there's a whole separate cauldron of marine wildlife: xara brushes - you would first need to make those work :D
then if you could draw with them the way you can in expression or illustrator or inkscape even, we might be getting somewhere
Printable View
there's a whole separate cauldron of marine wildlife: xara brushes - you would first need to make those work :D
then if you could draw with them the way you can in expression or illustrator or inkscape even, we might be getting somewhere
Absolutely. a number of threads have been about colouring cartoons and illustrations and the video link jumped at me as a way of allowing very fast colouring without having to tweak nodes or do anything fiddly. I remember there was a question about a fill tool and in some ways an eraser can help with fills too (rough fill, trim unwanted bits).
Get Designer Pro 7.
It already has an Eraser.
Attachment 83372
(I have had to log-in 5 time reading this thread)
Let me see if I have some things Right:
1) If you have a Big or Fat (if you will) Vector Line
and a Little (or Skinny) Vector Line
And you Erase 1/2 their Lengths, you Still have 2 Vector Lines, Shorter: 1 big width, 1 little width, Right?
Or if cut in 1/2 (or cut to any length) then you have 4: 2 big width, 2 little width, Right?
2) If you have 1 Big/Fat/Thick Vector Line
And you Erase 1/2 of its Width... You have 1 littler Vector Line, with a smaller width, Right?
3) in Bit-map... a Line could vary in Width...
And an Eraser would have to be something of a Hybrid to take that into account...
An 'Interesting' Challenge for those who would be doing the Eraser Programming to Cover Both Vector &
Bit-Map at once!
(many things to account for to have an Eraser that would do both Vector & Bit-map at the same time)
But, I am betting they can do it, as Good as they are, if they want too or there is enough demand.
Exactly. It shows the applicability of the typical bitmap eraser. And the bitmap eraser does not work the way you suggest for the vector. To have a similar workflow we need more sophisticated implementation of the vector eraser than you suggest. And the one you actually suggest will not help you with organic workflow at all.
On the other hand, to be honest, I'm not sure that even bitmap eraser is necessary for the illustrated workflow. You can do the same only using brushes with proper color selections. No? :)
Absolutely right. See the attached image.
Wrong. You have lines or shapes. If you have a line, you can cut it, but not nibble the width. If you want to nibble a line width, make it a shape first.Quote:
2) If you have 1 Big/Fat/Thick Vector Line
And you Erase 1/2 of its Width... You have 1 littler Vector Line, with a smaller width, Right?
In my earlier posts there is a diagram showing lines that have had an eraser go through them. When the eraser cuts through the line, the line is lost where the eraser has passed and thesevered ends have their end caps replaced, so the round end caps are now seen where the line is severed. The eraser cant rub out the width of a line.
Yes, but plenty of other people already do it. Erasers can also scythe through shapes, and bitmaps so. It's all perfectly possible.Quote:
3) in Bit-map... a Line could vary in Width...
And an Eraser would have to be something of a Hybrid to take that into account...
Yes, indeed. I posted the video so people could see how good it can be to have an eraser. Before the video I really didn't see the point.Quote:
An 'Interesting' Challenge for those who would be doing the Eraser Programming to Cover Both Vector &
Bit-Map at once!
(many things to account for to have an Eraser that would do both Vector & Bit-map at the same time)
But, I am betting they can do it, as Good as they are, if they want too or there is enough demand.
I have run an eraser over a bitmap for you - it's essentially a shape.Attachment 83386
I can replicate the effects of the bitmap eraser shown in the video using the flash IDE using only vectors. The only differrence between a vector editor eraser and a bitmap editor eraser is that bitmap editors don't have the concept of lines as seperate editable entities. Once they are drawn they are just pixel shapes like everything else. A vector eraser will respect that a line is a joined series of points with a certain thickness and end caps.
There is no trick question about this these vectore erasers are in existence and work just as you saw in that video. The whole point about the video is that the artist has a very fast, organic workflow that Xara doesn't have at present.[/quote]
We must be watching differrent videos. I'll let others judge.Quote:
And the one you actually suggest will not help you with organic workflow at all.
