Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Suggestion: Rebrand Point Transform Tool to 'Scale Tool' or similar


Recommended Posts

Hi Serif Staff

In this thread, I realised that your 'Point Transform Tool' is really just a Scale Tool, which is a very fast and well-known tool from Adobe Illustrator and Blender, for example. Just with a configurable origin.

Shouldn't you re-brand it as a Scale Tool - something with the word Scale in it, at least - so that customers actually understand the tool, Point Transform Tool probably misses your average customer, and if you search for scale tool designer or similar you won't find it.

It might also be an opportunity to rethink the tool in that context - both you and your customers must have needs and ideas that are waiting for their chance. 🙂

In other words, my suggestion is to turn the approach to Point Transform Tool from an engineering angle to a customer-oriented angle, and at the same time create some recognisability and reusability from similar programs out there.

I simply no longer believe that there are any professional graphic designers here. Everything follows suit. Just everything.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bit Arts,

The Point Transform Tool is not "just a Scale Tool". It also rotates.

The definitive difference between it and the bounding box handles is that it effectively lets you use any node of the selection as the 'transform handle' instead of a bounding box handle, which is often irrelevant to the drawing. The dragged node can be snapped to nodes or edges of other existing paths as it is transformed.

So the "point" word, I suppose, is collective generic reference to Nodes and the Transform Center as 'points' meaningful to the drawing itself.

It does not, however, obviate the function of bounding box handles, because it does not (so far as I can tell) provide for scaling disproportionally, which is also very important.

That's why just having transform tools in the toolbox that act like Illustrator's (at least as of CS6; Adobe has not received a penny from me since its Captive Creative subscription) does not satisfy, either. That's why Illustrator also has bounding box transform handles.

But even with Illustrator's transform tool and bounding box transform handles (again, as of CS6), one still cannot scale a selection disproportionally in an arbitrary direction other than perpendicular to a bounding box side or to the ever-tyrannical horizontal or vertical.

That's why, as I suggest, if Affinity's utterly superfluous 'lollypop' bounding box handle were given the ability to rotate the bounding box independently from its content (by means of a momentary keyboard shortcut), the functionality would not just match Illustrator's functionality, but surpass it.

JET

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JET_Affinity said:

Bit Arts,

The Point Transform Tool is not "just a Scale Tool". It also rotates.

I do know. Yes, it does now, but not if you press shift. Then it just scales. So in reality, it's both a scaling and/or a rotation tool. Terms that make sense to everyone - we scale and rotate objects all the time. But do we need a 'Point Transform Tool' that does both and makes little semantic sense to most people? I doubt it. At the very least, I think the name and icon blocks customers from understanding and utilising it. I wonder what the real consequences of Serif's design choices are. Not what we think in here.

I imagine that most people would benefit most if the two sub-functions could be accessed via two shortcuts, so that you could quickly use your pointing tool to scale or rotate without having to press SHIFT or whatever. And it will probably work even better on the iPad. These methods are for one need or workflow, traditional handles for another. I can't favour one or the other. They provide value at different times, complement each other, but don't get in each other's way. 

In short, measure whether the tool resonated with customers and customise it to their needs. And possibly not stubbornly doing something different than Adobe. I think they knew exactly what they were doing when they separated these things.

So, overall, just a call for Serif to give it some consideration. 

I simply no longer believe that there are any professional graphic designers here. Everything follows suit. Just everything.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Splendid, then just add this as the tooltip and documentation:

In the intricate realm of computer graphics, the triumvirate of transformation operations—rotation, scaling, and translation (moving)—form the cornerstone of spatial manipulation, each governed by a distinct set of mathematical paradigms and geometric nuances. Rotation, a pivotal transformation, hinges on angular displacement around a specified axis or point, adhering to trigonometric principles, where entities undergo a coordinate metamorphosis in a plane, preserving their intrinsic dimensions yet altering their orientation in a Euclidean space. Scaling, in stark contrast, entails a proportional alteration of an object's dimensions, an operation underpinned by scalar multiplication that distorts the size but not the shape, often described by a scaling matrix that systematically expands or contracts the object's vertices in relation to a defined center, a process intrinsically linked to the concepts of homogeneity and anisotropy in scaling. Translation, the third vertex of this transformational triad, involves a linear shift of an object's position in space, a straightforward yet profound displacement along the Cartesian plane, achieved through vector addition, where each point of the object is uniformly relocated, maintaining its size and orientation but altering its relative positioning in the spatial domain. Together, these transformations are the linchpins of graphical manipulation, each contributing uniquely to the dynamic reconfiguration of digital imagery, whether in the realms of 3D modeling, animation, or virtual reality, where they intertwine in a symphony of mathematical elegance and computational precision.

