When Are We Getting A Mesh Paint Tool?

[remi]

All these "workarounds" don't create the same smooth results like a real Mesh tool.

Furthermore I agree with JokeArtist, that there were no new vector tools available from the Xara team since years.

To see the difference with other projects: The new Inkscape 0.46 version comes with a new Paint Bucket Tool, a new Tweak Tool, a new 3D Box Tool, a so called "Engraver's Toolbox", the new Live Path Effects ("Path along Path", "Pattern along Path", "Stitch Subcurves" and "Gears"), new angled Guidelines and much more. That's what I call progress with new vector tools.

Xara Xtreme is much more faster than Inkscape or Adobe Illustrator, and I love the direct editing features Xara Xtreme offers, but I can't see that the Xara Xtreme team is able to "staying ahead of the competition" (like Xhris said).

Remi

[handrawn]

Yep fair comment - and I used to 'worry' about it - but ironically the more work the less I worry, the more I concentrate on making the best use of what I have.

[MarkMyWords]

Personally speaking, I don't see the point of the mesh gradient tool, it's a clumsy solution to the problem.

The ability to draw feather and apply various transparencies and fills to any shape is different to many approaches, but can give outstanding results.

I initially bemoaned the lack of a proper airbrush in Xtreme (I come from a painting background), but, with a little practice, the above tools can create almost any complex gradient you could want.

As above, my own preference would be for better layers (better galleries all around) to help organise large numbers of objects.

[Xhris]

...To see the difference with other projects: The new Inkscape 0.46 version comes with a new Paint Bucket Tool, a new Tweak Tool, a new 3D Box Tool, a so called "Engraver's Toolbox", the new Live Path Effects ("Path along Path", "Pattern along Path", "Stitch Subcurves" and "Gears"), new angled Guidelines and much more. That's what I call progress with new vector tools....

I think the explanation for this comes from 3 points. a) the 'business model'/proprietary software vs. open source model I mentioned earlier; Xara can't just whip out incomplete tools quickly if people pay money for it; it has to be fully worked first time and quality (although, looking at AI's 3D tool for example, maybe they could get away with releasing buggy crap...), which takes time. b) Xara's philosophy of getting things right first time takes time combined with having limited man hours--what with being a small company; things take time to do properly, and thus things have to be prioritised. c) Xara is getting to a 'certain point' as Handrawn astutely pointed out; this further emphasises the prioritising point. Once all major features supported by most graphics packages that can't practically be worked around are completed, it follows that the other (really desirable) supplementary things will come along, like all the non-trivial usability features etc. With additional funds and thus man hours available from the Magix acquisition, development cycles will likely either come quicker or be more fruitful. Given that it's been a while, I have a suspicion the next version will be more substantial than we've seen in recent time, just from the logic.

I also think it's sometimes worth adding balance to the criticism Xara receives; look at all the things Xara supports that other software doesn't. Practical application of graduated transparency, true vector feathering (as opposed to only bitmap feathering) etc. It is interesting to actually perceive this as Xara having got this right years ago, and the competition, having had all this development time, still hasn't improved to that level. Xara's improvements in the last few releases may not have come in core vector tool form, but they have been addressing first, features in the program that cannot be reproduced by other means. A lot of the new tools available in other packages are not new core tools, but just help usability and managing of vector graphics.

Xara in this respect is simultaneously playing catch-up and lead-the-way. By staying ahead of the competition, I refer to pioneering core graphics functionality. Xara have said in the past that they want to seamlessly transition bitmap and vectors graphics together, so perhaps we'll see something akin to this eventually. Multi-core CPU's are becoming common place now; will we see this technology taken advantage of? Maybe even GPUs in the future. They were certainly one of the first 3rd party developers to offer support for XPS which is expected to take off big and is directly relevant to vector graphics.

