Inkscape 1.0 Beta 1
inkscape.org
inkscape.org
* Learn how to use it once
* Keep using it for a life time
* Not completely changing interface every major release
* Keeps getting better (some commercial software seems to bloat beyond repair)* Available on many platforms
* All of the above for FREE
Now I dont need to do vector graphics every week, not even every month. But for those couple of times a year it's good to have a tool in your box. Inkscape is there for me, no need to buy a (subscription) license. No need to boot into another OS. No need to relearn it. More than complete feature set for my needs.
Congrats to the team!
Being able rapidly and precisely build an item in 2D CAD, then do the graphic design component on Inkscape is amazing.
More recently I’m moving to do the graphic design part in Affinity Designer due to a couple of irritating bugs in Inkscape... but it doesn’t have export to DXF... But Inkscape is what taught me vector graphics, and I’m still using it as my default vector graphics app in my day job as a laser cutter operator-extraordinaire.
Inkscape is pretty extensible as well. It's not too hard to write plugins for it (in Python). I've did it myself, and love how a handful of people seem to find it of use¹.
1: https://inkscape.org/~jdhoek/%E2%98%85isometric-projection-c...
Adobe's video editing suite of latest versions is actually well known to be buggy in terms of regular crashes and hangings. It took me many months to realize that the problem was not inferior CPU or drivers or other software or virtual machines or little memory, but that their software is straight up buggy. That's a company that charges hundreds of dollars for their suite and also a company that had a perfectly good software before and have also basically owned the market before. Now it is buggy and crashes. What other software even crashes these days? I have to think back several years when I remember office suites crashing or other complicated software. It is really a disgrace on Adobe's part. This is not a single user experience either, there is a general consensus now among video editors that this is the case with Premiere and After Effects.
The crashes I had were due to 3rd party plugins. I am slowly replacing AE with Blender now, but for certain stuff I still like it.
Also as an additional thought, is it really that good that they make such a big software that can be crashed because of a plugin? They know there will be a plugin Zoo out there, they know the plugins sometimes have to use GPU on their own, which brings many troubles with drivers etc, - they still can't manage to just isolate in in their own processes? Plugins are used all the time, it's an industry of itself. Company of the size of Adobe can't foresee that some plugins will be unstable and they need to take care of it? The dreaded chrome can isolate websites in their own processes, Adobe can't do the same with a mere plugin??
Sometimes this kind of thing turns out to be memory with a problem at some address. :/
Now, it's possible that this was technically the other programs' fault, but on the other hand you can't blame them for not testing their video playback with all different filters installed. Why does Adobe add these filters globally with a high ranking if they're not drop-in-replacements for the 'normal' ones?
I am a long-time user of Inkscape (since 2007 at least), and it is sad how poor it looks now next to Sketch/Figma. Their vector tools are better, their layer tools are better. It's a million little things that make drawing a similar shape in Sketch 50x faster than in Inkscape.
The way Blender does it is near optimum in my eyes: not shying away from a major overhaul once in 5 years and aleays making sure it is really making things better.
Blender is one of the most successful projects out there, and assuming other projects could just 'do what Blender does' is ignoring some of the fundamental differences between Blender and smaller projects.
The closest other projects have to this are vague forum/bugtracker posts that more often than not give little (or misleading) idea to the programmers what is needed.
Having an artist sit next to you and giving them the mouse and keyboard to show you directly in the software what they are doing, how they are doing it and what they want to do is much faster and gives you way more information and you can bounce forth and back alternative ideas, perhaps make minor quick modifications on the spot as a prototype or lead to an idea, etc.
(the next best thing is you being both the artist and the programmer - which is how many of FLOSS art oriented programs are made really - but there is a great danger of you getting used to your software's drawbacks and being unwilling to address them)
Programs like GIMP (or even entire OS UIs like Gnome and KDE) often shy away from 'aping' respectively Photoshop or Apple. But those proprietary vendors have spent millions of dollars on focus groups and man hours to optimize their UI and UX. Benefiting from that seems like a no-brainer, but alas.. NIH and proprietary hate reigns supreme.
And really personally i find Photoshop UI atrocious and if i had to chose between that and GIMP's i'd pick GIMP any time (though overall i actually prefer PSP7's UI which IMO is the best of any of those).
Last time I checked ps still defaulted to require control-shift-something-non-standard for redo, unless you customize the key mappings. there are much more standard bindings and they even admit the only reason for this default is legacy users .