Yes, a brush tool, coupled with an eraser does work. It's the equivalent of the bitmap workflow - erasing brush generated shapes rather than bitmaps. I haven't ever suggested the need for using bitmaps for that workflow.Quote:
On the other hand, to be honest, I'm not sure that even bitmap eraser is necessary for the illustrated workflow. You can do the same only using brushes with proper color selections. No? :)
In flash, the brush tool is drawn across the drawing space and it dynamically creates a shape that encapsulates the area that the brush is moved over. When the eraser tool is dragged, it creates a shape that again encompasses the area over which the eraser has moved. The eraser shape remains visible as the eraser is dragged. When the mouse is released, the shape created by the eraser is subtracted from the shapes and lines that are under it.
A brush tool, plus colour and transparency selections are the equivalent of the artists paintbrush or crayon.
I suppose you replicate it on the shapes, right? The point is, that the workflow represented on that video produces drawing consisting entirely of lines. There would be not a single shape created would he draw this way in vector editor (except if you have all lines automatically converted to shapes that is). And the eraser is clearly affecting resulting strokes as shapes, not as lines. This is most obvious closer to the end of the video. The background is represented as just a few very wide lines, which cover large area. Then the shape of the houses is subtracted from this area with the eraser. But the area is not a shape. So it wouldn't be erased this way if it was a vector eraser as you describe it.
A stroked line inside a soft mask group would have the effect of partially erasing other stroked coloured lines and would leave both the erase stroke and the coloured strokes as editable vectors.
It is possible to create an image like that in the current version but not in the natural, WYSIWYG way that an eraser tool would do it.
Phil
I was hesitating to even get involved in this thread as it is obvious that many people using Xara use the Software to produce Pseudo-3D Graphics as demonstrated in the Clip you posted Coxover.
While I'm afraid to step on people's feet: Is this stuff still the Programs development focus - is this really how you think one should use Xara?
I frankly fail to understand why people still use such an odd approach to to let something look somewhat 3D at all. Such may have been useful in 1995 when 3D was crazy expensive - but today?
One gets to far more convincing illustration results in comparable time even with free 3D Apps and Render-Engines do output such illustration-style Graphics fast - even at sizes which can be used for Giant poster
(so that there's not even a Vector-Scalability Advantage over Raster).
But 2D of course isn't dead: I think it is save to say that the Illustration-Techniques showcased in the Autodesk Clip have a lot more relevance in Professional Graphic Design around the World than workflows demonstrated in your Proposal.
Maybe the the thread-starter also should have linked to this Clip.
That is the same program in a more advanced edition. To me it seems that Focus-Reorientation in Xara development towards 2D in ways which have some relevance for professional Graphic Work wouldn't hurt.
I love its foolproof Web-Capabilities but I don't think that Xara is on par any more with what modern Vector Editors can do, apart from its blazing Render-Speed.
I deliberately didn't link to such a video since I wanted to focus on one tool and try and break the view that vector editors can't do what bitmap editors can and that a workflow including an eraser tool is useful and will speed image production compared to pushing points.
The argument that 3D is better is something differrent. It's been raging for many years now and I don't see 2D to be in any danger - 3D technology and 2D technology are complimentary not competitors.
Xara has limited development effort and much of the Xara community aren't aware of any alternative to pushing points around. Until I saw my video link I didn't think an eraser was very useful either.
Anyway, covoxer I have made two incredibly crude videos. Drawn superbly with finger and touchpad (LOL) they do at least show that lines can be drawn, remain as vectors, and be erased. Painting with a brush produces a vector shape that can be erased as required and still manipulated using points.
Laugh at my artistic creations, they are just to illustrate bitmap type erasers already exist in pure vector applications.
http://ipauland.com/eraser/eraser.mp4
http://ipauland.com/eraser/vector_house_and_eraser.mp4
I meant if you erased 1/2 of its width as a Vector line (I wasn't clear on that) -as #3 pointed out about 'shapes' they could vary in width... I hadn't really envisioned trying to 'nibble' out portions of a vector line (which would be interesting -another Challenge)
And, Thank You for your Reply - Appreciated - Tom aka Hwy101
Well, let me start with absence of the brush tool that produces shape instead of line in Xara. So this part of your workflow would not only require eraser tool but the brush tool similar to this as well. Also this is the only part somewhat similar with the workflow demonstrated in the OP video. The line cutting was not part of it.
