Neue Testversion 23.40b7

[Martin Huber]

[1]
In games, web, and app dev exporting new versions of assets update older versions all the time throughout design and development phases. Placeholders are replaced with (semi-)finished assets, design specs change, new improved versions of assets need to replace the older versions, and so on.

Currently this is not possible with how the export works, because it asks for a folder, and then saves new versions with a space and an incremental number instead of replacing the old versions.

On the other hand, the current behaviour is also desired in many circumstances: asking for a folder and export, and keeping the older versions.

My suggestion would be to add a second export option called "Export Again" or "Re-export" which would remember the export last used with that document. It would also overwrite existing files with the same file name and replace these, instead of saving new versions with incrementing file number suffixes.

Or a checkbox that tells PhotoLine to export to the same folder after picking it once, and that existing files are overwritten with newer versions.

I don't know how to handle this in a reasonable way.
Currently you can export
- the complete document
- the active page
- the selected layers
Each of them also exports its children if it has export data.
Should each of them save its own path which will be used for the reexport? Or should they all have the same path?
This path has to be visible, so that the user knows where he will export to. If each one saves its own path, this will be become difficult.

[2] While I understand why the Document export option is added (because it seems to make sense to add it to the document properties scope), I do think from a usability perspective it separates that functionality from the Export panel. It requires the user to keep those two panels open at all time, OR keep switching to that document panel to export the document.
(...)
It makes more sense to keep all Export functionality contained within the Export dialog instead. It could be implemented either as a checkbox option or as a separate document export option button.

This will mean, that there have to be 3 export buttons. And if we implement reexport, there will be 6. Isn't this even more confusing?

[3] the icon for "add export setting" uses a diskette icon. I would replace that with a + icon. It is confusing and too similar to the export icon. Other design apps with similar export options use that icon to indicate extra export entries.
Besides, the diskette icon is entirely deprecated nowadays. Newer users wouldn't even recognize it anymore.

I understand your point, but we checked other standard applications and most of them still also use the diskette symbol.
What is the alternative? Others just use a rectangle with an arrow pointing up. IMHO this is not clearer.

[4] replace the export icon with one that has the arrow pointing outward to the right instead of the left. That is the standard "flow" arrow with export icons. And again I would change the diskette icon to a document, or something else.

And that is the problem: We either need an understandable generic document icon or a generic file icon.

[5] it would be nice if the Export would use layername_01, layername_02, layername_03 instead of layername 1, layername 2, layername 3 when it exports and it discovers existing files with identical file names.

Well, I don't really care about the separator, so I will change that.

[6] Options for each export entry are now hidden in the dropdown menu, which makes little sense to me. I often make changes to the settings after testing the first export, and having to open each drop-down, then navigate with the mouse, and then finally click on that options entry is just WAY too much work. Please just add a simple options button right after the file format drop-down menu. Or just allow us to double-click an entry to open the settings - just like in the other areas of PhotoLine.

I will check the double-click option.

Btw
- I love the option to replace the number with any other one. I can simply type 2.5 to export an asset at that size.

You can also enter "300w" or "300h" and it will scale to a width or height of 300 pixels.

Martin

[Herbert123]

I don't know how to handle this in a reasonable way.
Currently you can export
- the complete document
- the active page
- the selected layers
Each of them also exports its children if it has export data.
Should each of them save its own path which will be used for the reexport? Or should they all have the same path?
This path has to be visible, so that the user knows where he will export to. If each one saves its own path, this will be become difficult.

How about something like this?

example_file.png

Default would be the default option (as it is implemented currently). Only by changing an entry to "custom folder" will a specific folder dialog pop up and allow the user to pick a custom folder location for that particular entry or group of selected layers.

It would be nice if that custom folder is maintained for each new entry that is created to prevent having to set that custom folder for each new export entry. So: add first entry, change to custom and the file dialog pops up. User chooses a folder, and clicks ok. Then the second entry is added, and it automatically bases that on the first custom folder entry.

This will mean, that there have to be 3 export buttons. And if we implement reexport, there will be 6. Isn't this even more confusing?

You make a fair point, and I had not noticed the page export option until you mentioned it here

It does make sense to approach it the way you have in mind - in particular after I noticed the page export options, which are quite nice. I suppose it would be an alternative to include the context in the export panel itself, but that may overcomplicate the panel completely.

I agree the current solution works quite well now that I understand the document AND page export options better.