Having said that i think Photoshop's non-standard Undo/Redo use is that it uses Ctrl+Z as a "last step undo" in that Ctrl+Z flips between undo/redo so that if you do some operation, press Ctrl+Z, it undoes that operation and if you press Ctrl+Z again it redoes it (and Ctrl+Z again undoes it, etc). This is because Photoshop at the past, like many other programs, had only a single step undo where Ctrl+Z would undo the last operation - including undo itself (so if you painted, undo would undo the paint and the next undo would undo the undo itself thus restoring the paint). Many artists used to this as a way to quickly compare the result of operations like crops, filters, etc so it became part of their workflow and was mentioned in articles, books, etc so Adobe most likely decided to use a different key when they introduced an undo stack. That was at a time that many other programs still had a single undo step so using a different key wouldn't really be non-standard. But again that became part of workflow, documented, etc so both remained as they were to avoid alienating users.
Though TBH that is based on my very brief use of Photoshop many many years ago, things may have changed since then.
Note that some simple programs still work like that, e.g. Notepad only has a single level of undo and pressing undo again undoes the undo itself.
To be more precise, after looking again the issue was, there was no way to use control-z for multiple undo without remapping the keyboard. Looks like they finally fixed it:
In older versions of Photoshop, you could only press Ctrl + Z once to undo your most recent change. If you wanted to undo more changes, you had to change the shortcut keys to Ctrl + Alt + Z.
from version 20.0.0 (CC 2019) onwards, we can just press Ctrl + Z which makes things a little easier
There was a blog post by a product engineering at adobe that lamented they had to stick with it for so long for legacy reasons. This supports your point that many parts of the UX would likely be much different given a modern clean sheet design.
Not enhancing UX because some users might have already gotten used to the current setup is rather shortsighted (relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1172/ ). What about all the people you don't get on board because the UX is terrible compared to all the other tools?
My experience is that when software reaches a certain level of maturity, major 'improvements' to the UI are driven very much not by the users.
> Not enhancing UX because some users might have already gotten used to the current setup is rather shortsighted
Perhaps. It depends proportion of 'some'. 1%..99%, it depends doesn't it. You're pushing for change with no quantification of the value of it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, so first find out if it's broke.
They seem to keep pushing it as a professional alternative to Adobe Illustrator, but no matter how many individual features they add, it just doesn't seem designed for that kind of user.
Every time I'm pleased at how easy Inkscape makes it. And it's completely smooth on both Linux and Windows.
Learning to use updates to a UI is relatively cheap. Having a bunch of tools that are outdated is expensive.
Inkscape is great for what it is, but it could definitely use a well thought out interface refresh.
Yeah, right. Like Xara XL
I downloaded the beta pessimistically thinking that they still wouldn't have native OSX Menu support (I've been using the non-updated 0.91+devel+osmenu fork/branch forever), but was pleasantly surprised to see full OSX integration in this beta. Great job guys!
While on Affinity, I can have hundred layers without noticeable performance issues.
Perhaps it's not the Layers but the effects? Blur in particular is pretty slow. Have you tried reducing the displayed filter quality? This doesn't effect the image itself, only the display in Inkscape. It's in the render tab in Inkscape preferences.
At View -> Display Mode you can also toggle between full display, display without filters and only outlines. If Inkscape is significantly faster without displayed filters, setting down the display quality will definitely help.
The more curves I have, the more sluggish it becomes.
There's no reason blur, in particular, must necessarily be slow. Everybody (and their phone) has a GPU that's more than fast enough to do that in real-time. I wonder if the (cross-platform) interfaces that Inkscape are using on macOS aren't hardware accelerated. Or if it's using some syscall which is cheap on some platforms and expensive on others.
I haven't done any testing but I agree that Inkscape feels much slower than Affinity Designer.
[1]: https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/designer/full-feature-list/ [2]: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/18079-what...
I would say Inkscape is even less robust than Gimp.
We are overall very pleased with it.
We were eagerly waiting for 1.0 to have a HiDPI support and native Mac application. They both are there besides a lot of other features.
Kudos to team to keep it alive and continuously improve it. Even though Adobe XD,sketch and figma are preferred tools for UI and UX design, we build our assets using inkscape. We got this inspiration from Taiga [3] project which has an open source design repository in svg and a completed single page app using angularjs based on those designs. It gave our team confidence we can do it.
The added advantage is the artwork developed using inkscape can directly be used as svg images in website and single page app and are responsive by default.
Once again thanks to inkscape team to keep it alive and improve continuously.
We had a lot of success cleaning Inkscape's svg output.
