Pen Tool

[steve.ledger]

When dug out and positioned in a toolbar, it then fails to survive a relaunch of the program. Maybe that was an unintentional bug.

Actually, you can get it to stick.

[csehz]

JET thanks for this demonstration, I was very interested in your practice. Also finding your comments as very valuable reference point.

Anyway here in the tv newspaper it seems typical practice, that the actors, figures, objects are masked over or how you say, so drawn around and pasted between the text, always considered how they are doing that? Each actor 7 minutes or something like that? Because that neither seems some automatical background erase from any application

[mwenz]

Whoa, Nelly.

Wasn't a back-handed anything. Just a straight-up acknowledgement that you are proficient in the varied vector apps you have investigated and used for your pleasure and or profession for years. So nope, no patronizing intended nor meant—I am simply not witty enough to have tried to slip in a back-handed "compliment."

And no, I will not forget any such thing as time comparatives nor the now demonstrated skill-levels in both yourself and Frances. You made that a point of fact. Only, it isn't fair to judge between yourself and Frances. Like I wrote, the time comparative would be best with yourself performing both tools and methods in AI and the bend-o-matic method in XDP. I do understand that regardless of the timing differences, you would be more proficient than Frances in all likelihood simply due to greater experience. And I do understand that it isn't just about the time involved, it is also about economy of movement. Whether you see the value of the comparative or not I don't really care.

If you have read what I have written in the past, you would understand that I agree with you and others that have long requested changes in the pen tool. I don't think it is going to happen. Just like with Adobe. How many people have wanted a bend-o-matic ability in AI? Enough that I suspect Astute Graphics makes a goodly amount on their plug-in. Just like they likely make decent money on another long-standing inability of AI in all the areas their plug-ins address.

Like with Adobe, Xara isn't interested in true advancements. Unfortunately, unlike Adobe, there is no ability to have plug-ins into their architecture nor the ability to add scripts to move past XDPs failings. As for enhancing the pen tool? There are features I would rather see first. Ain't wishes wonderful? Whether it is Xara, Adobe, Corel, Serif, ad infinitum, one can wish in one hand and crap in the other as regards "wishes." Guess which hand fills up first?

DrawPlus? Yeah, the pen tool works better. It's pretty much crappy in too many other respects. I could enumerate the ways, but you have probably figured those out by now.

Historically, Xara, and now Magix, have had no concept (or desire or energy) of true advancement in their applications nor the marketing of those applications. Which, to me, makes most of this saber rattling moot. Xara/Magix isn't going to be compelled to make changes by a (very) few forum posts, no matter how detailed they are. They are not going to be embarrassed into action: Unless one believes they are ignorant of these failings and that they can be harangued into sudden awareness and positive action.

Call me a lot of things. One of those that would likely be true is I am pretty apathetic towards software companies and their lack of interest in advancing their wares in meaningful ways. The 1990s is long over. That decade had software companies actually improving their software. I feel my apathy is a mere reflection of the still in business companies' apathy towards advancement and me.

[tonylondon]

A compromise solution. Additional modifiers for the shape editor tool.
In line and cusp mode, basic functionality is: Click creates a point. Click and drag creates and moves the point. Ctrl-click and drag creates the point and constrains the movement of the point. So far as per existing. Add the following:
Alt-click and drag to create a smooth join, equal length handles in a straight line (functionality as per the pen tool) with forward handle being selected and dragged away from the new point. Drag to get the back handle to the desired location, smooth join.
1. If that is what is wanted, create the next point. (Click, ctrl click drag or alt click drag as describe above)
2. If not, release the alt key to release the back handle then continue dragging the forward handle independently to the desired location. Then create the next point.
3. If forward handle is not required, double click the handle to remove it before creating the next point.

This would allow users to continue using shape editor tool as now configured and preferred by many, but would give the additional functionality to those that want it. Then the pen tool could be junked altogether.

Of course, in software this may not be so easy...

