After many years of service it died? What's my choices for a new computer. Well, new motherboard etc?
I'm thinking this bit of used cheap and cheerful from ebay.
AMD EPYC Supermicro H11SSL-i + 7551P 32cores 64threads 2.0 GHz motherboard+ CPUhttps://www.ebay.com.au/itm/134125357702What you think?
You know what I think of CorelDRAW and anything AMD.
Need to do more things than Corel Draw. Ignoring that and the AMD headspace...It's $700US for 32 cores 16 threads + motherboard. The negative in the clock speed of 2.2 GHz.$4,000+ for a new 32 core, 5 GHz max.
Sounds like a lot of bang for the buck.
I agree but it's 50/50 pot luck for Drsw performance.
It's odd as hell but my wife has an AMD laptop for email/web, shopping and general BS. It runs Draw just fine even though it's AMD and not robust. I can't figure it out.
OK then we agree this is an OK experiment. It lacks processor speed but has 8 way RAM.
Yes a bang for the buck but a 50/50 chance for Draw!
Have a lot at the impact of AI on DaVinci Resolve, some incredible masking at is just too easy. You just scribble over the thing to mask, usually a person and it uses the movement as part of the mask isolation. They had all their ducks in a row before going into this. Not having duck in a row on issues that have existed for too long as going to muck with implementing this. https://youtu.be/8p52x5zoeG0 There some great use cases for SketchUp where ChatGPT write Ruby code that is executed in the console. https://youtu.be/IPoFA-XyWrc
Something like that has all sort of possibilities, impossible to know... Perhaps a way to paint feathers using code, for example.
It was nothing 12 months ago. What has captured interest like this before?
At my age I wonder how much AI integration I'll see. As far as 2d static images I'm not real impressed. The noise reduction, sharpening tools have me waiting until the next upgrade. However the technology is in its infancy.
Nothing is ready for this. Not the software or the humans. It's a new interface pseudo code to code via AI is just the start. It's the new clip art as well.
Did you look at the examples in SketchUp? It's going big time in all things architecture.
Whole companies are forming to manage it.
It's incredibly useful as a sales tool and sales and marketing is what we do, or a big part of it.
My suggestion is this... we limb along with a curves function that is useless, even at a macro level, you can do what isn't in the function. And we give AI the ability to hit "auto curves". The conversation will go like this...Hal: Set the black point Corel!Draw: I can't do that Hal, the function has been missing for 20 years, the marketing department didn't think it was needed.Hal: OK Auto Curves the image Corel.
Draw: I can do that Hal but you are not going to like it.Hal: Open all the bitmaps in the image editor and I'll do it myself.Draw: Opening 55 imagesHal: WTF I said 55 images not 55 instances of photopain.
Draw: Don't talk to me like that I'm doing the best I can! (Goes off to cry in a corner. "Where's my Michael!")
Hal: Oh grow up, you have had 30+ years to get this right.
Point is that you can't interface to what isn't there.
If they can't manage to open a bitmaps within the same session of Photopaint, ie within their own applications then clearly there are issues with how bitmaps are managed deep within code.What's the thing I've been barking about got 20 years? Be compatible to the point that the user can open a bitmap in any capable editor. Getting that tech in place would have set Draw up for this.
The marketing department will be engaging in a reactionary process as per usual "we need something to write on the box that shows feature match to Adobe". That's always brought us the most half arsed solutions imaginable! The best of luck RAW converter, that was a wish granted that lacked relevance and defied comparison to the other professional tools in the market.
This is what I'd do to make AI possible...
1. learn from the past, don't degrade the core program Draw with half arsed crap,2. accept that Corel is behind in this, 3. fix the interface between Draw and bitmaps to allow a full range of professional editors to be used, that way existing AI products are immediately usable,4. deal with the issues of missing code in PP that should be part of interfaces and the macro system.
