Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, A_B_C said:

Oh, please don’t hide your post, Joachim. It is certainly very useful for other people who follow this conversation and have the exact same question. :)

There seems to be no option for unhiding posts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Joachim_L said:

There seems to be no option for unhiding posts?

Once a post is hidden, only moderators can see it. So it would presumably require moderator intervention to unhide it.


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 1.7.3.481 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.7.3.155 • Designer for iPad 1.7.3.1 • iOS 12.4.1 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Oval said:

In direct comparison (from a 0.5 pt stroke):

corel.jpg.d992d743d26a312e788b8d96f434aa63.jpg

CorelDRAW® 2019 delivers an exact result as opposed to AD. 
 

“People coming from Adobe that took for granted that things just work properly”, have not really used A-dope.

To be fair, you did deliberately choose to use a small object there (or a low document DPI) because you know that's what provokes the incorrect behaviour. The results only look so wrong here because of the size it has been performed at. This is currently being fixed, as I mentioned many times before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, MattP said:

This is currently being fixed, as I mentioned many times before.

Are we likely to see the fix in 1.7.x, or is it too early to say? ears.gif


Alfred online2long.gif
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 1.7.3.481 • Windows 10 Home (4th gen Core i3 CPU)
Affinity Photo for iPad 1.7.3.155 • Designer for iPad 1.7.3.1 • iOS 12.4.1 (iPad Air 2)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, MattP said:

To be fair, you did deliberately choose to use a small object there (or a low document DPI)

To be fair, we used the standard 300 dpi of AD and the same size in CorelDRAW® 2019, only to illustrate that Kuttyjoe is wrong with “in Coreldraw it's much worse”. 0.5 pt and a diameter of 0.3 mm is not too small for CorelDRAW® 2019.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Oval said:

To be fair, we used the standard 300 dpi of AD and the same size in CorelDRAW® 2019, only to illustrate that Kuttyjoe is wrong with “in Coreldraw it's much worse”. 0.5 pt and a diameter of 0.3 mm is not too small for CorelDRAW® 2019.

As I said - you deliberately used a small object which you know will go wrong. You can't claim this wasn't deliberate as it very obviously was. Showing that something you know is wrong is definitely wrong is not achieving anything in my book? It didn't help me (or anyone else already contributing to this thread) know where the problem is or show me how good CorelDraw does with something we fail at. If I wanted to, I could show you ways in which any other program can fail at certain functions - I do not as it is not helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4. September 2019 at 12:05 PM, MattP said:

you deliberately used a small object which you know will go wrong

No. I used a small object, because I hoped to find the limit of CorelDRAW® 2019 because Kuttyjoe wrote “Even Coreldraw has this exact problem” and because I hoped AD would work better. It should only show that Kuttyjoe is not right with his claim “Coreldraw has this exact problem , but in Coreldraw it's much worse” and should not achieve anything in your book.

KR
Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MattP said:

Showing that something you know is wrong is definitely wrong is not achieving anything in my book?

I thought that this is called "bug-reporting" and it is usually considered useful. ;)

(I'm sorry for being "not helpful.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Gunny said:

I thought that this is called "bug-reporting" and it is usually considered useful

:) Normally it is. I think you should read Matt's statement as

Quote

Showing that something you know (has been accepted as) wrong, is definitely wrong, is not achieving anything in my book?

Telling us things that are wrong when you are not sure if we already know, is...

1) very helpful, when we don't already know
and
2) completely understandable when we do already know, but you were not aware we did.

Matt knows that Oval is already aware...

1) that this function is imperfect
and
2) that we have acknowledged that imperfection.


Patrick Connor
Serif (Europe) Ltd.

Latest releases on each platform 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jay1991 said:

Is the solution currently being worked on aim to be exact or a bit more accurate?

Yes.

Best regards!


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:

This is an OR question.  "Yes" is not an answer (unless it's a sarcastic yes)

The yes is for the currently being worked part of the question. The or, for me, is not substantial to the nature of the question.

Best regards!


You'll never know what you can do until you get it up as high as you can go!   

AMD FX 8350 :: Radeon HD 7870 :: Windows 10 ::  http://mithferion.deviantart.com/

Oxygen Icons :: Free Quality Fonts :: Public Domain Pictures :: iOS 11 Design Resources :: iOS App Icon Template :: Hot to do High Quality Art :: Mesh Warp / Distort Tool Considerations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2019 at 12:23 PM, Oval said:

@Kuttyjoe

In direct comparison (from a 0.5 pt stroke):

corel.jpg.d992d743d26a312e788b8d96f434aa63.jpg

CorelDRAW® 2019 delivers an exact result. 
 

“People coming from Adobe that took for granted that things just work properly”, have not really used A-dope.

Whatever.  But this problem is hard to miss when you start working with something more complex than a circle.

CropperCapture[5].png

CropperCapture[6].png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

something more complex than a circle

What the hell? ;) AFTER is better than BEFORE … :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Kuttyjoe said:

Whatever.  But this problem is hard to miss when you start working with something more complex than a circle.

Whatever. But you had to have tried to get that result...it seems to me. I couldn't get the same poor result you did using your image.

Capture_000183.png.1e9d684ad44cc78a2efd5c8a6bbab38d.png

That said, I've used many image trace in several applications, including VM. While VM produces the most conistent good results, it hasn't handled all images I needed traced as well as CD, AI, DP, and with the odd image, even XDP.

There is no one size fits all (though VM comes close). And I doubt Serif's eventual tracing will be any different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2019 at 12:03 PM, MattP said:

To be fair, you did deliberately choose to use a small object there (or a low document DPI) because you know that's what provokes the incorrect behaviour. The results only look so wrong here because of the size it has been performed at. This is currently being fixed, as I mentioned many times before.

The size of element shouldn't matter, so you should obviously know as a dev. A proper vector editor has to be precise. It's actually even worse if the result is barely noticeable so if big prod is launched and the result doesn't fit, looks funny etc. I mean you know all this right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LarrySunshine said:

The size of element shouldn't matter […] I mean you know all this right?

@LarrySunshine Apparently, people at Serif did not know that the function does not work well even beyond 10 millimeters. Neither the program itself nor the help warns of the inaccuracies, although this has been demanded. One can only hope that Serif does not have to deal with lawsuits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×

Important Information

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.