Let me begin by saying, if you are a fan of X3, by all means treat this as a rant and pay it no heed. Hey, if it works for you -- enjoy. I am a professional graphic artist. I have been working in advertising/marketing as a designer for about 25 years. Currently I am the Chief Creative Director at such a firm. I predate computer design. I started when things were still done by hand on drawing boards and light tables. The first graphic design software I ever used was CorelDraw! It's been so long ago, that I don't even remember the version number, but I think it was either 2 or 3.
As computer graphics caught on and professional standards began to be established, certain names such as Adobe Illustrator and Quark Xpress took the lead among printers and designers. Over the years I have remained a staunch Corel user. I have consistantly held that it is superior to Illustrator in many ways. However, in more recent years, it has become harder and harder for me to defend this position. CorelDRAW really hit its stride around version 7. Either 7 or 8 is by far the best version of CorelDRAW ever marketed. After that the software designers started changing things that did not need changing, tweaking things that needed no tweaks, and fixing stuff that was not broken -- all the while ignoring some of the more egregious design flaws and technical issues.
To this day, I still use version 8 whenever I can get away with it. The problem with 8 is that it has some fatal bugs when running on XP or Vista. Because of these flaws, I have been forced to purchase upgrades in the hopes that the problems had been corrected. Trouble is, the newer versions screwed with the interface, tools, shortcuts, everything! I am now using X3 on my current workstation and it just flat out SUX! I have never used a less intuitive, more infuriating piece of software in my entire life! The only reason I am using it at all is because my version 8 is unstable on this particular XP platform.
I am just thankful that by some miracle 8 works without a hitch on my laptap, also running XP. Sadly, I must also get some work done on the studio workstations where I am forced to endure X3. The horror of it all is that I have long considered myself to be an enlightened opponent of the pathetic herd of Illustrator designers who had no clue about the wonders of CorelDRAW! Now, because of X3, I have actually been driven to using Illustrator more and more, just to maintain my sanity. I'm actually beginning to... (gag).. appreciate... (cringe)... Illustrator. It is a sad day for me because I think my days as an avid CorelDRAW designer may finally be coming to an end.
Sorry to be a hater... but this needed to be said. If you don't agree, I'm happy for you. But for me, 13 just blows.
The interface has not changed much for a very long time. What are you trying to do that you are having issues with?
Look, I'm really not trying to start a debate here about the virtues of X3 or lack thereof. I've got almost 15 years of user experience with CorelDRAW -- have designed award-winning pieces with it. I can't vouch for versions 11 and 12, because I upgraded from 10 to 13. But for me, X3 has changed some of the most intuitive and basic functions of the software, such as the way the color-tool works; the way certain tools and palettes function and interact; the ability to order your workspace; some of the keyboard shortcuts. Version 8 was so much cleaner and far less clumsy. Frankly, the latest CorelDRAW makes Illustrator look rather appealing and easy-to-learn by comparison.
Hey Rolf,
Can we see a sample of your work? Award winning would be great... Or maybe a comparison of what you've pulled off Illy vs. DRAW. I'm not doubting your graphic design credibility, it would just be interesting to see. I could never go back to using version 8 after using 12 and X3. I know that in latter versions of DRAW, some objects would have a hard time refreshing when working anything higher than a thousand layers/shapes. How do you get around that?
Hey igorstshirts:
Almost all of my work is synergy of CorelDRAW, Photoshop, InDesign and Illustrator (sometimes other software), so in the finished product it is often difficult to discern which was used for which bits. When I have minute, I'll see about uploading a few samples. Thanks for your interest.
Rolf
igorstshirts said: Hey Rolf, Can we see a sample of your work? Award winning would be great... Or maybe a comparison of what you've pulled off Illy vs. DRAW. I'm not doubting your graphic design credibility, it would just be interesting to see. I could never go back to using version 8 after using 12 and X3. I know that in latter versions of DRAW, some objects would have a hard time refreshing when working anything higher than a thousand layers/shapes. How do you get around that?
Hi Rolf !
Dear as per my thinking, when a software company upgrades their product, they have follow atleast one objective i.e. 'user friendly' and they try to serve more-n-more about this feature. I am also using corel draw since ver 1.0 and now x-3, and no doubt ver 5 is first exiting ver. and 8/9 is also a nice work effecnt ver. But the corel X-3 is excellent, it as like smooth as mature grain liqure. Yes it's my feeling. But all about your problem, some command are change, options are change, so you can manage it very easily like sortcuts, menus and all about, you can manage your interface also. so i think it is not a matter to worry. if you are very use to for ver 8 than x-3 takes maximum 1 week (2 or 3 hours daily) to make you fluent for it. So stay with x-3, feel it's freedom, and take advantage of it's features and keep ahead.
In future you have any problem, we all will be here to support you!
thanks
This is a great example of resistance to change. We all suffer from it. But I bet you could use the features in X3 to make it LOOK and ACT like version 8 if you wanted to! I have sat in user sessions where we all try to decide what we collectively want in future versions and there is never agreement, it is natural.