If you are to take advantage of AI for macro code then that code becomes limited by the programs' functions. It will need functions that should exist but don't and function that need to exist where a human was previously clicking something. Something like "locate the highlight and shadow points of this image and measure them". I doubt AI could write these sorts of macros for PP. As I keep telling you, PP is a major weak point.
On the other hand, the positioning and sizing stuff in Draw is highly macro capable. So you could expect at some stage to get a result from "using the selected object, vary the size between 10mm and 50mm at random and duplicate over the page with a color variation of xxx". Or something like "construct a cube using grid-lines that is isometric and 10mm apart". The work needs to go into strengthening Draw and PP to be more capable. Training an AI to write macro code well can only work if the programs have the required hooks and abilities.
With 2d static images only current AI features for resolution, sharpening and noise reduction would be viable with Photo-PAINT. Unfortunately my testing shows that my current tool set is just as good, not as automated but the end result works.
Corel already uses an AI upsampling in Draw and Photo-PAINT and it's very good.
If Corel wants to move to be more accepting of AI features they need to rethink their entire process. Start with where AI features are and will be in demand.
I'm seeing a great deal of YouTube hype for photography which is why I checked them out. However there is a strong undercurrent of non acceptance do to the end result. As you and I know the programming will grow past that in a year or two.
I told Corel this 25 years ago, make an integrated modular application. The user can buy the web package, the photography package, the entire package for manufacturing.
However their code is so intermingled it is just not possible.
Driving your decision using marketing and profit as a motive, clearly what has been occurring, then hiding stuff like bug reports... it's not really the way things are done in 2023. It's the sales on effect where to sell the company you need to justify the price based on existing code and potential market share.
The real value is held by long term staff that are committed to the outcome.
Modular and workflow focused.
Interestingly, the 2 products that I see a lot of activity on, youTube videos etc, are BlackMagic Resolve and SketchUp.
BlackMagic, Grant the owner gets out there and does the technical videos himself.
SketchUp, the programmers introduce the features they develop.
In both cases they have maximum development turned on at the programming level.
Perhaps 2d and publishing are just boring stuff now that isn't going to attract programmers or users? So far in this recent incarnation of Corel, all I see is profit seeking from the user base and not much else is noticeable. If they are going to make the user base bleed with this insane pricing model then they need to do a lot more of everything else to keep value in the proposition.
If there isn't investment in what matters then the open source products will race past Corel in development and Adobe will has such a complete tool set that they are impossible to catch.
If I was responsible for the purchase of Corel, I wouldn't be punishing the users with the subscription model as a first gesture of what the future will look like. I'd freeze the product to bug fixes and put the development effort to a new product that has the potential to relight the fire of interest.
As you say, modular and with a workflow focus that sees all other applications by anyone as a "best friend".
What Trimble (SketchUp) and Blackmagic (Resolve) has in common is they sell hardware. They were hardware businesses that became software developers.
That's what is necessary for Corel. Dupont Corel, Xerox Corel, Fuji Corel... They are the companies capable of getting market-share and value back into the product. Fuji likely has the most market spread from cameras to plate-makers and are known for the highest quality outcomes. It's just where we belong. Not with venture capitalists or superannuation companies. Selling Corel Graphics to Fuji with agency would be what I'd be doing as CEO. The other stuff they should keep and bleed the users. Fuji have sales, marketing and management, they would be buying developers, history, users and code. Clearly, marketing and management are costing too much ATM hence the out of order subscription model, which has "I'll pay it once to cover the year I move to a different product" all over it. I can't see the numbers of course but user activity in here is at an all time low.
This mob of owners need to prove they are going to take the users to some magical wonderland and get to it. Else the product will lose value year on year and the current state is the "high" point of relevance. In that case this mob should develop a strategic plan entitled "Flog it to Fuji".
Perhaps we need to send a petition to the head of Fuji, pledging our allegiance to the Samurai family, seeking integration back into the stream of graphics businesses. "Please save us before we become the renowned only as "the once tool favored by church newsletters".
