Aaron Digulla wrote: There was the idea floating around that stroking close to an existing path would adjust it instead of creating a new one. This way, you could quickly fix misstrokes. Maybe that would help?

The inkscape version has two issues I'd like to resolve if possible. 1. The lack of line width variation, in particular, the tapering at the beginning and ending of lines.

2. The shakiness of the lines.

The two problems kind of go together. The shakiness seems to be caused by the fact that I'm drawing the lines fairly slowly, so relatively lots of nodes are being laid down. If I draw the strokes faster, they are smoother, but then I can't follow my penciled guide drawing as well. I do realize that I can reduce the number of nodes after the fact, thus yielding smoother lines, but this solution is time-consuming and tedious.

Since I'm fairly new at this learning to draw business, maybe the problem will resolve itself as my skills improve.

Hi bulia, Thanks for the response. I give my responses after each of yours below. bulia byak wrote: > On 11/15/05, Matt Jordan <matt@...1296...> wrote: > >> The inkscape version has two issues I'd like to resolve if possible. >> >> 1. The lack of line width variation, in particular, the tapering at >> the >> beginning and ending of lines. > > > > So are you using pressure sensitivity? Does it work for you? If yes, > what exactly is the problem with tapering lines? Would you prefer a > non-linear dependency between pressure and width - for example so that > pressure of 0.5 would give a width less than 0.5? Can you describe the > ideal pressure/width dependency and in what way Inkscape differs from > it? > Yes, pressure sensitivity does work. The trouble was a limited amount of variation given a certain line width setting. (I keep stupidly saying a "lack" of variation, when I actually mean a limited amount - sorry). Changing the mass setting per your tip below seems to have helped a lot with this problem for some reason. Now I can set the line width fairly high and still get a nice taper at the ends. A nonlinear setting, particularly one where I could adjust the level of nonlinearity, might be a cool feature though. > >> 2. The shakiness of the lines. > > > > Have you tried increasing Mass? With Mass=0.2, drawing lags behind a > bit, but slowly drawn lines are noticeably smoother. > This really helped a lot. Thanks. I'm playing with exact settings. 0.2 gave great smoothness, but the visual lag on screen was throwing me off. I edged it down to 0.08 and I seem to get most of the smoothing benefits with a fairly low lag factor. I think I can learn to work with that. > >> The two problems kind of go together. The shakiness seems to be caused >> by the fact that I'm drawing the lines fairly slowly, so relatively >> lots >> of nodes are being laid down. If I draw the strokes faster, they are >> smoother, but then I can't follow my penciled guide drawing as well. I >> do realize that I can reduce the number of nodes after the fact, thus >> yielding smoother lines, but this solution is time-consuming and >> tedious. > > > > Pressing Ctrl+L a couple fimes after each stroke is easy, and does not > require switching to another tool. > True. It still feels a little tedious to me, though, especially when I was having to do it with virtually every line. Luckily, thanks to your tip above, I may have to do this a lot less. > >> Since I'm fairly new at this learning to draw business, maybe the >> problem will resolve itself as my skills improve. > > > > If that happens, please let us know :) > I hope to eventually do stuff that'll make the Inkscape crew proud! :) Thanks for the response. This was the kind of stuff I figured I was missing, so thanks for the tips and I'll keep experimenting. Matt

Adam, Thanks again for the help and encouragement. And thanks to all of the patient posters on this thread helping the Inkscape rookie find his way. I'm definitely starting to get the hang of the program. The attached image isn't great from a drawing standpoint because I drew it directly into Inkscape without the benefit of a pencil sketch - and I'm at a stage where I still really need the preliminary pencil sketch. :) But it does illustrate that the tips I've received here are helping me get the kind of line quality I want. Thanks again to all and I hope to have some images soon that'll be worth looking at. Matt Adam wrote: > Matt > > I am confident that you will find what you want with practice. The > reason I say this is that the attached doodle just shows a few > variations I got _without_ adjustment of _any_ settings, or changing > the angle of my stylus. Seems to me that you will find what you > want, it may be tedious getting there, but, boy!, we will watch you > fly when you make it! > > Good luck and keep us all informed! > > All the best, > > Adam > ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Matt I wonder of there is another variable here, since I get a pretty good variation with my Wacom tablet and using the calligraphy controls, especially thinning and of course the enabling of pressure controls. I am on Windows XP and Inkscape 0.43 (so it says, but the download site did not seem to confirm this ... don't understand this part! Guess it is a pre-release.). Anyway, the pressure controls on the interface work and I have the other settings available for this tool. I am able to get quite good variation in line thickness. See my Web page http://home.exetel.com.au/adam001/test_bed.html I may be missing something here? I should say that I can't do the sort of thing you are doing, Matt, I admire your skill, but does the stuff on the Web page clarify or confuse? The line thickness seemed to be a result of variations in speed, angle and the Inkscape settings, which means to me, not having used it a lot but getting good width variation, that I would have to fiddle around a lot to advise further! Adam

Matt Jordan wrote: >Conversely, if I raise the width setting so that I can get a wider line >through the middle of the stroke, I can't get the nice tapered ends - >they tend to be blunt and squarish. Have you checked the line style? I'm not sure with the caligraphy tool but the "normal" lines have three kinds of line endings: cut off (square, not extending over the start point), square and round. Try to set the line ending style to round; maybe that helps.