[JET]

And no, I will not forget any such thing as time comparatives nor the now demonstrated skill-levels in both yourself and Frances. You made that a point of fact.

Again, M, I'm not the one dismissing the time-spent differential; you are. You want to dismiss it on the mere assumption that Frances is less skilled than I. I never claimed that. So I suggested you go ahead--for the sake of your own argument--and dismiss the time-spent differential entirely in order to understand my point...

Only, it isn't fair to judge between yourself and Frances.

The point of my argument has nothing to do with judging between myself and Frances or anyone else who decides to try the exercise; it has entirely to do with comparing two different drawing tool interfaces...

And I do understand that it isn't just about the time involved, it is also about economy of movement. Whether you see the value of the comparative or not I don't really care.

Good! Mission accomplished. That's what you need to focus on: the software, not the personalities.

I don't think it is going to happen. Just like with Adobe.

I, on the other hand, am convinced that the problems with the software vendors reside more in the single-software devoted users who just don't know any better. I've done a few pre-release programs in my time and that experience has only served to reinforce that conviction. Software vendors are in business to sell product. Eventuallly, software vendors build what their users demand--or someone else does and takes their business.

So I prefer to spend my limited recreational online free time discussing such items of common interest with other users, as opposed to sending letters into the black holes of the vendors' feature request repositories, never to see the light of day and never to hear a response. I consider conversing with other users of similar interest an avenue to the root of the problem. If a vendor is too lethargic to keep aware of what's being publicly said about its products in its own customer forums, that's just another sign of an unresponsive vendor anyway.

Most of what's wrong with Illustrator persists because of the stubborness and defensiveness (actually borne of fear of an overestimated difficulty of learning something a little different) of its habituated users who have never bothered to experience anything better. Illustrator's dominance has kept the 2D vector drawing segment in the doldrums for decades.

But Adobe's rent-only marketing blunder has suddenly created an interesting historic situation (opportunity) in which many of its even most habituated and defensive users are finally realizing their single-vendor captivity and considering alternatives. There's a lot I like about Designer Pro and I'd love to see Xara step up to that plate. But I won't lose any sleep if it doesn't. Xara may be perfectly content with its current market position, largely regarded (rightly or not) as an entry-level hobbiest's tool, despite its "Pro" pretensions (most overused and abused word in the drawing software market).

Fact is, Xara has a long way to go. The primary Bezier drawing tool is front-and-center. It's paramount. It's the first thing users of historically dominate mainstream drawing programs look for. But it's not the only thing. Printing to separations, for example, is another. (Even directly-competitive Serif DrawPlus does this.) And while Xara seems to have realized the competitive disadvantage of not having a proper page-assembly program for long bookish document building, I fear the recent attempt at that falls far short of the mark, too; at least for the potential pool of new customers which Adobe's move has created. (Corel and the others face this obstacle, too, but perhaps Corel could ressurrect Ventura Publisher if practicable.)

So maybe Xara is content with catching just a small portion of the disgruntled rental-resistant overflow. There are no doubt a good many AI users who are, in fact, merely casual users and hobbiests who would frankly be better off using a more modest program with a simpler and better-designed interface. But users don't like to think of themselves that way. Pride of ownership doesn't just affect cars.

Regardless, so far as I can tell, the facts remain regarding the over-glorified Shape Editor tool. It's a deal-breaking limitation for many, many serious 2D illustrators.

DrawPlus? Yeah, the pen tool works better. It's pretty much crappy in too many other respects. I could enumerate the ways, but you have probably figured those out by now.

It's crappy in other respects right now. But more than Illustrator, Draw, Canvas, et al, it's squarely in Xara's perceptual market segment. And the main issues I've found with it are in places debilitating, but are merely bugs that should be easily corrected. So even if Xara doesn't intend to serously play in the same park as the "big kids," it certainly does need to have its eye on DrawPlus.

