Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The Artsboards are impractical. Example: you have 100 artboards. Then you delete 20 artboards. That leaves 80 artboards. These 80 artboards are not numbered correctly. Much better would be the pages, like the Publisher. If you open a document with a lot of artboards, you see all artboards. It would be better if you only see one artboard, like in Publisher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that if you had 100 artboards in a project that you didn't really plan it well.  Something of that scale is probably better done in Publisher.

Also, artboards are probably better off being named, not numbered (you can rename them in the Layers panel - the name of the layer is displayed above the artboard).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one has 100 dartboards one should also utilise Navigation Viewpoints, name them appropriately and zoom to dartboards used most often in no time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2020 at 1:40 PM, Designer1 said:

These 80 artboards are not numbered correctly.

What is the reason for artboards to be named by numbers exactly in order? The name of the Artboard should be as representative of its content as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The concept of so-called 'artboards' is not impractical. Far from it. (How best to implement it, of course, is a matter of discussion.)

Think of it like this:

  • The general interface metaphor of pages in a page-layout program is that of a bound book: flipping a stack of same-size pages in a fixed sequence, viewing them as 2-page spreads.
  • The general interface metaphor of artboards in a vector-based illustration and design program is that of freely spreading and freely arranging related but individual sheets of a project—which may be of different sizes and orientations—on the conference table.

I don't know about your work, but mine (for the past 3.5 decades) has overwhelmingly more often corresponded to the latter than the former. I dare say that is also true of the vast majority of whole-document designers; vastly more single-sheet brochures, fliers, placement ads, trade show displays, identity documents, signage, etc., etc. than high-page-count bookish documents with repetitive layouts.

Truth is, for the majority of graphics-intensive documents, it is more efficient to build it entirely in a drawing program than in a conventional-wisdom page-layout application.

JET

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2020 at 12:40 PM, Designer1 said:

The Artsboards are impractical. Example: you have 100 artboards. Then you delete 20 artboards. That leaves 80 artboards. These 80 artboards are not numbered correctly. Much better would be the pages, like the Publisher. If you open a document with a lot of artboards, you see all artboards. It would be better if you only see one artboard, like in Publisher.

Make a few suggestions in the feedback section to improve Artboards, you never know they might get used.
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/52-feature-requests-suggestions/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global colors are also partly impractical. For example, I want to change the global color blue to green on only one artboard. But it does not work! The global color is changed on all artboards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Designer1 said:

Global colors are also partly impractical. For example, I want to change the global color blue to green on only one artboard. But it does not work! The global color is changed on all artboards.

Excuse me, this is the definition of global colours.

If you want to have global colours that are restricted to just one artboard you have to adapt your workflow. You can define the same colour multiple times and e.g. call them 'corporate red artboard 1' and 'corporate red artboard 2'. That way you can change them seperately for each artboard for multiple objects.

Cheers,
d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, thanks for that information about global colours.

My suggestion: artboards and pages! If you want, you can work with pages or artboards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Designer1 said:

Interesting, thanks for that information about global colours.

My suggestion: artboards and pages! If you want, you can work with pages or artboards.

Glad to be of help.

For pages you have to work with Affinity Publisher (if you have it). It was discussed here several times to have pages in AD, as well. Opinions about this are mixed. I do not miss them in AD.

Cheers,
d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Designer1 said:

Global colors are also partly impractical.

Quite the contrary: Defining a bunch of willy-nilly non-'global' color swatches in the same mixed bag with a bunch of 'global' swatches is bad practice that leads to cluttered confusion (and potential production errors).

In Altsys FreeHand, there was no 'global' versus 'non-global' distinction in swatches. All user-defined colors automatically became 'global' as soon as they were dragged from the Color Mixer palette to Swatches palette. That's how it should be in every such program. That's the intuitive meaning of defining a color. Editing the definition of a color should of course update wherever that color is already used. That's the intuitive meaning of redefining a color. If you want to add another color to the document's palette, that's what you do: add another swatch to the palette.

I never heard a FreeHand user complain about any of that. It's straightforward, intuitive, consistent, and reliable. You could redefine an existing swatch at any time and be confident you wouldn't miss any elements throughout an elaborate illustration that needed to be updated because the swatch was applied to it 'before setting the swatch to global.' Any time you wanted to use a different color; that's what you did: defined a different swatch. The interface was clear: The Color Mixer was where you mixed colors. The Colors Palette is where you stored the colors you mixed.

This is just one example of how FreeHand's interface regarding colors was superior to Illustrator's. FreeHand could properly handle spot colors in both gradient fills and in object blends, without their being converted to process.

JET

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.