Pro program you mentioned, and the those same points apply to it as well.

Those two programs have neat effects that can be applied along the drawn line, which are similar to the effects Illustrator and CorelDraw have. If those are the "stroke options" you referred to, then Yes, they're nice.

There's nothing inherently wrong with "how a programmer would solve this problem". In fact, PL's method gives more flexibility, as I noted. Just because "artists" don't want to think logically at times doesn't mean that always manipulating things directly on-canvas is the best. At times it is (applying gradients, for example), but sometimes it's just more powerful, and flexible to use a properties panel. You're right that the modal dialog box can get in the way at times -- maybe PL could implement a "Properties" (or "Effects", or "Tool Editor") panel where appropriate....

True, Expression lacks the variable width control after drawing the stroke. Expression 3.3 did have more control after drawing a stroke.

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.

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.

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.

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).

[Herbert123]

When drawing a vector shape that is not closed, the fill colour will cross the gap between the start and end points in a straight line. Often, this is not desired...

+1

[Hoogo]

I had some problems to find the variable with yesterday, and it took me a while to find it, even though I remembered that it was somehow hidden in the line options.
I guess it's currently still beta, maybe the controls could be moved from the sub-subwindow one level up into the normal line style editor?

A separate (additional) tool to work directly in the document would also be nice, but I don't care much. But I wonder how it might look like, as the variable width stores relative values compared to the line width.