Here's what raises my eyebrows that regard: DrawPlus shows signs of true innovation--which has been far too rare throughout the Adobe-dominated vector drawing history. It's axonometric grid feature (a subject near and dear to me) just needs a few bugs squashed to almost match the functionality of the similar treatment in far more expensive Corel Designer--at a price far less than XDP. And getting back to the current context, its Pen's control of the outgoing curve handle is a sign of real discernment toward deceptively subtle interface elements which pay off hugely for user; in other words, functional elegance, a concept that seems to have been lost during Illustrator's domination.

So yes, I certainly do think Xara needs to have its eye on Serif, and I'd guess it probably does.

Xara/Magix isn't going to be compelled to make changes by a (very) few forum posts...

You are evidently much more cynical regarding Xara than I. If I thought Xara really was a monolithic fat & happy company just trying to maintain its status-quo, I'd dust my feet, walk away, and spend my time better elsewhere. But like I said, there's much to like about XDP. For example, it blows the friggin' doors off anything Illustrator can do for the casual static web-page builder. And it just as dramatically embarasses Illustrator regarding XDP's main claim-to-fame: performance when handling kazillions of objects with raster-based effects (feathering and transparency). I find it a refreshing joy to use except for its sub-standard primary Bezier tool.


Regardless, Xara/Magix, Adobe, Corel, et al, are going to be compelled by the buying decisions of their existing and potential customers. Again, that's why I converse with fellow users.

JET

[JET]

And no, I will not forget any such thing as time comparatives nor the now demonstrated skill-levels in both yourself and Frances. You made that a point of fact.

Again, M, I'm not the one dismissing the time-spent differential; you are. You want to dismiss it on the mere assumption that Frances is less skilled than I. I never claimed that. So I suggested you go ahead--for the sake of your own argument--and dismiss the time-spent differential entirely in order to understand my point...

Only, it isn't fair to judge between yourself and Frances.

The point of my argument has nothing to do with judging between myself and Frances or anyone else who decides to try the exercise; it has entirely to do with comparing two different drawing tool interfaces...

And I do understand that it isn't just about the time involved, it is also about economy of movement. Whether you see the value of the comparative or not I don't really care.

Good! Mission accomplished. That's what you need to focus on: the software, not the personalities.

I don't think it is going to happen. Just like with Adobe.

I, on the other hand, am convinced that the problems with the software vendors reside more in the single-software devoted users who just don't know any better. I've done a few pre-release programs in my time, and that experience has only served to reinforce that conviction. Software vendors are in business to sell product. Eventuallly, software vendors build what their users demand--or someone else does and takes their business.

So I prefer to spend my limited recreational online free time discussing such items of common interest with other users, as opposed to sending letters into the black holes of the vendors' feature request repositories, never to see the light of day and never to hear a response. I consider conversing with other users of similar interest an avenue to the root of the problem. If a vendor is too lethargic to keep aware of what's being publicly said about its products in its own customer forums, that's just another sign of an unresponsive vendor anyway.

Most of what's wrong with Illustrator persists because of the stubborness and defensiveness (actually borne of fear of an overestimated difficulty of learning something a little different) of its habituated users who have never bothered to experience anything better. Illustrator's dominance has kept the 2D vector drawing segment in the doldrums for decades.

But Adobe's rent-only marketing blunder has suddenly created an interesting historic situation (opportunity) in which many of its even most habituated and defensive users are finally realizing their single-vendor captivity and considering alternatives. There's a lot I like about Designer Pro and I'd love to see Xara step up to that plate. But I won't lose any sleep if it doesn't. Xara may be perfectly content with its current market position, largely regarded (rightly or not) as an entry-level hobbiest's tool, despite its "Pro" pretensions (most overused and abused word in the drawing software market).

