Layer Inadequacy

[Regular]

Lightwave3D has a sophisticated layering system that is quite useful and utilitarian. Being about to keep boolean cutters and an object on separate layers is quite useful.

Making complex scenes where there is a lot of "rigging" or "machine parts"; different effects, guidelines and etc. is most useful.

Being able to export and import said layers into PhotoShop layers is even more useful.

[JonH27]

That might make you feel smugly superior but it doesn't help me understand the situation.

Like others, I'm no longer sure this thread is serving a helpful purpose, but I will end my participation in it by responding to this from Bones who was referring to me at the time. I don't feel smugly superior... I wouldn't spend so much time learning from others and absorbing new ideas here at TG if I felt like this - and I hope I made this clear in my opening post in this thread. I'm in awe of most of what Xara can do - and what it can enable us to do. But we mustn't be blind where there are shortcomings or relative weaknesses, and it's clear that there are many of us who think that this whole layers/groups/nesting/gallery functionality topic (and IMHO it's all of those things interelated, not just simply "layers") is one of those areas where Xara is lacking. Over and out, on this subject.

[BONES]

So it just is, because you say so? Sorry but that is not very helpful. I still strongly believe it is all in the approach and if you are used to playing with lots of layers, you are likely to set yourself on a course for coming up against limitations.

There are also a couple people who have said that they use other programs just so that they can get better layer control. (As an example.) So you aren't reading very well.

"What" doesn't explain "why". In fact, it tends to reinforce my opinion that they are basing their workflow on the strengths of other packages, not on Xara's strengths.

You also say that your tests indicate that hiding layers doesn't speed up rendering. In the attached file, zoom in step-by-step to a high zoom factor. Then repeat the experiment after turning off layer 1.

No difference here with a workstation-class graphics card [QuadroFX2500M]. In fact, that thing is very easy to work with.

I also gave you an example where nested layers would be beneficial. Just because you don't do that doesn't mean others don't want to. Your words come across as trolling.

Except it was one example that, again, could as easily have been done without nested layers. It seems to me that it is simply because you are used to using lots of layers that you see advantage in more and more of them but I wonder if you have even tried to get by without any at all.

If you don't get a speed up by turning some layers off, then you are not working on particularly complex images and this is probably the crux of the misunderstanding.

No, I'd say it is far more likely the fact that I am working with a pro set-up and your graphics are made for gaming. Do you get much difference between zooming and simply nudging or moving objects, in terms of redraw time? For me it is chalk and cheese. Maybe it has to do with how Xara's redraw is optimised but zooming works really well for me.

Now imagine that the car illustration is very detailed and one layer isn´t enought to organize all the objects needed to correctly represent the rims.

Here is the crux of my problem - I cannot imagine how many objects would constitute "too many to organize" [sic]. Are we talking thousands? Millions? Because I can organise hundreds on a single layer without any problems at all.

With this type of "naming" and nested layers you can control precisely where your objects are.

But I can see precisely where they are anyway. It just doesn't make sense that I'd need to organise them any further.

You just have to create them in the correct layer something that´s easier and intuitive than it looks since usually we are working on specific sections of our work ( i mean you don´t create one shape for the rim, then go work on the roof shape and then go to the fronts lights and back to the rim).

No, but you often go back and make changes to the rim, then to front lights, and that's where it becomes a PITA.

Besides this you can hide all the nested layers of all sections of your illustration leaving only the one you are working on open (so you can see all nested layers that compose this specific area of the work). This reduces the visual clutter of the layers tree structure and means you don´t have to scroll the layer gallery to go to the lowest layers in the gallery.

But if you put everything from the nested layers into a single layer in the first place, you wouldn't have as many layers and therefore you wouldn't have these problems, which is my point - by using so many layers you are creating a problem. Use less and you won't have any problems.

Check out this topic for a great example of illustration complexity here

That's all about 300dpi bitmaps, its irrelevant.

Indeed, thats workflow that you describe works on 2 overlapping objects. With any more that 5 objects ontop of each other with different transparencies (i usually have more than 5) thats a nightmare to select the right one and modify the effects, then putting it all together to view the composite image to check if everything is as it suppose to be.

I sometimes have a dozen objects one on top of another and I never have a problem selecting the one I want. I'm wondering if you guys are even aware of the CTRL-drag method of selecting objects that are surrounded by larger objects?

[handrawn]

Bones you are either:

a) working on project files you never go back to at a [much] later date
b) blessed with a perfect memory and an acute sense of dead reckoning
c) always doing the same sort of thing, so a) is not a problem and b) is not necessary
or
d) full of bullshit

I know which I think to be the case. This has gone beyond trying to be helpful, which is a two way process after all.

It's goodbye from me too on this topic

[David O'Neil]

Oh, you are trolling. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Egg Bramhill]

I have closed this thread as it is going nowhere and all valid points have been made.