I simply no longer believe that there are any professional graphic designers here. Everything follows suit. Just everything.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bit Arts said:

Splendid, then just add this as the tooltip and documentation:

In the intricate realm of computer graphics, the triumvirate of transformation operations—rotation, scaling, and translation (moving)—form the cornerstone of spatial manipulation, each governed by a distinct set of mathematical paradigms and geometric nuances. Rotation, a pivotal transformation, hinges on angular displacement around a specified axis or point, adhering to trigonometric principles, where entities undergo a coordinate metamorphosis in a plane, preserving their intrinsic dimensions yet altering their orientation in a Euclidean space. Scaling, in stark contrast, entails a proportional alteration of an object's dimensions, an operation underpinned by scalar multiplication that distorts the size but not the shape, often described by a scaling matrix that systematically expands or contracts the object's vertices in relation to a defined center, a process intrinsically linked to the concepts of homogeneity and anisotropy in scaling. Translation, the third vertex of this transformational triad, involves a linear shift of an object's position in space, a straightforward yet profound displacement along the Cartesian plane, achieved through vector addition, where each point of the object is uniformly relocated, maintaining its size and orientation but altering its relative positioning in the spatial domain. Together, these transformations are the linchpins of graphical manipulation, each contributing uniquely to the dynamic reconfiguration of digital imagery, whether in the realms of 3D modeling, animation, or virtual reality, where they intertwine in a symphony of mathematical elegance and computational precision.

Users have been coping with the name of Transform Panel without your suggested documentation, so they'll probably cope with the name of Point Transform Tool without that documentation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Bit Arts said:

Yes, it does now, but not if you press shift. Then it just scales. So in reality, it's both a scaling and/or a rotation tool. Terms that make sense to everyone - we scale and rotate objects all the time. But do we need a 'Point Transform Tool' that does both and makes little semantic sense to most people? I doubt i t. At the very least, I think the name and icon blocks customers from understanding and utilising it. I wonder what the real consequences of Serif's design choices are. Not what we think in here.

 "…but not if you press shift"

So?? It doesn't scale if you press Ctrl {Windows} either. But without pressing a modifier key it both scales and rotates in one move. So how would "scale" be a more appropriate name than "transform"?

Look; I'm all for intuitive and consistent terminology. And I've been at this for a while, too. I cut my vector-drawing teeth in Altsys Fontographer—the progenitor of FreeHand, before Illustrator even existed—on a Mac Plus. But egads, man, there's no real issue in this instance. Dear departed Aunt Mollie would call this "straining at a gnat to swallow an elephant".

For a real interface terminology issue, look no further than the current abuse of the "Pages" (or Artboards) and "Layers" terms. What is intuitive about starting a new document which displays a working area that certainly looks like a  page, drawing an ellipse on that 'non-page', and having the ellipse immediately listed in a Panel named "Layers" in which there are no Layers (or Pages)? Since when is a single ellipse a 'Layer'? This is supposed to be intuitive terminology convention? But we should take issue with "Point Transform Tool"?

Illustrator is historically one of the worst about needlessly renaming its so often late-to-the-game constructs and features that existed long before in competing programs. Calling pages 'artboards' and nodes 'anchor points'. Its utterly needless and wordy 'Convert Anchor Point Tool'. Starting the whole now pandemic 'necessity' for two primary selection tools—the second of which is awkwardly named the 'Direct Selection Tool'—when FreeHand's elegant single selection tool performed all the functionality of both, more efficiently, intuitively, and capably. Adobe should hardly be considered the authoritative preferred 'dictionary' for best feature naming.

So yes, I quite agree that words mean things. But functionality still trumps. The functionality of the Point Transform Tool addresses crucial omissions that stem from having only bounding box handles for common transformations: being able to rotate paths by their nodes, so as to intuitively snap them to paths and nodes already drawn. Before the Point Transform Tool, that was a serious failing relative to Illustrator. It's actually a bit of a new wrinkle and more elegant and accurate than the corresponding functionality in Illustrator.

  1. Pen Tool: Draw three arbitrarily-shaped open paths; one near the upper left corner of the page; one near the lower right; and one in the middle.
  2. Your goal is to scale and orient the middle path—without distorting its shape—to perfectly fit between two arbitrary nodes; one on the upper left path and one on the lower right path.
  3. Point Transform Tool: Select the middle path. Mousedown on one endNode of the middle path. Drag and snap it to the target node on the upper left path.
  4. Drag the Transform Center and snap it to that same node.
  5. Mousedown on the other endNode of the middle path. Drag and snap it to the target node on the lower right path. Done.
  6. Tell me how you would do that as quickly and intuitively in Illustrator with one tool.

"…do we need a [term like] 'Point Transform Tool' that…makes little semantic sense to most people?"

Yes! We need different terms for interface elements that are significantly different treatments of similar functionality in other programs, so that we know they're not just another re-packaged 'me, too' identical copycat treatment of same-old market-dominating (and progress stifling) programs like Illustrator.

I cringe every time I see users in forums like this demand "We must have a [insert Illustrator's term] tool in Affinity!", as if Illustrator's cluttered, confused, scattered, and often mediocre treatment is the ultimate de facto thing to emulate. Affinity is opportunity to finally advance 2D bezier drawing beyond the mediocrity of Illustrator. But it won't get there by just thoughtlessly demanding identical treatment from such long-in-the-tooth programs without putting at least a little thought toward how it might be done better.

 

Link to comment
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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.