Fact is, Xara has a long way to go. The primary Bezier drawing tool is front-and-center. It's paramount. It's the first thing users of historically dominant mainstream drawing programs look for. But it's not the only thing. Printing to separations, for example, is another. (Even directly-competitive Serif DrawPlus does this.) And while Xara seems to have realized the competitive disadvantage of not having a proper page-assembly program for long bookish document building, I fear the recent attempt at that falls far short of the mark, too; at least for the potential pool of new customers which Adobe's move has created. (Corel and the others face this obstacle, too, but perhaps Corel could ressurrect Ventura Publisher if practicable.)

So maybe Xara is content with catching just a small portion of the disgruntled rental-resistant overflow. There are no doubt a good many AI users who are, in fact, merely casual users and hobbiests who would frankly be better off using a more modest program with a simpler and better-designed interface. But users don't like to think of themselves that way. Pride of ownership doesn't just affect cars.

Regardless, so far as I can tell, the facts remain regarding the over-glorified Shape Editor tool. It's a deal-breaking limitation for many, many serious 2D illustrators.

DrawPlus? Yeah, the pen tool works better. It's pretty much crappy in too many other respects. I could enumerate the ways, but you have probably figured those out by now.

It's crappy in other respects right now. But more than Illustrator, Draw, Canvas, et al, it's squarely in Xara's perceptual market segment. And the main issues I've found with it are, in places, debilitating but are merely bugs that should be easily corrected. So even if Xara doesn't intend to serously play in the same park as the "big kids," it certainly does need to have its eye on Serif, and I'd guess it probably does.

Here's what raises my eyebrows that regard: DrawPlus shows signs of true innovation--which has been far too rare throughout the Adobe-dominated vector drawing history. It's axonometric grid feature (a subject near and dear to me) just needs a few bugs squashed to almost match the functionality of the similar treatment in far more expensive Corel Designer--at a price far less than XDP. And getting back to the current context, its Pen's control of the outgoing curve handle is a sign of real discernment toward deceptively subtle interface elements which pay off hugely for the user; in other words, functional elegance, a concept that seems to have been lost during Illustrator's domination.

Xara/Magix isn't going to be compelled to make changes by a (very) few forum posts...

You are evidently much more cynical regarding Xara than I. If I thought Xara really was a monolithic fat & happy company just trying to maintain its status-quo, I'd dust my feet, walk away, and spend my time better elsewhere. But like I said, there's much to like about XDP. For example, it blows the friggin' doors off anything Illustrator can do for the casual static web-page builder. And it just as dramatically embarasses Illustrator regarding XDP's main claim-to-fame: performance when handling kazillions of objects with raster-based effects (feathering and transparency). I find it a refreshing joy to use except for its sub-standard primary Bezier tool.


Regardless, Xara/Magix, Adobe, Corel, et al, are going to be compelled by the buying decisions of their existing and potential customers. Again, that's why I converse with fellow users.

JET

[JET]

Sorry for the accidental double-post. I was trying to edit some typos.

JET

[JET]

A compromise solution. Additional modifiers for the shape editor tool.

That would be backward. It's not the Shape Editor tool that needs fleshing out; it's the Pen. The pen already provides the fundamental click-or-drag functionality. So add the requisit momentary shortcuts to the Pen. (See my earlier comments about the Shape Editor's shortcuts not even being momentary.) Give the selection tool the ability to bend segments and extract retracted handles individually. That would exceed Illustrator's cumbersome and resume-interfering Convert Tool. Take it to the next step by providing means to control which handle is pulled out first (incoming or outgoing) and that would surpass FreeHand. Then give the Pen tool a momentary shortcut to invoke the pointer without loosing resume.

There's no need to cling to the Shape Editor tool. Click-click-bend functionality can be fully integrated into a properly full-featured Pen tool, as FreeHand did many years ago and as DrawPlus did later. (Yes, you could swap names, too, but "Shape Editor" is not particularly intuitive. It implies it's for editing [adjusting] pre-existing paths, not for drawing new ones. In other words, it sounds more like something more akin to Illustrator's white pointer or Draw's Shape Tool.)

