Printable View
Steve: Boy I'm glad I discovered Xara when all these tools had become available!
I don't think I could have drawn anything when these things were not available.
Did these sort of tools exist in things like Photoshop before Xara then?
From what little I know, Photoshop handles linear fills a bit better than Xara.
I'm not trying to compare Photoshop to Xara by the way.
photoshop is totally different - because it is raster not vector
raster graduations are smoother all else being equal, because they work at pixel level [as I understand it]
Only semantically - not according to what a blend is in Xara.Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
Since users cannot set the number of ‘steps’ in a fill, and since they are invisible and inseparable, they are, for all practical purposes, non-existent to users. By contrast blends’ steps can be set, are visible, and can be separated or changed into curves. Blends also blend from one shape to a totally different shape, unlike fills. Thus they are two totally different tools in Xara. In Xara, a blend is not a fill.
ah - you, accuse me, of semantics :p
I don't really care about how Xara Ltd [bless 'em] care to define things - that should not get in the way of seeing how things actually work
And incidentely your last post is a good illustration of why blends are more flexible, if sometimes slower and more resource heavy, than fills.... :D
Semantics are great – without them we’d still be grunting at each other. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
I can think of a few words like ‘blend’ that one might use when describing one colour graduating to another. Meld, merge, amalgamate, transition, fade, coalesce, etc. “Using a fill you can blend one colour into another seamlessly.” That doesn’t mean a Xara fill is a Xara blend.
In some cases they are, and in others they are not, as per my first post in this thread. If a blend can achieve the same effect the ellipse fill provided there, why hasn’t someone provided the sample, using that crescent shaped object? If you attempt that, remember that time should be considered, as well as how complex objects in great numbers affect a file’s redraw.Quote:
And incidentely your last post is a good illustration of why blends are more flexible, if sometimes slower and more resource heavy, than fills.... :D
never said it was a Xara blend in that sense, I think you are being too literal..Quote:
Originally Posted by James Allen
Pardon?Quote:
Originally Posted by James Allen
a set of rules now already?
it's a competition you're wantin'?
I may start another thread if I get time - to be honest I think this one is getting rather bogged down...
Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
Was I supposed to think you meant non-Xara blends? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
No rules - just letting you know that if you produce a blend that matches the ellipse fill, and it takes you five or ten minutes, the obvious question would come back, “What’s the point?”Quote:
a set of rules now already?
No, but your proof that a blend could do better than the ellipse tool for that shape would be nice. Quite a few blends were made in this thread, but none for the shape in question.Quote:
it's a competition you're wantin'?
No problem for me – I neither mind long threads nor evolving conversations. :)Quote:
I may start another thread if I get time - to be honest I think this one is getting rather bogged down...
Yes, to all of it. You need to take a pill, man.
Thanks Risto, but keep your meds.Quote:
Originally Posted by RTK
a] of course - blend is a general term, Xara did not invent it
b] the point is.... someone somewhere will learn from it
c] there you go again hammering on about 'the shape in question' - I don't think I have actually addressed 'the shape in question' directly once in this thread - I thought you were up to speed with that - general discussion remember?
d] :D
its now 1.26 am here
z...z....zz