The controversial eraser tool
It's been mentioned umpteen times on TG - people wanting an eraser tool for Xara. It's usually followed by an "explanation" of why Xara doesn't have it - usually a mixture of "erasers are for bitmaps", "this is the way we do it with Xara/vectors" and "vector software can't do this", "don't expect xara software to work like other software, work with the flow" or variations thereof.
I've never really seen the big deal about an eraser tool - after all we can juggle points around and get the same effect - right?
It's also tempting and convenient to consider that vector software can't do erasers. Well vector software is generating bitmaps for display continually from vector information and it's a fallacy and disservice to suggest that it's beyond vector tool developers to build an eraser that works with vectors.
But we don't really need new drawing tools, right? And neither would an eraser tool improve the productivity when drawing - it's only for sloppy people who are used to bitmap software - we all know that.
Today I saw a video of a guy using non-Xara software. I don't care if it's bitmap based or vector based, but the workflow blew me away - I have never seen anyone work in this manner before.
At first, I thought "Wow - this guy is working fast!", then I considered, yep he's a talented artist, then he started colouring in his B&W line artwork and man he was fast and the inking speed is spectacular.
Watching him working, he splashes on colour with complete abandon; color goes over lines, it's really fast and a bit messy. Then he switches to the eraser tool and just swipes back over the excess colour removing it wherever it's gone further than intended.
This is a stunningly fast, organic workflow and it's only possible with the use of an eraser tool (combined with layers).
I'm not a real artist in any shape or form, but for me this video shows why an eraser tool should be in Xara and why layers are important (so the eraser only wipes what you want it to wipe). The drawing tablet is pretty cool too..
I'm afraid the video blew me away and Xara, you should take notice.
Paul
Oh, you might want to look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJk0S...ature=youtu.be ;-)
Re: The controversial eraser tool
Paul,
Thanks for sharing.
Convinced!
Keep knocking, maybe the door opens...
Re: "...and Xara, you should take notice."
Indeed.
Peace
James
Re: The controversial eraser tool
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pauland
This is a stunningly fast, organic workflow
You know the answer already. But I will still say it. This is not Xara workflow. It's a pity that there's almost no videos of experienced users designing in Xara. But that doesn't mean that in the hands of a true artist Xara workflow would look less impressive. You must have seen this already for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE5hIGad_Os
Now, I do hear that you don't care vector or raster. But that's the point. Trucks and roadsters do behave differently despite the result is to move from point A to point B. Freehand drawing is not natural for vectors. As the freehand input produces completely irregular and chaotic result, basically it is best to be represented as a bitmap already on the input stage. For the vector approach, freehand input may only be logically represented as a line. Which is the way freehand input is implemented in most vector editors. However, the eraser tool operates with the area, not path. And interacting with other lines produced by freehand drawing, we have alterations to the shape rendered based on the line. So we do not edit lines no more. We have to convert lines to shapes (based on used width, profile, brush etc), then alter them and end up with lines not being lines anymore. Now this approach is in fact not quite vector. If you draw a line, you expect it to remain a line until you decide to explicitly convert it to shape.
Now, you've already said it, and you are right. What you want is to emulate the work of bitmap editor with the vector editor. This IS possible. But, what is the point? You can use the bitmap editor instead. After all you do not expect bitmap editors to emulate the workflow of the vector editors, do you? Surely you can move your stuff with a roadster or drive fast in a truck. But it will always be better to use them for the proper purpose.
Now, in conclusion. Obviously vector eraser is not a bad idea. But the example you provide and your arguments are mostly invalid.
1 Attachment(s)
Re: The controversial eraser tool
Rather than have this become a "Mexican Standoff", perhaps a little dialog might evoke a compromise in perspective...
Re: "Freehand drawing is not natural for vectors."
Drawing a freehand line (no matter what the profile/width) seems very possible in Xara, CURRENTLY. The math to make that line is already coded in the program. It certainly seems to me that to make that negative space instead is not so very different. If you have further light to shed on why it is FUNDAMENTALLY different, I would love to hear and consider it. ;)
If I make a large vector rectangle and then make a line, convert it to a shape, select both and subtract the line from the rectangle, it seems I have done EXACTLY what a vector eraser tool would be doing, except less hoops to jump through if it's made into it's own Tool...