See here for solutions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20680559
I'm pretty happy with svgcleaner (https://github.com/RazrFalcon/svgcleaner)
For those wondering why this is significant, this means that it will run as a native application on macOS. Really neat!
Started using Inkscape in 2007 to illustrate a math paper, and been using it ever since whenever I needed to TeX something up.
That reminds me of this series of posts I read a while back:
• https://castel.dev/post/lecture-notes-1/
• https://castel.dev/post/lecture-notes-2/
• https://castel.dev/post/lecture-notes-3/
> I only recently came across TikZ which is an even more epic way to TeX up fancy diagrams (you "program" them). Still use inkscape for most stuff though.
Check out link 2 in particular there.
Now I'm no longer using TeX daily and kind of regret boxing myself in.
I find that I'm either working with teams that are 100% "TeX all the way" or 0% "please no."
For tidy circuit diagrams the CircuitSymbols plugin [2] produces exquisite results by hooking into Latex's circuitTikz package and dumping the rendered result on the canvas. Typically I generate a bunch of circuit promitives and then connect them afterwards using snaps and the line tool.
[1] https://inkscape.org/~seebk/%E2%98%85latextext-render-latex-...
[2] https://inkscape.org/pt-br/~fsmMLK/%E2%98%85circuitsymbols
edit: wording
Reason I'm asking is because there are links between the projects and OCAL has been offline since April [1].
OCAL doesn't seem to be coming back, their official line is they are handling a DDoS ... if it's no longer included I'd conclude that OCAL probably expired.
There was a death, of an associated dev, I believe.
1 - https://alicious.com/openclipart-ddos-offline/ my blog post on the issue.
It's also sad to see that Pixabay has basically copied all assets from OpenClipart and republished them under a more restrictive license rather than try to cooperate and support them.
It's extremely bad public relations at best.
Next up will be GIMP 3 as that will mean I no longer need GTK2 a dependency of unmaintained PyGTK.
PyGTK also depends on python2-cairo and python2-gobject2 so I will finally be rid of Python 2 once and for all.
Inkscape is another great example of why we should try to support open source if we can.
I know it's just a surface thing, and there's a lot of great functionality there. But it's still not exactly a sight that helps inspire you to create beautiful content using it.
Well let's remember that there was HEAVY criticism of Blender's UI up until the 2.5/2.6 releases, with some people even criticizing it now that 2.8 is released. There was an extreme amount of work done since 2.5 to clean up the UI.
It also has a lot more functionality than Inkscape, and so I think there is incentive as more people start using it to make sure that all those functions are filed away neatly and accessible without cluttering the interface too much.
Also, just going on users subscribed to their respective subreddits, Inkscape has around 6000 and Blender 151,000. So the size of the user base might have a direct impact.
Personally I don't find the Inkscape UI to be all that bad, although I agree it could do with some tightening up. I still prefer to use Adobe Illustrator if I have it to hand, but Inkscape will always work in a pinch.
Being able to use it to create SVG that can be directly imported into Blender as curves is something I've used it a lot for, for that kind of task they complement each other very well.
I hate programs that re-invent toolbars and menus just to look "good" on the surface.
My main problem, as a non-expert user, is that the different "groups" on the toolbars are not obvious to me, and so I don't understand all of the icons. They should have had a couple of more labels in there, or somethime.
(I have spent quite a long time using both and appreciate each's merits)
Oh finally! Haven't used it for the last two years simply because the interface was too tiny on my laptop.
Like the GP I've hardly been using Inkscape recently as it's such a pain with the small icons.
Here's my all-time favorite thing to do... transform font types to paths inside svgs (so one doesn't need to hold that font asset in CDN, ...) :
inkscape -T -A tmp-hack.pdf orig-w-custom-fonts.svg
inkscape -l final.svg tmp-hack.pdf
> On supported hardware (trackpad, touchpad, multi-touch screen), the canvas can be zoomed with the two-finger pinch gesture.
Thank god! As a macOS user, this is really one of my pet peeves because I'm so used to pinch-to-zoom that I almost forget it exists until I use a program that doesn't support it.
To draw lines with arrows, one needs to draw a line then select the arrow style, where as a the natural flow would be to set the style before drawing the line. Imagine if you have 20 lines of the same style, it is painful to draw 20 standard lines and then go back to change each of their appearance individually. It would be better if one could define a style of line, then create lines of that style as many number of times as required.
Having such stylesheets will for example change the width of all lines of the given style easily later.
Do they have "flatten-layers" and export as a single file (similar to Illustrator) functionality yet?