I understand your point, but we checked other standard applications and most of them still also use the diskette symbol.
What is the alternative? Others just use a rectangle with an arrow pointing up. IMHO this is not clearer.

In my opinion the current diskette icon is too noisy and unclear in regards to shapes. Either change it to something simpler/better use of colours or change to different icons altogether. Compare with my quick mockup above.

(not saying my colours are great, but at least they are easy to differentiate. And I would argue that files are exported, and not diskettes )

Well, I don't really care about the separator, so I will change that.
I will check the double-click option.
You can also enter "300w" or "300h" and it will scale to a width or height of 300 pixels.

Awesome!

Other notes:

- When new export entries are added, the suffix number stays at 1x. It would be nice if it automatically increments by 1 for each new entry (just like other applications).

- Also, it would be a good idea in my opinion to expose the W and H options by amending that list with two generic entries - for example 256W and 256H. Just so that the user is made aware of those two options.

- It would be great if a margins option could be added - in the export options dialog, for example. Often a custom transparent or non-transparent pixel margin is required for asset jobs in my experience.
A top, bottom, left, and right pixel size margin setting

- an option to select a replacement background colour for layer content with transparency. JPGs are now exported with a white background, but the user should be able to adjust this.

- this one might be harder to implement, but it is quite essential under circumstances to be able to choose the resampling method. In the past (if you recall) I experienced real issues with scaling up and down assets using the wrong resampling method, and it would be the icing on the cake if either the layer setting for this would be honoured during export or it is a setting in the export options to control it for each export individually.

- GIF as a file format is missing in the file export list. It is still used quite a lot, even though it is an older file format. Could it be added?

[shijan]

Current drop menu is better than standalone gear icon, because it can quickly show presets in that menu. So i guess double click to open preset settings will be more than enough.


Currently that drop menu field is always empty and looks a little bit confusing. If possible i prefer that empty drop menu to indicate selected preset. Example:

[Herbert123]

One last thing to consider in regards to the export function:

The file suffix or prefix should ideally include @2x, @3x, @0.5x.

For example, a layer named "Arrow" should be saved as
Arrow@2x.png, Arrow@3x.png, Arrow@1x.gif, and so on.

And Arrow-480w.png, Arrow-512h.jpg as well.

@2x-Arrow.png (when using prefixes)

That said, if the size of two or more assets is identical, but the file format is different, all three should be exported with the same file name, but different extensions:
Arrow.png, Arrow.svg, Arrow.jpg

In the current implementation it is exported like
Arrow.png, Arrow.jpg, Arrow.gif
without any indication about the size it was exported at in the file names.

These are typical file naming conventions found in asset export workflows.

Ideally the user would have even more control over the exact file naming conventions... But the above are sort-of essential to have.

[Herbert123]

Drop menu is better than gear icon standalone because it can quickly show presets in that menu. So i guess double click to open preset settings will be more than enough.


Currently that drop menu field is always empty and looks a little bit confusing. If possible i prefer that empty drop menu to indicate selected preset. Example:

Agreed, double-clicking will work just fine as well. The cogwheel is not necessary and it fits with the rest of PhotoLine.

Also agree with the preset field - it should be populated with the preset that is selected. Makes it much easier to see what is going on for various selections for various layers.

[maxwell]

Nach Bearbeitung einer pdf Datei wechselt die Werkzeugleiste nicht mehr vom Vektormodus in den Bitmap Modus. Auch nach Beenden und Neustart und anschließendem Laden eines Bitmaps verbleibt die Werkzeugleiste im Vektormodus.

[maxwell]

Umschaltung der Werkzeugleiste auf Bitmap funktioniert nun auch nicht mehr unter Version 23.02. Ich nutze Windows 11. Unter Windows 10 habe ich das Verhalten noch nicht kontrolliert.

[maxwell]

Verhalten der Werkzeugleiste lag an der Dialogvorgabe. Nach Verschieben der Dialoge, so dass Werkzeugleiste alleine auf linker Seite ist alles wie gewünscht!

[Martin Huber]

Verhalten der Werkzeugleiste lag an der Dialogvorgabe. Nach Verschieben der Dialoge, so dass Werkzeugleiste alleine auf linker Seite ist alles wie gewünscht!

Das gefällt mir trotzdem nicht. Die Werkzeugleiste sollte immer umschalten, auch wenn sie mit anderen DIalogen zusammen gedockt ist.

