> The fact that most people don't currently use blender to make money is a bit
> troubling... mainly because hobbies often fall by the wayside for more
> important things in life. It means Blender may lose a substantial portion of
> our users over time if we don't push to make Blender 3D ubiquitous with 3D
> graphics in the industry. It's come a long way towards doing that, and I
> think these figures show it.

It's more complicated than that. You can't push Blender to studios
that have tons of custom scripts and plugins for Maya, After Effects
etc. No support for proprietary file formats can fix that. It's a
workflow thing. It's a bit similar with InDesign and Photoshop users
too.

It's true, but you could still work as a freelancer with a studio for modeling if you support their in-house formats.

It also makes it easier for people to transition if there is a way to get everything to work together.

> Sure, but it doesn't make them any less FOSS to support interchange formats
> in my opinion. It makes it more likely that Blender will become a viable
> option for an increasing number of VFX professionals.

I'm unsure how you arrived from FOSS morals (in your own words) to
interchange formats, but OK :)

Sorry, it's vaguely what the argument Gez and I are having is about.

Really, it's all gotten a bit tedious, and I'd be surprised if anyone is benefiting from that part of the discussion at this point in time anyway.

>> Inkscape opens both .AI and .CDR. What other industry-leading apps do you
>> know?
>>
>
> Yea, and it's a horrible mess. lol
> It also does not write AI files back out, which packaging companies are
> notorious for requiring.

Maybe I've hanged around on #ardour too long, but when Paul Davis says
"that's bullshit. there's always one more thing. every crowd has their
own "one thing"", I tend to completely agree.

Currently the only thing that allows us to have our open-source way in print-industry is the print Industry is the fact that Adobe decided to make their PDF an open format. If not, you would have some people still saying it's not needed, because you have TIFF, but TIFF doesn't support vector graphics... oh but you don't need that, really either... right? Everyone may have one more feature, everyone also has one more excuse why the feature isn't important, because it's not important to them personally.

I've been a huge proponent for legacy data support in free software
for a long time and personally contributed to some of the relevant
efforts, but with time I revised by attitude towards that. The thing
is, you don't change the industry by running after major players and
doing "one more thing" all the time. You focus on making a bloody
amazing product instead (see another reply with reference to Sketch).

It's not really what the conversation is about. It's not about doing "one more thing" it's about supporting something that most of the graphics industry uses. This is not a feature issue, it's a format issue. If you think differently, that's fine. You can write off what I think as important as "one more feature" too.

It changes nothing, because when a client sends me an ai file, in most cases I have no choice but to use Illustrator to get the job done, or spend hours (or days) rebuilding it in Inkscape.

There are lots of people who are okay with it not supporting illustrator files. Maybe Inkscape is for them, exclusively. Maybe that's where it is going. In that case, I really hope we win! lol. Because I hate having to load a Windows VM just to use Illustrator to make minor changes to an AI file. I'd much much rather do that with Inkscape.

Look at the thing with Visio. It took years to get this sorted out for
just reading, and crowds who were unhappy that free software doesn't
support VSD at all are now unhappy about quirks in the VSD support.

That's.. actually the same issue. lol

A poor implementation may be no better than no implementation...

so what? It's kinda how AI reading is in Inkscape right now. Sometimes it's passable. Usually it's not.

It's important that it is done anyway, but it can't and shouldn't be
the primary focus. You are not building a VSD reader, you are building
a vector graphics illustration package :)

Why is one feature request tantamount to "building an AI writer"? :P

That's like saying the new Ruler added to Inkscape transforms it into a program made to measure the space between lines.

Same with AI: you are not
building an AI writer (which should be a low-hanging fruit anyway).

It's a major obstacle. I've tried to get other designers on board with using Inkscape as an AI replacement for vector editing, but all their package designs, magazine adverts, etc. are in AI format, and the answer has been a universal "we'll pass", for obvious reasons. Maybe these people aren't the target group for Inkscape?

There's often a baseline. For vector graphics, that is PDF, PS, and
EPS. Support it well and fix the rest by social means: actually talk
to printing companies about their need to absolutely take everything
in either .AI or .CDR. Not neccessarily _educate_, but _talk_.

Time and time again I do. The problem is, the people you talk to haven't a clue about any of it. Most of them couldn't tell you the difference between raster and vector graphics in the first place. All they know is it doesn't load up like everything else does, so you must have done it wrong. You're expecting a level of technical prowess that just isn't there, unfortunately.

> If a client sends you a psd, scolding them for not using an open format is
> not going to convince anyone.

Do you know about GIMP# much? When Maurits started working on support
for Photoshop actions, he had to implement every Photoshop filter that
works differently from its GIMP counterpart and write a few missing
filters. That got him about 50% coverage AFAIK. This is the kind of
work you have to do when you aim to support other software's project
data. It will never be perfect.

Not requesting/expecting something perfect. I would personally donate to have that feature added, and I'd bet there are many many more that would too (Krita is a good example of that as well). Maybe it's worth someone's time. If not, well, doesn't change the reality of the client situation.

When you have limited human/time resources, what do you make your
priority? Adding support for something you can't do much with
(remember: those layers effects are commonly used in web design, for
which Krita has no features at all) or adding features that help
people getting their work done _from scratch_?

I have no idea what it takes to add the feature, only that it is useful to be able to handle a clients ai files, and the format is required by companies I have no choice but to work with, and most graphic designers in corporate jobs do not have the choice either.

> I would not say that GIMP is a shining example of something everyone knows
> about either.

Exactly my point.

Point... ah... accepted? ;)

> Very few know about it compared to Photoshop. People want professional
> artists doing spots for GIMP, etc, you've got to provide software that is
> compatible with the industry established software

Are you absolutely sure that artists, that is, people whose primary
tools are brushes, absolutely need opening their old PSD files with a
layer effect or two thrown in for a good measure?

If you are asking "does it make GIMP unusable?" Nope. I don't believe I ever said that.

Is it something they want? Um, yea... why is that so hard to understand?

In some cases it's required for the job. The client wants you to make changes to a PSD file of their website with layers in-tact, and give them back the PSD file with your changes made. You would have to say "no".

That may not be a dealbreaker for everyone, but graphic designers don't often have the luxury to make these calls, unless they are freelancers, or working for Gez. ;)

-C