VectorCat
-
Posts
1,002 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by VectorCat
-
-
If instead we just refused to create the object at all, with a message explaining why, you would then have to go to the Layers tab and select a different layer anyway. This might be better than what we have now, clearer and less error-prone, but it will also be intrusive and annoying, and the effect will be to teach you to deselect layers as soon as you lock them.
To me, that sounds like something that would both satisfy the convention you've built for AD, and help users to understand what is going on. Probably in a short time, Users would "get it" that they need to make a new layer after locking a layer group; that warning would helpfully be there in case the user forgot what to do.
Thank you for being receptive to our comments.
-
@MEB
Thank you for the good explanation of the idea behind the lock later behavior. It now makes sense to me, however it still gets in the way of May work flow to have object ending up in locked layers. So I would really like your idea of a preference option to disallow objects ending up in locked layers, as you suggest.
I vote for this option, too.
pmeinertz says it well in that it gets in the way of my work flow to have to stop, puzzle out what happened, find my "missing" object, separate it out from a locked layer I thought was unavailable for new objects, make a new layer, paste my object, then try to regain momentum and flow. This current process I find unsettling and disruptive.
Upon re-reading the comments, it's clear that the behavior under discussion is known and deliberate in the sense that AD is written to behave this way.
So, no need for me to make a clip; it would merely show what we all know is happening, unlike a bug which happens sporadically and only for some.
I feel that while each software application may have its own way of doing this or that, there are some conventions which obtain across applications, and I would request that the developers weigh this in when deciding how their brand of locked layers behave.
Cheers,
vcat
-
Absolutely no tension here @VectorCat. Don't get me wrong ;)
I'm just trying to explain how it works and showing that some actions are more simple than what you are describing. I'm a user too!
Maybe i'm not seeing where the problem is. In any case i personally see this as a healthy discussion and i believe we can all keep it that way.
If you think that a clip will help to show your issues, go ahead and post it.
If somehow my previous post sounded harsh or anything, i apologize, it wasn't my intention.
I think that's what it is..a combination of perhaps some of us not understanding the rationale behind the behavior, and a not understanding of why that behavior is problematic, at least for some of us.
I'll try to get what I hope will be a helpful screen clip this evening to show what my issue is, with some narration describing why I find it problematic.
Cheers!
vcat
-
It feels like tensions are rising over this subject, and I don't feel that anyone intends that to happen.
I don't think anybody is beating up on AD; merely citing some problematic behavior. maybe it would help if I took a screen movie of what I myself consider to be problematic behavior, and we can then discuss what that movie shows?
Sound good?
I think that what we users are after is a "model" of doing things which makes sense to us, and lets us develop "flow" in our work.
-
I do get what you mean. I really bothers me too the Layer lock thing where new objects place themself in a locked layer.
For me a locked layer is a locked layer, no changes at all should be possible.
yeah. things that are in a locked area should be off-limits to our touch until said locked area is un-locked. None of this quasi-locked bidness.
Either locked or not locked.
-
if you need something like a video screen grab, I might could serve one up to you, but the behavior, tho puzzling, is as I described it. I will be working with/manipulating items on unlocked layers, then moments later, no amount of (edit: direct) clicking will activate those objects again. (edit: I must click on the item in the layer palette).
Let me know if a video grab is required.
-
-
In general, I am encountering a lot of illogic when it comes to where things land and whether I can and can not click on them to interact with them.
Major neck pain when my day is characterized by futile and incessant clicking. Can something be done about this? At least can there please be an explanation of the current rationale so that we can deal with/avoid it?
Is it about whether I've clicked on a layer group or not? is this trying to help me? Could it be less helpful and less insistent? Why can I direct-click on some things, yet not on others?
This is a very pointy rock in the shoe, for me..can't speak for others. Very pointy. Like a cinder, with sharp spikey bits.
;-)
-
is there a way to scale an image inside it's box?
-
maybe I'm old-school but I view "locked" as meaning, "You can't alter this."
I am constantly getting stung by finishing with a layer group, locking it, creating a new object, then trying to move or change it, and unable to!!
kind of screwy to allow the new object to be created on a locked layer, and then to have that newly-created object be locked!
I see no logic or benefit to this....is there one/some?
-
Maybe it's good to know for someone on that topic:
I run AD on my late 2008 MacBook Pro with 2,93 GHz, 8 GB RAM and a SSD with the integrated nvidia Geforce 9600 on Yosemite.
It runs smooth and very well - I only detect glitches and jerks when I have a very complex file or with large pixelpics inside.
So everything about that should run very good :)
Also I use a 2011 iMac with 16 GB of RAM and a SSD - and that's nearly perfect.
I'd have to say that my experience with AD is just about perfect, too. It's hard to judge because A) so many established software tools are pretty weird; they lower the bar and B) AD was so well-behaved out of the gate, and the fit and finish of AD is so polished, I have to assume the devs truly know what they're doing and that things will only get better.
You know..it wasn't a pile of half-done casserole chuffed off onto hungry Mac users desperate for anything. AD has to my eye been best-of-breed software from square one.
