If you really want to know how creative XaraX can let you be, just take a look at the forums at TalkGraphics.com.
Look at the main Xara-X forum, and the Gallery - you will be amazed at the quality of some of the work posted on there.
XaraX lets you to express your creativity with a freedom that no other application allows. To go back to anything else now would seem outdated and clunky.
Submitted by michaelward on Tue, 04/10/2001 - 12:42.
"..Xara X can export to tif and pdf....formats that should pose no problem for RIPs. "
Assuming it exports CORRECTLY. As the review stated, it didn't always export to ai files correctly, so why would we assume it can export to PDF or TIF correctly? Just because a programm can export to PDF, that doesn't mean all of a sudden the file can be printed by any provider: bad PDF=problems.
Submitted by wayne shaw on Fri, 03/09/2001 - 10:21.
>No CMYK seps? No good. Uses RGB space only? It's a toy IMHO.
I'm always infuriated by people claiming they're experts only because they can do cmyk and separations and can joyfully ride a phototypesetter costing more than my house. Your eagerness to kill more and more trees and produce more and more junk mail in full color does not make you a real designer, sorry. Paper design is quite foreseeably doomed, at least the color separated variety (b/w book design is another matter).
As for illustration packages, they must be judged before all by how creative they allow you to be, and by that measure, Xara is surprisingly good. Ah, and if I need to prepare a version for print, I use other programs that can do separations just fine. Xara is a program for designers, for CREATIVE pros, not necessarily for service bureau technicians.
And besides, there are service bureaus who accept Xara files for print.
In theory PDF levels the field: ask 20 pre-press pros how they like a PDF from Word and I guarantee 90% will have horror stories to tell all night long. I already own distiller - been in the business 14 years.
No color management is, IMHO, a SERIOUS factor - I would hesitate to call any program an Illustrator/Freehand replacement/competitor if it cannot produce consistant color output or work with ICC profiles. No PMS? No good. No CMYK seps? No good. Uses RGB space only? It's a toy IMHO.
Submitted by wayne shaw on Tue, 03/06/2001 - 15:56.
...that can't be done with Ill, FH, Painter. PS... all of which can be output by any SB / commercial printer. Your creativity is useless if it can't be successfully output to industry standard devices.
Submitted by wayne shaw on Tue, 04/10/2001 - 14:07.
> creativity is useless if it can't be successfully output to industry standard devices.
What a silly proposition... creativity is the gift of God, while industry standard devices are, you know, just
industry standard devices. Nothing more. How can you compare?
If you have some great graphics, no matter in which format, you WILL be able to output it. Period. It's only a
technical problem and as such it is solvable by definition. It does not even have to be solved by you -
there's technical staff out there who will do the work if you can't do it yourself. If, however, all you have
is an "industry standard device" and not a bit of creativity in your head, you're lost. Nobody will help
you. It's as simple as that.
Adobe Illustrator is a perfect example of creativity being sacrificed to the "industry standard". They've been
trying hard to keep the program down to what can be saved as pure postscript. And postscript is pretty much
frozen since 1980s. As a result, up to recently you could not do even simple vector transparency in AI, which
is outright hilarious. It's industry standard all right, but what's its use besides that? I would say it's
more properly called the industry's lowest common denominator.
BTW I own both Xara and AI. I do all my work in Xara, I run AI only when I need to prepare some files done in
Xara for print. I think it's outrageous that the way it is, AI costs times more than Xara - it's the most
expensive file format converter that i know of, simply because of its reputation of "industry standard". Still
i think Xara+AI is a great package deal if you do some print work, otherwise pure Xara will be your bliss.
...what format does it reliably output in, that can be run through a RIP without it choking, spluttering & giving up? In other words is this really a pro package or a consumer package? If it's consumer, why are we reading about it on creativepro.com?
Submitted by wayne shaw on Tue, 02/27/2001 - 15:13.
I had no problem outputting from Xara locally, nor did I didn't have any
problems running Xara output through Acrobat Distiller or the resultant PDFs
through a PostScript RIP on my Epson 3000. However, for obvious reasons, I
couldn't test these files at a service bureau. PDF output levels the pro
playing field--you can turn out professional-looking stuff from Microsoft
Word that slides right through the typesetter's RIP if you use PDF output.
Sending PostScript ouput files directly to service bureaus is almost a thing
of the past. I haven't done it in two years. So if your concern is
compatibility with the service bureau, buy a copy of Acrobat Distiller and
prepare to be deilighted.
Because Xara has no color calibration, I would consider this a sermi-pro
package, that is, it's fine for just about anything short of precision-match
four-color work that is to be sent to a service bureau. However, my
standards are pretty high--I didn't consider CorelDraw a "Pro" package until
version 10.
As for consumer versus pro, the definition varies from person to person. I
know many sucessful graphic designers who have a limited budget and little
patience with Illustrator's learning curve. For them, Xara is an inexpensive
and easily mastered solution. We covered the product because it's an elegant
and cost-effective alternative to CorelDraw, Illustrator, and FreeHand and
we think people should know that Xara is on the market.
Just take a look...