It is true that Illustrator has copied many innovative CDR features but they are still a long way behind.
In terms of performance by the way, if you stick a ready boost flash drive in a Vista machine, X3 flies! (just turn off all the Vista aero rubbish!) It is also incredibly stable compared to previous versions.
Good day everyone!I've been looking through the forums here lately and have been an avid Draw user since ver 2. I remember ver 2 didn't even use the typical fonts of the computer. It had it's own outlines. It's interesting to think back to how it's improved.
Draw sure has gotten better. I really like what I've been able to do over the years with Draw and I think it has the best tool set. With that said, I have to say the single biggest issue I see is Speed! I'm not to worried about them changing the tool set from version to version. Corel has apps coming and going so fast from the Draw suite it's hard to keep up. But, I too have been drawn to the dark side out of necessity. Draw is slower than $%@, and I have a great system! It's screen refreshes often sux. For example, using a simple Lens over a bitmap. Many times I've had to use Illustrator or various other graphic apps because I just can't be productive with Draw. I recently tested this by a few simple posters and a simple two-sided brochure. Time is Money in my business. I know the argument about how much you pay for Draw and how much you pay for Illustrator etc. I used it many times when defending Draw. It doesn't hold water however. I loose money when I use Draw do to speed. I just can't afford to use Draw.
Now, that may make me appear bitter, but I'm not. Corel has a great product with a great feature set. Now they just need to focus on fine tuning the product. Make it FASTER!
Red
You have to realize that there are two things at work: first, the way CorelDRAW prints directly to a Digital Platemaker (which is perfect on every score) and second, is the way the .pdf is made. Whenever another program, don't care which one it is, if it is not made by Adobe, there is not going to be every feature of the competitor's software supported by the .pdf. If Adobe has the feature, it will translate correctly when the .pdf is made. If it doesn't, it will become a bitmap such as conical both in blends and transparency, Adobe doesn't have that feature, and it cannot understand it. It is best to flatten your artwork, that way there are not going to be misinterpretations of how it should render. You do not need to flatten your vectors unless they contain things which are not going to be interpreted correctly.
When making a .pdf before I rasterize anything, I make a backup copy of all my work I am exporting and paste my original art on a back page. Then I select all text, move it to the top, cut the text, paste it to a rear page of the same document and group it. I select any vectors that I want to preserve (if vectors include any gradients I do not cut them, but I make sure any of the vectors left to be made into bitmap are like 500 steps instead of 256), group them, cut them and paste them behind the text group. Now what's left should be anything which will be better off printed as a bitmap. So I convert this to a 300dpi bitmap, usually leave it as RGB as changing it to CMYK, will be done making the .pdf,, then I cut the vectors and text and paste them back on top. I have a goof-proof .pdf. Now when I make the .pdf I convert all text to curves, the vectors I don't have to worry about, for print I don't have to worry about links, I tell it how much bleed to include, and I use the I.C.C. profie, CMYK, I don't have to worry about banding in my gradients, they are already converted to a bitmap. Nevertheless, I also have Adobe Acrobat Professional. As I do prepress on other people's work, I do so on my own work too so I don't get funky color, I don't get back things which don't print right.
The best one to analyze your document when it comes to making a .pdf is the author. When I prepress other people's work, I do not change their work from RGB to CMYK for them, even though I could probably do so. I know ahead of time which colors are going to give me problems and design without those color in my palette. I know the place we send files out to because we don't print CMYK on the premises very often, will check my work in the same manner. I don't have issues of my .pdfs being rejected.
Last week my boss got mad at me because I rejected a job for offset printing. The file had 96 dpi RGB images, the text was not embedded so bitmap substitution would occur, it had like 45 error messages, and no I am not exaggerating. Rejected jobs from some service bureaus come with a penalty fine. Who needs it? My boss told me another printer accepted the job. I told her, it is not worth my while to put my job in jeopardy when the customer will not be happy with the finished output. I recommended that the customer send me the Word file and I'd try to make my own .pdf from it. That way whatever I could do to it, we'd charge extra for that. The customer wouldn't wait, But I am not going to be called on the carpet doing what I know won't work. It would end up as my fault. NO WAY! When printers have had to eat too many jobs, they don't accept what isn't a sure deal. If you are hungry and take a reject job, it is going to bite you in the butt. Hungry is one thing, starving is worse.
DRAW isn't a dumbed down program, there is a learning curve, but it is worth it. Once you get around as Os said to where you are using systematically user scripts, it really does speed the work up. When we have only a few jobs in house, as in slow for a bit, I find new scripts I haven't used yet and install them and practice with them or I learn keyboard shortcuts which I haven't implemented before. I get my jobs done fast. I am doing what my boss had two people doing before and I pick up the jobs her daughter isn't getting done due to being Chatty Cathy. And even at that, I have never missed a deadline. And this isn't just knowing these scripts and keyboard shortcuts for DRAW it is also using what I can learn in PhotoPaint to my best advantage. DRAW is as good as the graphic artist using it.