The all new "Xara is inaccurate" thread!

[Egg Bramhill]

Here.

[jamesmc]

So you ungrouped them.

And this makes a dirty boolean how?

When I make objects that are to be booleaned I do a couple of things.

(1) I "SET" the line to no width before I draw any shapes.

Why? It's because I don't want lines to be part of a boolean operation.

(2) I group the shape after it is drawn.

Why? Because I don't want nodes to determine how a boolean operation will be performed. I want shape being affected by a shape, not nodes or line width.

Notice that the boolean cut out is perfect with my method.

Having perfect boolean cutouts is the goal is it not?

Just look how perfect that cut out is at 500 percent view. Do you see any flaws?

BTW, I add the line width after the objects are booleaned.

[Egg Bramhill]

Hi again James,

(1) I "SET" the line to no width before I draw any shapes.

It doesn't make any difference what the line width is. You can draw 2 shapes, one with a line width of 500 pix and the other a line width of 2 pix. Subtract the shapes and you end up with the same shapes as if either had no line width.

(2) I group the shape after it is drawn.

Why? Because I don't want nodes to determine how a boolean operation will be performed. I want shape being affected by a shape, not nodes or line width.

Grouping shapes makes no difference. Xtreme still creates "dirty" boolean exractions.

Look at your xar file again. Ungrouping won't alter the shapes. There are two straight lines within your shape, of which there shouldn't be if it was a clean boolean operation.

[handrawn]

James

I think your argument about using other software for this type of work has merit - but thats a separate issue to the apparent bug in xara itself.

I'm sorry but on your xar file the flat is clearly visible at 8000% zoom whether its ungrouped or not

Also I tried your method as your last post and I still got the flats on high zoom.

I have posted up my xar file - did I do some thing wrong?

PS just seen Eggs latest post - I'm afraid I have to agree

[The Alien]

You don't need the shape editor tool to see these dirty boolean operations. I downloaded James' dirtyboolean1.xar and I can clearly see the straight line segments at 200% already, without having selected or manipulated anything :\

I've tried, Jon G's method on page 4 to slice a square with a circle, setting the line width to none immediately after X1 had started like James suggested.
Seems like the straight segments always show, except when the circle is horizontally centered on the edge of the square. Makes sense, cause there can be no line (segment) in 1 point.

Laser cutting or no laser cutting, I think this bug deserves to be fixed :\

[jamesmc]

Cool, I'll guess one just needs to bring a magnifying glass along so one can see the imperfections at 8000 percent when one makes a cutout.

Yes, one can see the nodes.

Okay, have fun with the dirty booleans and inaccurate booleans.

By the way, has anyone ever looked an extremely sharp knife blade under high magnification? I wonder all those nicks and gouges are doing there? It's a wonder anything gets a proper cut.

[Egg Bramhill]

James, that's not the issue. For graphics etc there isn't a problem. The problem arises when your creating different coloured vinyl cutouts and try to fit them together. You either get gaps, or worse, ovetlaps, as in my jigsaw image earlier.

[The Alien]

Cool, I'll guess one just needs to bring a magnifying glass along so one can see the imperfections at 8000 percent when one makes a cutout.

Yes, one can see the nodes.

Depends on the size of the line segments and the observer. As I said, I can already see the straight lines at 200% :shrug:

By the way, has anyone ever looked an extremely sharp knife blade under high magnification? I wonder all those nicks and gouges are doing there? It's a wonder anything gets a proper cut.

Yes, isn't it?
Though that's not an argument to justify Xtreme's inaccuracy
Software works through mathematics.
Mathematics are exact.
Nature is not mathematics.

I've read your statements so far, but I still don't understand the motivation behind your point of view. You've said Xtreme is not an industrial program. Is that a reason not to fix this bug?
Suppose the developers fixed this bug; will that make Xtreme less of a graphics program? in other words, what capabilities will you (or other graphics designers) lose if this bug were fixed? It's not like people are asking for Xara to convert their graphics program to some sort of CAD software.

I think if this were fixed it may invite a slightly broader range of people towards this program.
And speaking for myself, if Xara would fix this bug, I would buy their program (don't care which one, Xtreme or Pro) immediately to be redeemed of it

In risk of floating off-topic here, I think Xara shouldn't always be concentrating on adding features to Xtreme. IMO they should dedicate a period (6 months? 1 year?) of their development time exclusively to fixing bugs in order to shrink the bug list.
So instead of concentrating on adding features with bugfixing as a secondary objective, they should do the opposite for a while (IMO)

[jamesmc]

I've read your statements so far, but I still don't understand the motivation behind your point of view. You've said Xtreme is not an industrial program. Is that a reason not to fix this bug?
Suppose the developers fixed this bug; will that make Xtreme less of a graphics program? in other words, what capabilities will you (or other graphics designers) lose if this bug were fixed? It's not like people are asking for Xara to convert their graphics program to some sort of CAD software. (IMO)

There is no motivation behind my point other than constant belittling of a World Class software doesn't do anyone any good.

I disagree one one of your points that yes, people are asking Xara to convert their graphics program to some sort of CAD software. CAD as some people know it is a packaged software that does Computer Aided Design. CAD is also software built into chips such as in Robotics, industrial laser cutting and etc.

Xara is a Graphics Program, not a Computer Aided Design Program.

There is much more to CAD than just software. One must have the proper hardware i.e. - specialized monitors, graphics cads/chips and control/monitoring software on top of design software that enables the industrial process.

Here's an excerpt from an American firm that cuts plastics:
"Programming is done by our own talented staff and parts can be produced from a wide variety of sources. With Cad / Cam software, we can develop new ideas, bringing parts to life quickly and competitively."

Read more about laser cutting here:
http://process-equipment.globalspec....arking_Systems

Read more about CNC machines here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNC

Read more about CAM here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compute..._manufacturing

Read more about CAD here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAD

With all that information, Xara and Illustrator are 2D programs. CAD/CAM/CNC need to deal with three dimensions or 3D.

Here's a URL that talks about various Vector Programs suitable for preservation:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...ient=firefox-a

For example:
Adobe Illustrator: A 2D layer-based raster/vector format based on PostScript. Not suitable for preservation.
CorelDRaw: A proprietary layer-based 2D format which can hold both raster and vector data. Not suitable for preservation.
Wavefront OBJ Files: A 3D graphics format stored in Unix format ASCII. Closely related to VRML. It is used in the animated film industry and favored by some 3D laser scanning practitioners. Suitable for preservation

Note that Xara is not listed, I don't know why. I suspect that Xara Vectors are a combination of Vector and Raster graphics and cannot be saved in an ASCII form for further manipulation. It is also 2D based.

Yes, the bugs should be fixed, but since Xara is a Graphics program and not an Industrial software application, I well imagine they have higher priorities than competing with CAD/CAM and CNC software packages.

[handrawn]

I can't see that anyone is belittling anything here as such.

Theres a bug in xara
The bug needs fixing
Bug fixing should be a priority for xara.

Perhaps the title of this thread is a tad provocative, but thats all - it dosn't have to be taken that seriously unless the arguments stand up.

To me the issue here is that this bug has been around fior a long time - that deserves comment, if not actual criticism.

If xara deserves to keep its 'world-class' status it MUST fix bugs like this.

This is quite apart from any arcane argument about what it can or cannot be used for

IMO