The controversial eraser tool

[PhilM]

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

[Guest]

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.

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.

[pauland]

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 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

[Hwy101]

* * * 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.

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. * * *

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

[covoxer]

they 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.

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.

[covoxer]

many people using Xara use the Software to produce Pseudo-3D Graphics as demonstrated in the Clip you posted Coxover.

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.

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?

As I say, this stuff, if I get you right, is, and always was only a part of what people use Xara for.

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?

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.
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.

[pauland]

John, as ever, you miss the point. I give up. That should please you.

[David O'Neil]

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>

[handrawn]

AutoDesk's very latest version does both vector and paint [raster] - ironically no vector eraser [] - but the integration of vector and raster at the brush level here is a delight - expensive compared to xara [£570 inc tax in UK] ....

[ODdOnLifeItself]

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