You need to be a pretty die hard supporter of Draw not to jump ship and go with Adobe. For a start you are not going to have to defend the fact that you used Draw in the first place against "that's not industry standard". In fair comparison of the apps Corel is worth, at best $180AU a year. To keep this up, the next version would need to have mind blowing improvements, not a few things hacked on. I don't think that is going to happen. They will do the minimum to claim a new version, keep to the insane pricing and lose more market-share. It's the fool's battle that comes from seeing Corel as being a permanent 2nd place to Adobe and first at absolutely nothing. It's baggage being carried forward year on year by marketing. I hope you are enjoying this rave, we will see what we agree on and crystal ball ourselves into 10 years on.
Professionally, like in the pro market, no one is attempting to be in 2nd place to Adobe and charge X3 more for it and there are good reasons for this. And it is not where Draw belongs in any case. Draw is a unique and powerful bit of software. The correct path forward is to make Draw central to a work-flow or at least the most integrated application within that work-flow. And attention needs to be focused within multiple development cycles to bring that about.
How about fix the damned curves and show us some movement towards better workflow management. Why are we 20+ versions into Draw and don't have a tool that allow you to see the content of the Draw file as objects to be edited in any program? Present the Draw file as objects, text, text, thumbnail etc with descriptions. That would enable edits without opening the Draw file. Somewhat dangerous but with appropriate warning, highly useful. It there something particularly horrible about the way Draw creates a file that it can't be displayed as XML objects?
There's so much scope to go down a path that isn't 2nd to Adobe but first unto itself. So clearly not the right way to go as while Corel have been busy being 2nd to Adobe they have fallen behind in most of the specialist streams. And focused on being 2nd they developed this unnecessary culture of secrecy that gets in the way of doing anything. Our bugs, plans, personal... it's a secret! The opportunity is a workflow that includes Draw. PhotoPain is really of little relevance. It's an emergency editor and good with text. It will never make it as a must have in multiple workflows.
Draw is different. It is, among other things, a visual database for objects. And it has that hidden feature of being able to attach data to those objects.
Here a potential example of such a workflow...
Put all incoming graphics, photos, renders and drawing into Draw pages. The client wants to see all the bits for the job and we need to check them on the printer.Open the Object file for that Draw. See any warning about file issues. Easily edit the object data in one place and with some assistance like mini templates or copy existing from... get some data into this empty hole that has the potential to be so useful.
So now I have access to the objects without entering Draw, what else can I do? Update text from a URL, update an image for a URL, it's about time we could embed a video into a PDF and have it update.
They have been buggering around for 30 years and can't see the wood for the trees. It's not about buying some junk software for a quick profit but doing a far better job at exploring the opportunities that exist because some smart people added some stuff that had little purpose at the time but could now be mined for gold.
As a manufacturing person there are many capabilities in graphic products, CorelDRAW included that need to remain static or move forward slowly because the evolution of the deployment of manufacturing equipment is slower than software development.
However if the product is coded properly that shouldn't preclude new features however with Draw, in my opinion it's another story.
A very simple example is the 30,000 x 30,000 pixel limit in images, this is a nothing thing, until you hit it. This limit requires me to have another application, it's peanuts in terms of cost but it's a pain in the butt. No Corel recognized this on offered free PhotoZomm free for a couple of cycles. However when they supposedly recorded during 2019 they failed to remove the issue in their products. No continuity in development.
Another simple example was web graphics, like it or not graphics for web use is a standard today. It took 2 cycles to make it work, it's still a bit convoluted and the process was demonstrated incorrectly on their web site.
Your concept of inter application compatibility is the future but I'm not sure of the value of the base code in the product. When color management was moved from application based to document based it was a Herculean effort. It broke things that (while in the end it made sense) it was unbelievable how complex the change was and how long it took.
I may be wrong but I believe Corel is slowly trying to replace the code to make it more viable. Yes they recorded in 2019 but I believe all they did was make coding their existing outdated coded easier for 3 platforms.