If you really want to know how creative XaraX can let you be, just take a look at the forums at TalkGraphics.com.
Look at the main Xara-X forum, and the Gallery - you will be amazed at the quality of some of the work posted on there.
XaraX lets you to express your creativity with a freedom that no other application allows. To go back to anything else now would seem outdated and clunky.
Xara X does support CMYK, PMS, RGB
There seems to be a bit of confusion on the support that Xara X offers. It DOES have PMS support. It DOES support CMYK sep.
T
Also can export to pdf and tif
Another short note: Among many other formats, Xara X can export to tif and pdf....formats that should pose no problem for RIPs.
export
"..Xara X can export to tif and pdf....formats that should pose no problem for RIPs. "
Assuming it exports CORRECTLY. As the review stated, it didn't always export to ai files correctly, so why would we assume it can export to PDF or TIF correctly? Just because a programm can export to PDF, that doesn't mean all of a sudden the file can be printed by any provider: bad PDF=problems.
what does cmyk have to do with creativity?
>No CMYK seps? No good. Uses RGB space only? It's a toy IMHO.
I'm always infuriated by people claiming they're experts only because they can do cmyk and separations and can joyfully ride a phototypesetter costing more than my house. Your eagerness to kill more and more trees and produce more and more junk mail in full color does not make you a real designer, sorry. Paper design is quite foreseeably doomed, at least the color separated variety (b/w book design is another matter).
As for illustration packages, they must be judged before all by how creative they allow you to be, and by that measure, Xara is surprisingly good. Ah, and if I need to prepare a version for print, I use other programs that can do separations just fine. Xara is a program for designers, for CREATIVE pros, not necessarily for service bureau technicians.
And besides, there are service bureaus who accept Xara files for print.
again, IMHO
In theory PDF levels the field: ask 20 pre-press pros how they like a PDF from Word and I guarantee 90% will have horror stories to tell all night long. I already own distiller - been in the business 14 years.
No color management is, IMHO, a SERIOUS factor - I would hesitate to call any program an Illustrator/Freehand replacement/competitor if it cannot produce consistant color output or work with ICC profiles. No PMS? No good. No CMYK seps? No good. Uses RGB space only? It's a toy IMHO.
nothing...
...that can't be done with Ill, FH, Painter. PS... all of which can be output by any SB / commercial printer. Your creativity is useless if it can't be successfully output to industry standard devices.
on creativity, again
> creativity is useless if it can't be successfully output to industry standard devices.
What a silly proposition... creativity is the gift of God, while industry standard devices are, you know, just
industry standard devices. Nothing more. How can you compare?
If you have some great graphics, no matter in which format, you WILL be able to output it. Period. It's only a
technical problem and as such it is solvable by definition. It does not even have to be solved by you -
there's technical staff out there who will do the work if you can't do it yourself. If, however, all you have
is an "industry standard device" and not a bit of creativity in your head, you're lost. Nobody will help
you. It's as simple as that.
Adobe Illustrator is a perfect example of creativity being sacrificed to the "industry standard". They've been
trying hard to keep the program down to what can be saved as pure postscript. And postscript is pretty much
frozen since 1980s. As a result, up to recently you could not do even simple vector transparency in AI, which
is outright hilarious. It's industry standard all right, but what's its use besides that? I would say it's
more properly called the industry's lowest common denominator.
BTW I own both Xara and AI. I do all my work in Xara, I run AI only when I need to prepare some files done in
Xara for print. I think it's outrageous that the way it is, AI costs times more than Xara - it's the most
expensive file format converter that i know of, simply because of its reputation of "industry standard". Still
i think Xara+AI is a great package deal if you do some print work, otherwise pure Xara will be your bliss.
So...
...what format does it reliably output in, that can be run through a RIP without it choking, spluttering & giving up? In other words is this really a pro package or a consumer package? If it's consumer, why are we reading about it on creativepro.com?
Xara Output
A note from the author:
I had no problem outputting from Xara locally, nor did I didn't have any
problems running Xara output through Acrobat Distiller or the resultant PDFs
through a PostScript RIP on my Epson 3000. However, for obvious reasons, I
couldn't test these files at a service bureau. PDF output levels the pro
playing field--you can turn out professional-looking stuff from Microsoft
Word that slides right through the typesetter's RIP if you use PDF output.
Sending PostScript ouput files directly to service bureaus is almost a thing
of the past. I haven't done it in two years. So if your concern is
compatibility with the service bureau, buy a copy of Acrobat Distiller and
prepare to be deilighted.
Because Xara has no color calibration, I would consider this a sermi-pro
package, that is, it's fine for just about anything short of precision-match
four-color work that is to be sent to a service bureau. However, my
standards are pretty high--I didn't consider CorelDraw a "Pro" package until
version 10.
As for consumer versus pro, the definition varies from person to person. I
know many sucessful graphic designers who have a limited budget and little
patience with Illustrator's learning curve. For them, Xara is an inexpensive
and easily mastered solution. We covered the product because it's an elegant
and cost-effective alternative to CorelDraw, Illustrator, and FreeHand and
we think people should know that Xara is on the market.