Over the next few years and Xara releases, I suspect the hierarchy of changes will firstly be directed toward adding functionality that can't be achieved in any other practical way and that the competition may offer, and secondly toward pioneering new technology in line with their philosophy, and then thirdly, supporting non-trivial usability tools. Amongst these, there will likely be the sprinkling of trivial (to implement) usability tools/fixes. Some may have noticed that this model fits what we've seen so far anyway.

This offers some explanation as to why it seems that the continuous cries from current users for primarily vector usability tools/features are seemingly ignored (or de-prioritised). The desire/need to stay profitable (or merely afloat in Xara's case) for a business is deathly important and this is reflected in the form of recent additions to the software--opening it up somewhat to new audiences and sources of funding (Flash, DTP). I feel that this next release (and maybe the one after) may address the last few remaining 'catch-up' features that get it to a 'certain point', and then we'll see considerably more emphasis on other vector tool additions/improvements to old tools. There'll probably also be some new vector tools/features coming too within those releases, but time will tell.

[JokeArtist]

All these "workarounds" don't create the same smooth results like a real Mesh tool.

Furthermore I agree with JokeArtist, that there were no new vector tools available from the Xara team since years.

To see the difference with other projects: The new Inkscape 0.46 version comes with a new Paint Bucket Tool, a new Tweak Tool, a new 3D Box Tool, a so called "Engraver's Toolbox", the new Live Path Effects ("Path along Path", "Pattern along Path", "Stitch Subcurves" and "Gears"), new angled Guidelines and much more. That's what I call progress with new vector tools.

Xara Xtreme is much more faster than Inkscape or Adobe Illustrator, and I love the direct editing features Xara Xtreme offers, but I can't see that the Xara Xtreme team is able to "staying ahead of the competition" (like Xhris said).

Remi

Completely agree with you on that point. Xara is a Vector Illustration application and the most important tools for a graphic designer or arts working in vectors are the vector tools. So if no new tools in this area are added then the way they work is always the same to create the drawing, logo, website or whatever from X1 to X3.2 - Nothing has changed.

Yes people that use it for fun or a hobby love making fancy effects in Live Plugin but if Xara want to get more professional graphic artists using it then need to give them more tools to play with every release, every year. Then they will spend their money getting upgrades. Otherwise they will still with the current version and use the same work arounds and save their money and xara doesn't get money. Or they go back to Inkscape, Corel Draw or Illustrator where they have more to play with.

The small fast application with fancy bits for hobby people just isn't good enough. I mean it's completely laughable adding flash animation to Xara. If you are professional it would be useless and you would have Flash any way. A waste of developers time.

I just think, in all honesty, Xara can not employ good developers.

[raynerj1]

There are more graphic artists than there are print shops. Print shops are stuck with Apple products/interfaces. So the most important thing is to get the drawing in a format that Printers can easily and accurate produce. That is the main difference and drive for the majority of xara changes since 1.1.

[handrawn]

I just think, in all honesty, Xara can not employ good developers.

I am sorry but I see no basis in the discussion to merit this, though I respect your right to the opinion of course.

However as Xhris has said - it comes down to Xara/Magix Business Model [amongst other things] - have you seen it? if not then how do you know whether it is good or bad from the point of view of the company?.

That is what determines whether the developers are good or bad in a commercial environment, and those of us who are ourselves professional business people will understand that

[eobet]

Still so much debate on this. Right now, I'd settle for a gradient fill which can be edited for more colors and transparent colors. Only having two colors in a linear gradient is rather annoying!

[handrawn]

am I missing something here - you can have more than two colors on a linear gradient

with you on the tranparency issue though - would be nice if xara defined colors RGBA like inkscape does

[eobet]

am I missing something here - you can have more than two colors on a linear gradient

with you on the tranparency issue though - would be nice if xara defined colors RGBA like inkscape does

Oh? Then I have been missing something for years! How do you accomplish this, I wonder? For once, it can't be as intuitive as in Illustrator, because I figured out that immediately.