But the most important thing is that both your workflow examples are extremely suboptimal. You really could use much more efficient techniques here. First of all, it is many times faster to draw actual shape for the area to be filled instead of dozens of chaotic strokes. It also produces result that doesn't need that much correction afterwards. I would also highly optimize it by using shape editor instead of the freehand tool simply because this allow you to follow existing lines precisely from the start. Actually, your examples shows that even the drawing made in OP video would greatly benefit from using vector drawing techniques (not available to the original author). The workflow would be quicker and with far less redundant actions. Thus probably looking slicker.
Really, if you want to show importance of the eraser tool, show something that is quicker and easier to draw with it than with existing tools. Both your videos show exactly opposite. It is much easier and quicker to make similar drawings with basic vector tools. ;)
The reason of pointing to that video was not to demonstrate this particular technique or type of drawing. The point was to demonstrate that drawing creation may look impressively in Xara with existing tools. Since one of the points of the OP was the amazement by the particular workflow. As I have already said, unfortunately, there's very few of videos with actual workflow of great artists captured in Xara. So I could only point one of those available. But that doesn't mean that this particular drawing type or workflow is the only possible. You can check gallery to see that there are many different kinds of great drawings.
As I say, this stuff, if I get you right, is, and always was only a part of what people use Xara for.Quote:
While I'm afraid to step on people's feet: Is this stuff still the Programs development focus - is this really how you think one should use Xara?
Let me put it this way. Why do people make landscape or portrait paintings for example? After all photography is cheaper now than it was 100 years ago. And produces much better result. But it's a completely different art. Same with 3D modeling. Comparing it to drawing is like comparing sculpture to painting. Surely popularity of some kinds of art may change with time. New ones may grow in popularity. But they are basically not a direct competitors. To do great 3D art one must basically learn from the very beginning. Many artists prefer to stick to the tools and techniques they have mastered and improving them to perfection instead of starting all over again with something completely different.Quote:
I frankly fail to understand why people still use such an odd approach to to let something look somewhat 3D at all. Such may have been useful in 1995 when 3D was crazy expensive - but today?
There's nothing wrong with drawing pseudo 3D objects in vector editors. Same as with paintings, it is harder to get perfect realism, but you have more freedom to make unrealistic, but artistic things.
John, as ever, you miss the point. I give up. That should please you.
I was tempted to possibly upgrade to V7 someday, because of the some of the features (paltry though the vector additions are), but if John's attitude is indicative of Xara's policy/attitude I'll look more into spending my future money on the alternatives, such as the AutoDesk alternative posted, or Illustrator. Brushes, mesh tool, memory limitations, full OpenType font support... The list goes on, and Xtreme is falling behind... If you are enrolled in some community colleges, AutoDesk allows you to freely try out their software and learn it for a very generous term, as long as it isn't used commercially. And the YouTube vids showing warping of gradients is mind-blowing compared to the (not-so) Xtreme method.
<edit>Oh. Maybe the 'falling behind' is the reason they disbanded the Xtreme name. I liked that title much better than the current mouthful. There's a lot to be said for simplicity.</edit>
AutoDesk's very latest version does both vector and paint [raster] - ironically no vector eraser [:D] - but the integration of vector and raster at the brush level here is a delight - expensive compared to xara [£570 inc tax in UK] ....
This is a milestone post.
We have now reached the point in the thread where, had we spent this time coding, the vector eraser would already be written and in the newest update.
Thanks for slowing us up. ;)
Have fun! :) :) :)
James
attached is a screenshot from sketchbook designer in vector mode
rather than an eraser as such it allows you to just jiggle the mouse along the length of the vector line and it varies in width organically [adding or subtracting]- note it is still a line and not a shape - this sort of organic sculpting is at least as useful as a true eraser and very very quick to do once you get the hang of it, it works a lot better than illustrator, more like the old pre Microsoft Expression3 brought up to date and a lot quicker than messing around with shapes and nodes for the organic stuff ;)
Here is a circle with a few strokes of the eraser tool in Serif DrawPlus X5. It was done in about 20 seconds.