-
Definitely not yet, @VectorCat, but it's a matter of time... if the rumors of the iPad Pro with a 12"-13" retina screen and built-in iOS stylus support pan out, I'd say within 3 years we'll see a lot of truly professional level apps which can but don't need to integrate with desktop apps... But i hear ya, right now, it's definitely not a viable option for most types of workflows. Heck, who wants to look at a 9" display for 8 hours a day?! But a 13" display, now that's totally different...!! (sarcasm)
ronnyb;
Can you or any other tablet owners/users talk speak to what extent the tablets are now "real" computers capable of doing real work?
So, you mention 64-bit processing in the latest iPads, and I get how limiting/frustrating the small screen size would be, but in terms of doing illustration...there's iDraw, and Pixelmator, and we truly hope AD will soon be there.
Then there's I believe a certain amount of video editing, maybe iMovie for iPad..
And code authoring/IDE... I assume there's some kind of code editing that can be done, and if not a native app, one could use something like Nitrous.io, tho I find that frustrating on a real computer; too much nitrous "chrome" and not enough space for the actual code area.
Then finally FTP software...surely there must be something for tablets.
Are the tablet virtual keyboards too "toy" for real work? Are they too basic, such as alpha-numeric, but incomplete in other characters needed? Ability to format text?
I have a friend who says he could do front-end development and illustration on his iPad no problem. He's a very good illustrator, but I'm not convinced that his front-end skills are far enough along to testify about the iPad as a serious dev platform.
Thanks for any views on this....
vcat
-
no, I agree. I am happy as a clam with my even non-retina 13" MB Pro. I can and have worked all day for days on end on that great machine.
if there becomes and iPad that can do what that MB Pro does, there will be one in my toolkit.
fairly exciting idea...
-
OK..so, a question for all tablet users:
If you were plopped into a new job, contract or permanent...or working for a client, and the only tool you could use was a tablet and whatever software you need and is available for that tablet, could you do your job?
..Or, could you not do your job on that tablet? Right here, right now?
-
drawing on the screen has always been appealing to me..more like paper. I've also always liked the iPad, but from what I know of its capabilities today, it doesn't seem to me to be a "real" computer capable of doing real work of the kind I do.
It looks like it is getting there, especially as serious apps are written for it..apps like AD and others. Then combined with the size and light weight it becomes compelling..I assume it's very conservative on energy, too..
-
when I say "magnifier" I mean zoom...a little magnifying glass with a + sign where the glass would be.
or more accurate, click with this tool to zoom, or marquee an area to zoom in on.
-
Is this even possible? say you have 2 or more objects differing in color and you want to adjust their saturation at the same time but without altering their respective colors.
maybe this idea has other applications..
-
the iPad version is extremely encouraging news...helps move the iPad much closer to serious work platform, in my mind..
-
-
I guess that could work, too..I think I happened upon that in adobe by accident and found it to be pretty useful.
it's the on-the-fly, temporary tool function which needs a "quick release" too
-
I get that, once a document is created or saved in one of the betas, it can't be opened by a previous version of AD...
However, what do people actually do, when choosing to use the Beta? I personally don't have any extra "experimenting" time; when I use AD, it simply must be for real, finish work.
So, do beta users simply accept that, and stick with the beta regardless of whatever problems might occur with the beta?
-
OK..let me get clear on this.. A) Using the beta version of AD, and turning off or changing the key combo that invokes Spotlight will correct the key command producing a temp magnifying glass?
I've already changed my spotlight command to Ctrl-Space..one of the first things I do upon installing OS X..mainly because I want CMD-Space to be for magnify, in various apps..
thank you!
-
the key combo to get a temporary magnifying glass for marqueeing around a selection you want to zoom in on is CMD-Space, but the order matters: it must be Space first, then press CMD.
I have 25 years' worth of muscle memory for CMD-Space, regardless of which order. If you don't get the order correct in AD, you're left trying again, swiping, not zooming..very time wastey and frustrating.
Could AD be modified so that it doesn't matter what order you press those keys, that you still get the magnifying glass anyway?
If you press CMD, THEN space, you get a hand tool but the hand tool already has it's very own key: the Space bar, which conforms to years of convention.
Thank you!
vcat
-
My 2 macs are older...2009 Mac Pro, 2010 Mac BOOK Pro.
I am very happy with the speed of AD on both, and while faster macs obviously run the same software faster, I feel that apps like AD give my hardware new life.
What they say in their promos is right: by the time Illustrator gets done loading, I'm already working in AD. The question of which computer? For Affinity Designer: the mac you have. For adobe? Next years's Mac.
;-P
An option to hide handles and bounds of objects?
in Older Feedback & Suggestion Posts
Posted
Could there be an option to hide control handles and the bounding box of a selected object? the benefit would be while adjusting color, shading, etcs..some times it's hard to see what's going on with the handles and bounding boxes visible.. sometimes you just don't want to see it, sometimes they actually obscure the object being worked on.
thank you