I checked the release notes, but could not find anything around it.
This can sometimes be an issue, in the way the image is rendered especially by different browsers. You end up with some unintended image output than you developed in the tool because of the interaction between different layers and opacities. Even a .png export did not help in one instance.
EDIT: Calligraphy is available but only hand-drawn. What I meant is calligraphy applied to a path, and the ability to transform the resulting stroke back into a path. These are powerful operations that are available in commercial offerings but not yet in inkscape, afaik.
I've tried to make Inkscape work, after ending my Adobe subscription. Conclusion - Inkscape is not worth it.
Just pony up $50 for Affinity Designer. Great app. Facilitates tremendous productivity
I just wish that Krita had the same text editing capabilities as Inkscape.
Pressure sensitive pencil for the PowerStroke Live Path Effect (LPE) "if a pressure sensitive device is available"!
I'm on a fairly powerful 5K iMac with High Sierra...
The next version (to be released in 2-3 weeks) is going to introduce full support for filters and color swatches. In the upcoming 12 months I expect to reach full feature parity with Inkscape.
Then I went ahead and tried it out... mind blown. It's that good. Feels like a native app in it's UI quality and speed. And $9/month is a very good price point, especially for those that regularly create vector art.
I'm amazed at the quality of your app. It'll be especially incredible once you're at Inkscape parity. How large is the team you got working full time?
BTW, the widget toolkit used by Boxy SVG is open sourced and can be used by other projects. You can try it out on https://xel-toolkit.org. In near future I'm planning to improve it by adding Windows 10 theme and full support for color schemes and dark mode.
Everyone on earth wants to turn a sale into a recurring revenue stream for a reason. Trivial individual costs add up substantially over time.
i clicked on the link of your site, and the first box i saw said "9$/month". that's enough to click away (for me).
only after i did some more clicking and followed an external(!) link to the store it was obvious you can do a one-time purchase.
in a normal situation i would never have gotten to that point and would have clicked away immediately after seeing 9/month for a new product that still has to prove itself and doesn't have a big name behind it.
I was trying this out on my phone and although I had to switch to landscape to make the UI fit, it was buttery smooth!
I was really impressed with the sheer amount of features included, many of which I have never seen implemented in any other web based editor.
I'm not sure why you want new developers to donate to when the existing ones clearly didn't reach their goals yet.
Tracing could be easily implemented using third party libraries [2]. Custom extensions would be initially limited to the "Generators" panel. I haven't thought about the live path effects yet.
The hardest part remaining is full support for filters, but I have this feature mostly sorted out in the dev branch and the UI is going to be much nicer than in Inkscape [3][4].
[1] https://i.imgur.com/e08OW5x.png
[2] https://boxy-svg.com/ideas/5/vectorize-generator
Inkscape 1.0 adds what’s basically a more powerful version of that, a pressure-sensitive pencil, implemented with the powerstroke live path effect—more powerful, I say, because it’s editable, because it’s not immediately flattening it to what SVG can represent, but is also keeping its own editor information in namespaced attributes. That’s how you can add things like that and mesh gradients before SVG supports the concept.
I’m still intensely sceptical of your claim of full feature parity with Inkscape in a year, but I’ll believe parity for >95% of users and use cases.
My biggest problem with your app at the moment looks to be that path editing is painful compared with Inkscape. I like to show the outline of the path, and its keyboard and mouse operation also feels just all-round superior at present, and I don’t think that that’s just my greater familiarity with Inkscape showing through.
I’d also like more text labels and fewer icons. Iconless labels have no place on something like your filters panel; text labels are objectively superior. I’d say similar for the Defs panel and other such panels.
I wish you joy!
There should be an outline shown when you hover a path with the "Edit" tool [1], though it's a bit sloppy and needs more optimization. Most path-related commands are exposed by the "Shape" panel. To convert a node between a smooth and an edge type you must double-click it. The ability to box-transform selected nodes and to move them with arrow keys is missing but should be added soon.
My main problem with text labels is that they take a lot of horizontal space. Text labels could be shown only when the panel is wide enough to fit them, or when user hovers the icon (like it's done in Autodesk Graphic).
Not everything is possible this way; mesh gradients can’t be emulated in vectors, for example—though you could effectively implement a canvas-backed renderer for it to polyfill it; but a lot of functionality can be implemented without upstream support.
This is typically code for "doesn't respect my OS theme." I didn't like skinz in the past and that hasn't changed over the years, though the name has.
Good luck on an otherwise cool app however.