To prove to myself this was still vector here is the full procedure I used.
Circle with linear fill with a tramline effect outline. Random shapes “erased” from the circle with Serif’s Eraser Tool.
Exported from Serif Drawplus X5 as an .svg file. Opened in Inkscape and exported as a .pdf file. Imported to XDP 7 as vector shapes.
The attached .xar file shows all shapes are still fully editable.
Would be a useful addition to Xara's toolbox, methinks. I cannot reproduce this with XDP 7's current tools...
...perhaps some of you may know otherwise?
Bob.
I am in this hell right now. I'm working on an undersea project and I need to create sea weed. I am creating the leaves in illustrator and then turning them into strokes in Expression. It's the only way I can take an object and stretch it across the length of the path. If I were to do this using Xara manually, I would have to create a single leaf and then manipulate with a mould which is clumbsy and unpredictable.
I should add that I too am a huge proponent of an eraser. The lack of an eraser has driven me back to using Illustrator. As it stands, I create/erase in Illustrator and then cut and paste into Xara. This is far from efficient. The same goes for Expression. I have to export pdf from Expression then import into Xara because of Xara's limitations in their brush tool.
Its in drawplus X4 as well and works great
John actually [as I read it] rather gave the impression that, yes it could be done, but it wasn't going to be in the foreseeable future - I would bet that is not because of difficulty so much as priorities and resource, it maybe that an implementation worth doing [for xara] would take a lot of work... which is not the same necessarily as 'difficult'
I 've tested it on Inkscape.
I like it.
I don't know if this has been posted... and I'm not sure if it makes sense.
An alternative to the eraser:
1- Use the Freehand and Brush Tool on the part you want to erase
2- Convert line to shape
3- Combine Shapes: Subtract Shapes
Thinking outside the circle - neat idea!
The only problem is that this method only produces one shape, but with the Serif eraser the shape can be broken up into individual shapes for further editing.
Bob.
you can break shapes afterwards in xara Bob, or am I missing something? [see attached]
Ricardo - this very argument was used by a long term member here to argue against the need for an eraser in xara in one of the previous eraser threads - and if you only use xara in the traditional vector way it's a fair point
but if you want to draw fast and free to do this would be like trying to race a bike but having to stop every time you need to change gear....
not ideal at all Bob :(
I can see the argument from both sides--that of having the eraser and using a brush or line, subtract to produce the broken shape.
In the scheme of things, to me, the work flow isn't hurt by the one extra step presently required in XDP as it is the effect I would be after, not necessarily a minimal speed gain. Why? Because if I was using that process on an element, it isn't like I have dozens of shapes to do it to. Not for my work anyway.
Maybe if all I did was toons, or ? I would see the value of the needed programming time. But there are vector things in XDP that I think need fixed or enhanced before new features or capabilities are added as goes programming time. Heck, I still want the web stuff ripped out and have the two main application lines enhanced for the distinct abilities. Then perhaps having an added capability of an eraser makes sense to take the time to produce.
But...I will admit I am ignorant of how this feature would enhance my designing using XDP. I am open to concrete examples of what it would do for me.
Take care, Mike
I have moved discussion of web stuff removal to a new thread:
http://www.talkgraphics.com/showthre...-xara-designer
I've discovered another "hidden" Eraser Tool in Xara.
The secret is to use the Contour Tool to make the Freehand Tool work like an eraser:
For everyone suggesting workarounds to the the eraser: that's the point. We don't want work around. We want an actual eraser. The most effective/convenient workaround right now is to use the eraser in a vector program that has one and cut and paste the object into Xara. You can't tell me that switching tools and and breaking shapes is more convenient.
Hi Sheff--I haven't yet had any takers to my question about the utility of the eraser.
I suppose it is because of the type of work I do, the subtract shape thing works for me. In thinking about it, if I was doing computer-based, free-hand illustration, that might be a reason I could envision the utility of the eraser.
What I don't know is "the why" from the proponents point of view. So I am guessing in the dark on utility. How would you use this feature and, perhaps, how much of yoru work would benefit from it?
I'm really curious about others' usage (how and how often) of the eraser, in real life situations.
Take care, Mike