Xara Designer Pro X10 Released

[hseiken]

Are you doing raster images in a raster-based program? of course you're going to get a resolution-dependant image faster in a program designed specifically for that one single task. In fact Painter does a lot of stuff that Xara can't do, but it's not a general graphics program and doesn't pretend to be and isn't aimed at general graphics, so comparing them is a bit of a stretch. However, if Xara too was a natural media emulation raster image creation tool, then a comparison might be okay. Basically, I'm throwing out there that I never said Xara is capable of replacing everything else out there. I said Xara is better than Adobe's suite of bloatware, hype-ware and menu-diving-ware. I doubt anyone here would actually argue that Adobe's products are less powerful than Xara when it comes to feature list, but the idea is that a feature list = great program is a misnomer...without the workflow, you might as well still be at square one still looking for a tool to use to begin with...no one I know would willingly break their own leg before running a marathon. That said, my argument here is features+workflow = usefuleness and Xara keeps trying to battle Adobe on 'features' when their strength is clearly artist-centric workflow.

This is going a little off course, but here's my view which is quite a bit more macro than most people here seem to be operating in terms of assessing what Xara is good at and who it's for...and I hope maybe a more constructive conversation can come from this rather than a defeatist attitude that Xara's left us behind becaase while that could and may in fact be true, there's something more important going on here and it's outside of graphic design and in the realm of general computing...

Xara has quietly pushed (along with W3), whether intentionally or unintentionally, for a digital imagine standard that starts not at the pixel, but at the definition of the forms in an image. With Xara bringing in photo specific manipulation tools, content aware cutting, etc. into the paradigm of general image editing with vectors, that's sort of like, in evolutionary biology, the first land walking fish in terms of 2d imaging and computers. With the internet website features in there as well, it's sort of like saying, 'Yes, HTML5 is right. Soon, pixels will only be a reference to physical display and not the images themselves...If you guys into computer tech and data manipulation talk in the abstract, you should really check out those old Computer Chronicles episodes on archive.org. There's lots of technology showcased on that show that was presented, ignored, died, reborn again now and accepted...and I think what Xara's doing right now with pushing to mix raster and vector so as to be indistiguishable from each other is sort of like watching 1990 episode of Computer Chronicles about 'The Internet'...except we're seeing it in graphics technology...don't be surprised if in 10 years, Xara's first steps which seem to be ignored by the industry at large due to marketing and money, will be mainstream technology everyone's used to...there wont' be jpeg compression or png files with transparent pixels...there simply won't BE pixels, but simply different formats that dictate how they read their forms before being thrown up on a display, whether digital or physical (like a book).

This is where I think maybe I'm excited a lot more than everyone else because I'm a computer technology junky and one of the things I love is abstraction and melting of separate ridged ideas into a more fluid one. For this reason alone, I think I'm probably up about 50% more in Xara fandom than the old hands here. That being said, I hope everyone is more sad about Xara the brand itself and not dispappointed in the product. Even if people don't agree with me that it's much more forward thinking than people here believe it is, you still have to admit it's influence has been felt since adobe's since adopted a lot of features into photoshop and illustrator that Xara pioneered.

Xara might end up being Altavista to Adobe's Google and that wouldn't be a bad thing to me...because in the end, I want a good program and Adobe isn't delivering, but is an obstacle I still have to deal with professionally. So if Xara died and sold off it's patents, technology and what not, I wouldn't see it as a loss...so maybe right now is a transitional period. I remain optimistic because at least there are people out there taking new approaches to old problems...Being on the outside allows more freedom to take chances because you have less installed user base to piss off...

Again, sorry for randomly ranting and giving out verbal diarrhea. Xara as a product and technology showcase remains a beacon for the rest of the industry, despite it's dimness in the night and programs like it need our support as artists. That's about all I can say to wrap it up neatly.


EDIT: To clarify my 'vision' of a pixel-less future, let me state that obviously vector graphics in general are that, but what I meant by true pixel-less digital imaging, I mean technology that reaches outside of what we do (create images from scratch and our minds) to photography...such as a camera that when it takes pictures, they create the photo out of vector graphics principles, but you still cannot tell that it's a vector drawing unless you do one of those ridiculous 20,000% zooms. The counter argument is that at a certain PPI in terms of printing and pixels on a screen, they eye cannot discern pixels..however, that has nothing to do with resolution because those images become apparent that they're not infinitately zoomable when you try to crop and enlarge a part of a smaller picture to fill up a larger page. We've all been there with that problem...I have this photo, it's good, but I cannot blow it up without it becoming either fuzzy, pixelated or otherwise distorted, however subtle. The plus side to all of this is that even with this fantasy technology, file sizes would likely still shrink...again, because you're not saving every point in the picture, the photograph is a collection of non-square-grid-based forms...

So that's what I mean that Xara is sort of like an early step to a larger end result which benefits us as artists and other industries as well.

[handrawn]

In fact Painter does a lot of stuff that Xara can't do, but it's not a general graphics program and doesn't pretend to be and isn't aimed at general graphics, so comparing them is a bit of a stretch.

painter as a program is designed for painters rather than designers, but it is every bit a graphics program as photoshop; people use it for painting, illustrating, cartooning, advertising and more besides

I said Xara is better than Adobe's suite of bloatware, hype-ware and menu-diving-ware

that might be what you meant; it was not what you said

my argument here is features+workflow = usefuleness and Xara keeps trying to battle Adobe on 'features' when their strength is clearly artist-centric workflow.

first off xara the company have said on more than one occasion that they are not trying to compete with adobe [serif is with affinity on mac]
secondly - there is absolutely nothing wrong with illustrator as a program [leaving aside the subscription issue] I use it a lot - it's workflow is often a lot better than xara, eg: live trace / live paint

generally speaking:

I can usually draw a cartoon better in raster than vector - vector lines are not as precise when you draw freehand fast; in fact I can get more subtle results [without chopping and changing] using a chisel nib fountain pen for inking than a wacom a lot of the time, they do not behave the same way - I am no fan of technology for it's own sake, and artists come in many different flavours

[speedsterharry]

One feature I miss from Artworks (Acorn's version of Xara DP) is the ability to have "internal" arrows instead of the external arrows we have now. The arrowheads can start at the end of a line (external) or finish at the start of the line (internal). I used that feature a lot for technical design.
I now have to fiddle with the positioning of the line end when I change the line width (because the arrowhead will get bigger and go a bit too far).

[Acorn]

One feature I miss from Artworks (Acorn's version of Xara DP) is the ability to have "internal" arrows instead of the external arrows we have now. The arrowheads can start at the end of a line (external) or finish at the start of the line (internal). I used that feature a lot for technical design.
I now have to fiddle with the positioning of the line end when I change the line width (because the arrowhead will get bigger and go a bit too far).

It may not heelp but if you convert the line to Editable Shapes you have a measure of control as the arrow point is now a control.

Also the SmartShape arrows have a control point at the tip.

Acorn