The all new "Xara is inaccurate" thread!

**eobet** · 03 April 2007, 02:28 PM

Hehe, yes, do a search and you can see that I have about ten of these threads from past years, and now I'm at it again.

Though this time, I'm testing the very latest Xara Xtreme Pro.

I can't have any overlapping paths, since I'm going to laser cut my work into vinyl stickers, and Xara can't manage this.

The last curve segment of an intersecting cut/slice always becomes a straight line.

This is not, imo "pro", especially since the problem has been here for, I don't know, five years now?

**eobet** · 03 April 2007, 02:36 PM

Oh, and look what just happened when I modified a shape and subtracted it again! And this was at the other end of the shape, where no modification had happened since the last subtract...

**jamesmc** · 03 April 2007, 03:26 PM

I don't see a problem unless one is too lazy to fix it.

Just add some nodes and/or use the tool oddly called the "Shape Editor Tool" to edit your shapes?

Strange that there is a shape editor tool to handle such things.

Boolean in 3D is far worse and has many more incurable artifacts than 2D.

I imagine it has more to do with the precision of math in C++ than Xara Xtreme or Pro.

This is nothing.

**eobet** · 03 April 2007, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by jamesmc

I don't see a problem unless one is too lazy to fix it.

Just add some nodes and/or use the tool oddly called the "Shape Editor Tool" to edit your shapes?

Strange that there is a shape editor tool to handle such things.

I don't have time to sit and fix hundreds of nodes. This is a silhoutte of a butterfly, traced from a photograph and it's rather accurate. I mentioned that a machine would laser cut it, right? There can't be any overlaps or small "holes", so I can't sit there an "guess" what will work and what won't.

Originally Posted by jamesmc

Boolean in 3D is far worse and has many more incurable artifacts than 2D.

I imagine it has more to do with the precision of math in C++ than Xara Xtreme or Pro.

This is nothing.

You have obviously not used a professional 3D application like SolidWorks. If you do a subtraction there, it will bloody well subtract accurately, or inform you that it wasn't able to. It's not a Class A modeller, but the tolerance seems way higher than Xara.

This IS inaccurate.

**jamesmc** · 03 April 2007, 03:45 PM

So use Solidworks for your laser cutting software template?

I used to inspect machine shops at Air Force Bases that used laser cutting to make extreme precision parts. As much as I like Xara, I don't think think any engineer would use Xara that requires thousandth of a millimeter precision to cut parts.

One could of course use Xara to rough out the general layout of a part, but then you would have to do integrity tests which is always done to see where the software has failed to meet the desired parameters.

BTW, I'm was an Industrial Safety Engineer before I retired.

**remi** · 03 April 2007, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by eobet

This is not, imo "pro", especially since the problem has been here for, I don't know, five years now?

I understand, that you would like to see some progress with this, but there are a lot of user requests, which aren't resolved over the last years. Nevertheless, I wouldn't say Xara Xtreme is not professional or such things. The problem is more, that Xara Xtreme is not always the right solution for your needs.

Remi

**eobet** · 03 April 2007, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by jamesmc

So use Solidworks for your laser cutting software template?

I also mentioned that it was vinyl, not sheet metal.

Originally Posted by remi

The problem is more, that Xara Xtreme is not always the right solution for your needs.

True. And the decal cutting machine wants Adobe Illustrator files, and here is what happens if I do the same subtract in Illustrator:

**remi** · 03 April 2007, 06:37 PM

But you used different zoom levels. Are you able to zoom into 25600% within Illustrator?

Remi

**eobet** · 03 April 2007, 06:51 PM

Look at the second Xara screenshot again.

EDIT: What the heck, here's one at 4000% zoom you can play "find five faults" with...

**The Alien** · 03 April 2007, 07:22 PM

I for one completely agree with eobet on this. I find this inaccuracy a big nuisance during work

I don't like the idea that there are these kinds of imperfections in my drawing. This is partly an obsession of mine, but it also has its relevancies (read further) :\
Other software can handle these operations flawlessly. I don't understand what makes Xara's programming so different that it can't do boolean operations without problems.
IIRC, the vector drawing software which has almost become a taboo on this forum does this job perfectly.

Others on this forum always say that Xara is an "arts" program and not a CAD package. And therefore it is acceptable.
For the people who argue that these imperfections are only fractions of a centimeter and thus are irrelevant: that's fair enough.
However, don't forget that we're talking vectors here. Vectors are perfect for scaling. Even in Xara's promotional videos (for Xtreme), the female commentator frequently mentions that the art you create in Xtreme is vector and can therefore be scaled up (and down) indefinately. But what happens when you scale a drawing up that contains such inaccuracies? Exactly. They show.
Also, these imperfections do sometimes show, be it subtly, without enlarging the object.