Attachment 83359
It looks like all the main routines necessary for this are basically already there.
Peace
James
Re: The controversial eraser tool
Quote:
Originally Posted by
covoxer
You know the answer already. But I will still say it. This is not Xara workflow.
Web generation used to "not be Xara workflow", but somehow it's arrived.
Quote:
It's a pity that there's almost no videos of experienced users designing in Xara. But that doesn't mean that in the hands of a true artist Xara workflow would look less impressive. You must have seen this already for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE5hIGad_Os
I have seen the video and it is impressive. It doesn't invalidate the usefullness of an eraser.
Quote:
Now, I do hear that you don't care vector or raster. But that's the point. Trucks and roadsters do behave differently despite the result is to move from point A to point B. Freehand drawing is not natural for vectors. As the freehand input produces completely irregular and chaotic result, basically it is best to be represented as a bitmap already on the input stage. For the vector approach, freehand input may only be logically represented as a line. Which is the way freehand input is implemented in most vector editors. However, the eraser tool operates with the area, not path. And interacting with other lines produced by freehand drawing, we have alterations to the shape rendered based on the line. So we do not edit lines no more. We have to convert lines to shapes (based on used width, profile, brush etc), then alter them and end up with lines not being lines anymore. Now this approach is in fact not quite vector. If you draw a line, you expect it to remain a line until you decide to explicitly convert it to shape.
Now, you've already said it, and you are right. What you want is to emulate the work of bitmap editor with the vector editor.
I don't want to emulate the work of a bitmap editor, I'm just showing how powerful the eraser technique can be and suggesting that it's as applicable to vector shapes and lines as it is to bitmaps.
Yay, at last.
Quote:
But, what is the point? You can use the bitmap editor instead.
If people wanted to use a bitmap editor, they have plenty to choose from. I specifically mentioned the eraser tool workflow because if Xara just chooses to conveniently ignore drawing innovation people may do as you suggest - use a bitmap editor with a better workflow for their task.
Quote:
After all you do not expect bitmap editors to emulate the workflow of the vector editors, do you? Surely you can move your stuff with a roadster or drive fast in a truck. But it will always be better to use them for the proper purpose.
Now, in conclusion. Obviously vector eraser is not a bad idea.
It's not about emulating bitmap editors but improving Xara workflow. Since you concur that this is not a bad idea, I'm not sure what the point of the largely negative response is.
Quote:
But the example you provide and your arguments are mostly invalid.
We'll agree to differ. I hope some of the people involved artistically will provide their thoughts and not focus pointlessly on the Bitmap versus vector argument, but see it in terms of a tool to improve their workflow or not.
Re: The controversial eraser tool
illustrator, inkscape, serifdrawplus all vector editors, all have erasers, this must say something I think, and I've championed it in the past - it would speed up certain operations, no doubt
but that said, as an artist myself not a designer, for 'stunningly organic workflow' I would not use a vector program
back in the day screen rendering in photoshop and the like was abysmal at most zoom settings, but now with the advances in openGL and graphics cards, you can zoom out to at least 12% and your drawing still renders clear at every turn of the mouse wheel
so one of the main reasons for using vector for me is no longer relevant - I can draw large pixel size and see it clearly at reduced size view as I draw, in most serious bitmap drawing programs
screen rendering times are catching up too given the power of today's computers
I can draw freehand in, say SAI, and colour with it's air brush, a lot faster than I can in xara not withstanding xara's excellent vector tools
Where a vector tool really scores is if you need precision in the CAD/design sense - if you don't need that kind of precision, and you can freehand draw for real, a raster solution can be every bit as good if not better
Re: The controversial eraser tool
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ODdOnLifeItself
why it is FUNDAMENTALLY different, I would love to hear and consider it.
You've already heard it. If you can't understand what I have written, read again.
Re: The controversial eraser tool
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pauland
Web generation used to "not be Xara workflow", but somehow it's arrived.
Actually perfect example this is. You know very well how much Xara's web design workflow differs from the more classic ones. ;)
Quote:
I have seen the video and it is impressive. It doesn't invalidate the usefullness of an eraser.
True. But it illustrates that Xara workflow may look pretty well too. Actually, any good drawing/painting program in hands of great artist would produce stunningly looking workflow. So, the point is that eraser tool is important to exactly reproduce the workflow from your video. But it is not necessary to have a great workflow in general.