Wenn du da eine Dialogzusammenstellung hast, die nicht funktioniert, wäre es schön, wenn du uns deine PhotoLine.xml aus dem Einstellungsverzeichnis ("%appdata%\PhotoLine" oder "PhotoLineSettings") schicken könntest. Dann könnten wir versuchen, das zu reproduzieren.

Martin

[Martin Huber]

Current drop menu is better than standalone gear icon, because it can quickly show presets in that menu. So i guess double click to open preset settings will be more than enough.

and

Currently that drop menu field is always empty and looks a little bit confusing. If possible i prefer that empty drop menu to indicate selected preset.

I will implement both.

Martin

[shijan]

How about something like this?
example_file.png

Default would be the default option (as it is implemented currently). Only by changing an entry to "custom folder" will a specific folder dialog pop up and allow the user to pick a custom folder location for that particular entry or group of selected layers.

It would be nice if that custom folder is maintained for each new entry that is created to prevent having to set that custom folder for each new export entry. So: add first entry, change to custom and the file dialog pops up. User chooses a folder, and clicks ok. Then the second entry is added, and it automatically bases that on the first custom folder entry.

Maybe no need to use folder path field for each new entry? Why don't use one single global path field for all? It looks way simpler.
If folder path is set - any files from any preset are exported to that folder.
If folder path field is empty - dialog appears every time on export.

Guess it is also possible to save unique folder path for each preset.
Example:

[Herbert123]

How about something like this?
example_file.png

Default would be the default option (as it is implemented currently). Only by changing an entry to "custom folder" will a specific folder dialog pop up and allow the user to pick a custom folder location for that particular entry or group of selected layers.

It would be nice if that custom folder is maintained for each new entry that is created to prevent having to set that custom folder for each new export entry. So: add first entry, change to custom and the file dialog pops up. User chooses a folder, and clicks ok. Then the second entry is added, and it automatically bases that on the first custom folder entry.

Maybe no need to use folder path field for each new entry? Why don't use one single global path field for all? It looks way simpler.
If folder path is set - any files from any preset are exported to that folder.
If folder path field is empty - dialog appears every time on export.

Guess it is also possible to save unique folder path for each preset.
Example:

Because each layer export entry may have to be saved to a different folder. For example: I work with game assets, and have those laid out in a sample level in PhotoLine. Assume I have different types of environment assets and other objects. Various sets of assets must be saved to different folders in the game project folder. That includes saving different sizes/scales to different folders.

One single global path field would not allow for this.

One more example: I have a website mockup or an app prototype. Different types of GUI and content assets. I definitely do not want to save all those assets in the same folder: at the very least the GUI and content asset need to be saved in different image folders.

Worse, I might have to save different resolutions of the same assets in different folders (mobile, desktop, TV, tablet, etc). In this case each version of each asset may also have to be saved in their own folders.

And so on.

I am not saying a global field wouldn't be useful, by the way. Because at other times all versions of an asset do need to be saved in the same folder So I do like your idea.

But this is about flexibility. So it is not even enough to have a unique folder for each preset - useful, but I (and others) would also need the option to set a unique folder for each export entry.

Perhaps a dropdown could be included that allows the user to choose between a global field for that layer, and an option to allow for specific custom output folders set for each export entry?

[shijan]

OK, so possible options for "save file path" line are:
- One global path line for all layers (not changed when you change preset, i guess)
- One path line per layer (saved with preset)
- One path line per file type (every time you add file type with "+" button - new path line appears near that file type. Saved with preset)

[Martin Huber]

IMHO that is too complicated for most users.

Does any app have these export options? I've checked a few (for some, I just checked the documentation) and if I didn't miss anything, none of them had these.

I fear that we will once again create a function with a plethora of features and in the end nobody will use it, because it is too complicated.

For now, I have impemented a simple solution:
- the layer name can additionally contain subpaths. For example "folder1/folder2/flower" will create the subfolders "flower1" and "flower2" and save the file named "flower" there.
- The prefix can also contain subpaths. So with the example above and a prefix of "folder3/", there will be one more subfolder.

This way "normal" users aren't confused with options and infos they don't need while keeping the system flexible.

Martin

[shijan]

Well, i personally don't use export tool at all because i don't do this sort of work. To be honest i can't understand the purpose and didn't look at that tool before 23.40b7 at all
But from global point of view i may prefer simple option like "One global path line for all layers" or "One path line per layer". This may just save time because no need to open dialog and select folder every time on every export.

Optional "the layer name can additionally contain subpaths" sounds like good idea i guess.