Again, just see FreeHand's Pen tool for an example of how cleanly all the needed functionality can be integrated into one elegant tool, with a minimum of easily-reached momentary modifiers (Alt, Ctrl, Shift). And as mentioned above, opportunity exists to better even FreeHand's treatment.

By way of disclaimer: I doubt that a software company can deliberately and directly copy a competitor's interface design verbatim. I don't know where copyright begins and ends in this regard.

On the other hand, Serif has come mighty close to FreeHand's pen behavior. (DrawPlus's behavior of bend-extracted handles is inferior, so Xara at least has that element in its favor.)

But given the current XDP interface scheme, it's the Pen than needs to be completed, not the Shape Editor. Fix the Pen and the Shape Editor can disappear, because the Pen would be able to do it all.

An important part of Xara's generally better elegance (and Illustrator and Draw's lack thereof) is the matter of tool glut; too many disjointed and limited tools faking "sophistication" by means of similar-function redundancy. It just increases confusion, clutter, and scatter and interferes with advantageous integration. (The most obvious example is Illustrator's insistence on two separate selection tools; there are many, many other examples.)

Xara needs to jealously guard against such multiple-tool inelegance. It needs to further improve in that regard, not retreat from it. For all I know that may have been Xara's intention in removing the Pen from the default interface. But it was the wrong decision. The Pen needs to be completed, including click-click-bend behavior. In a nutshell, Xara needs to give up on the myth that the Shape Editor is some kind of breakthrough innovation providing greater functionality for less effort--or else objectively demonstrate that to be true.

In other words, I'm not looking for compromise. I'm looking for long overdue elegant advancement. Know when I started using Illustrator in earnest? When Macromedia decided that Illustrator was something to be emulated instead of surpassed. (FreeHand 9, when the white pointer was utterly needlessly added as a faux concession to AI users. The white pointer never actually gained its own genuinely functional purpose until MX.)

JET

[tonylondon]

That would be backward. It's not the Shape Editor tool that needs fleshing out; it's the Pen. The pen already provides the fundamental click-or-drag functionality. So add the requisit momentary shortcuts to the Pen.

There's no need to cling to the Shape Editor tool.

But given the current XDP interface scheme, it's the Pen than needs to be completed, not the Shape Editor. Fix the Pen and the Shape Editor can disappear, because the Pen would be able to do it all.

The reason I suggested starting from the shape editor tool is because I see no good reason to deprive those that appreciate it's simplicity by ditching it. We still end up with one tool with all the functionality. Anyone wishing to use a more complex functionality should be willing to use modifier keys. What I proposed was an elegant way to get all the desired functionality in one tool. The name of the tool is of course immaterial

In other words, I'm not looking for compromise.

No - that's exactly your problem. We live in a world where different people have different needs.

[JET]

The reason I suggested starting from the shape editor tool is because I see no good reason to deprive those that appreciate it's simplicity by ditching it.

Go back and read what I said, Tony. Those who appreciate the simplicity of the Shape Editor tool would still have it! I'm not taking anything away from that.

Again, the click-click-bend method can be (and has been) cleanly integrated into a well-designed Bezier pen tool. This has all been done before. I've taught dozens of new users by using that very method in FreeHand over the decades. I've argued for its inclusion in Illustrator for many years.

It is needlessly inelegant and cumbersome and confusing to provide multiple tools for the same purpose, when the functionality can be cleanly integrated into one. (Tool glut--you don't want to go down that path. That's how Illustrator became the scattered, confused grab bag it presently is.)

And, it's vastly more powerful to have access to both methods at the same time with the same tool. Have you tried it? In FreeHand or DrawPlus, you can be smoothly and efficiently drawing a path, clicking for corners and dragging for curves, and anytime you want to, go back and bend a straight segment by dragging its middle just as you do with Xara's Shape Editor Tool. Or, you can simply use one method or the other entirely. No added complication necessary.

No - that's exactly your problem.

There you go, flinging personal insults instead of arguing the facts. I have no interest in that.

JET