Quote:
I don't want to emulate the work of a bitmap editor, I'm just showing how powerful the eraser technique can be and suggesting that it's as applicable to vector shapes and lines as it is to bitmaps.
It is not applicable to lines as I have previously explained. But that's not the point. As I say, sure, it is possible to emulate raster workflow with vector tools to some level. But this fact doesn't make it necessary. In other words, you first have to prove that this particular workflow is better than anything you can have in Xara even without an eraser tool. Only then you can use it as a valid argument to add this feature. Your video does not prove this.
Has anyone told you that this is impossible? :eek:
Quote:
If people wanted to use a bitmap editor, they have plenty to choose from. I specifically mentioned the eraser tool workflow because if Xara just chooses to conveniently ignore drawing innovation people may do as you suggest - use a bitmap editor with a better workflow for their task.
Again, I see no proof of this workflow being superior. It certainly is more convenient for people familiar and used to it, but there's no proof that it is any better than the vector ways.
Quote:
It's not about emulating bitmap editors but improving Xara workflow.
Well, I have explained why it doesn't match the vector approach. So it is an emulation of the typical raster tool. Automatic conversion of random lines to shapes is basically wrong since you are losing editability (you can't change the line width or profile after such edits). And this is the most important feature of the vector.
Quote:
Since you concur that this is not a bad idea, I'm not sure what the point of the largely negative response is.
This response is objective. It is generally a good thing to expand vector toolset. After all, if someone doesn't like eraser, he may simply not use it. But your post had some false assumptions and exaggerations greatly skewing the real value, usefulness and actual reasons to have this particular feature implemented. So I'm just making it clear.
Quote:
in terms of a tool to improve their workflow or not.
Well, your original post was not about improving a workflow (you'd have to talk about improving your workflow in this case I suppose). Instead you were suggesting that the provided example of the particular workflow is something that must be possible to have in Xara. But first of all, this particular artist will not use Xara. And you have not proved in any way that any Xara artists would improve their workflow learning from this particular example.
The problem is not in the vector eraser tool. It's in your reasoning of it's importance.
Re: The controversial eraser tool
Quote:
Originally Posted by
handrawn
it would speed up certain operations, no doubt
Yes.
Re: The controversial eraser tool
John, I have put the case that the eraser tool could be a great thing in some circumstances. I don't have to prove that it's better, I just put that view forward.
Many people using Xara don't see the point of an eraser tool. The video shows the tool being used to good effect and while you may not see any value in what the video shows, others may find it enlightening.
I don't know why I find myself involved in a petty battle of word semantics about whether an eraser tool is trying to emulate some bitmap tool or workflow, when many competing vector toolsets incorporate it already - erasing vector based shapes without translation to bitmaps.
Xaras workflow for doing such operations as removing sections of vector shapes by point manipulation or shape subtraction works but is downright clumsy in an organic workflow as shown in the video.
To be honest John, I really don't care if you like the easer tool or not. What really matters is that people who are currently using xara for illustration and cartoons continue to find that xara is the best possible tool for them to do their work.
I would say that the video shows a phenomenally fast workflow that could be achievable within Xara using the eraser tool if it were present and speed their workflow. You clearly disagree.
Out of curiosity, I had a play at crudely repeating the workflow shown in the video using a pure vector editor - Flash. I can draw the lines and fill them using a brush tool. I can put them in layers and erase the vector shapes with an eraser tool and replicate the workflow of the video exactly without using any bitmap based tools at all. After I've erased a section of the vector shape I can play with the nodes and drag around points.
I really wish that rather than trying to kick a suggestion into submission (that's all this is - a suggestion), you let other people who use the product to do work similar to that shown, to decide whether that's a good way to work rather than try and push aside a perfectly good suggestion.
Xara may not wish to implement an eraser, but I'd rather people using Xara for the kind of illustration shown in the video, have a chance to air their views and support the idea (or not) rather than it just be buried and then those users eventually decide that there are better ways to do their work without Xara.
It's not about winning arguments with me John, it's about users having a voice about what suits (or does not suit) their workflow. I might be wrong, but at least I've tried to show a suggestion for progressing Xara as an organic drawing tool, rather than keep the Xara drawing workflow preserved in a museum.