So it just is, because you say so? Sorry but that is not very helpful. I still strongly believe it is all in the approach and if you are used to playing with lots of layers, you are likely to set yourself on a course for coming up against limitations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
David O'Neil
There are also a couple people who have said that they use other programs just so that they can get better layer control. (
As an example.) So you aren't reading very well.
"What" doesn't explain "why". In fact, it tends to reinforce my opinion that they are basing their workflow on the strengths of other packages, not on Xara's strengths.
Quote:
You also say that your tests indicate that hiding layers doesn't speed up rendering. In the attached file, zoom in step-by-step to a high zoom factor. Then repeat the experiment after turning off layer 1.
No difference here with a workstation-class graphics card [QuadroFX2500M]. In fact, that thing is very easy to work with.
Quote:
I also gave you an example where nested layers would be beneficial. Just because you don't do that doesn't mean others don't want to. Your words come across as trolling.
Except it was one example that, again, could as easily have been done without nested layers. It seems to me that it is simply because you are used to using lots of layers that you see advantage in more and more of them but I wonder if you have even tried to get by without any at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MarkMyWords
If you don't get a speed up by turning some layers off, then you are not working on particularly complex images and this is probably the crux of the misunderstanding.
No, I'd say it is far more likely the fact that I am working with a pro set-up and your graphics are made for gaming. Do you get much difference between zooming and simply nudging or moving objects, in terms of redraw time? For me it is chalk and cheese. Maybe it has to do with how Xara's redraw is optimised but zooming works really well for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Miguel B.
Now imagine that the car illustration is very detailed and one layer isnīt enought to organize all the objects needed to correctly represent the rims.
Here is the crux of my problem - I cannot imagine how many objects would constitute "too many to organize" [sic]. Are we talking thousands? Millions? Because I can organise hundreds on a single layer without any problems at all.
Quote:
With this type of "naming" and nested layers you can control precisely where your objects are.
But I can see precisely where they are anyway. It just doesn't make sense that I'd need to organise them any further.
Quote:
You just have to create them in the correct layer something thatīs easier and intuitive than it looks since usually we are working on specific sections of our work ( i mean you donīt create one shape for the rim, then go work on the roof shape and then go to the fronts lights and back to the rim).
No, but you often go back and make changes to the rim, then to front lights, and that's where it becomes a PITA.
Quote:
Besides this you can hide all the nested layers of all sections of your illustration leaving only the one you are working on open (so you can see all nested layers that compose this specific area of the work). This reduces the visual clutter of the layers tree structure and means you donīt have to scroll the layer gallery to go to the lowest layers in the gallery.
But if you put everything from the nested layers into a single layer in the first place, you wouldn't have as many layers and therefore you wouldn't have these problems, which is my point - by using so many layers you are creating a problem. Use less and you won't have any problems.
Quote:
Check out this topic for a great example of illustration complexity
here
That's all about 300dpi bitmaps, its irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Nostaw
Indeed, thats workflow that you describe works on 2 overlapping objects. With any more that 5 objects ontop of each other with different transparencies (i usually have more than 5) thats a nightmare to select the right one and modify the effects, then putting it all together to view the composite image to check if everything is as it suppose to be.
I sometimes have a dozen objects one on top of another and I never have a problem selecting the one I want. I'm wondering if you guys are even aware of the CTRL-drag method of selecting objects that are surrounded by larger objects?