-
1. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
W_J_T Sep 18, 2012 6:05 AM (in response to plutonak)How about using a blend of two arrows, one large (tall), one small (short). Then do a Object -> Blend, using Blend Options -> Specified Steps (however many you want), then use Blend -> Make. This way you can add more, space them out, resize them, whatever you want using the blend tool and direct selection, etc.
Simple and fully dynamic.
-
2. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
plutonak Sep 18, 2012 5:10 PM (in response to W_J_T)That's a very good idea! Thanks
Still, when there is a large amount of distortion between the two blended objects, the specified distance between successive morphed instances is hard to control
since the blend tool is calculating a mean path which is used to calculate the separating distance. In my case, I'd like the roots of the arrows to be used in prescribing
the separation distance.
-
3. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
W_J_T Sep 18, 2012 6:51 AM (in response to plutonak)plutonak wrote:
I'm trying to find the best solution in Illustrator 5.5 to reproduce the attached picture below.
I dont see the problem concerning your concerns of "large amount of disortion, hard to control" fom your previous post,
given what you desired based upon your inital picture?Seems to work fine given your original request, unless I am missing something or not understanding your concerns?
-
4. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
Wade_Zimmerman Sep 18, 2012 7:51 AM (in response to W_J_T)I don't see the problem either.
I think the user i this case might be think soimething is happening that is not happening.
WJT has the you sould go for it.
-
5. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
plutonak Sep 18, 2012 5:09 PM (in response to Wade_Zimmerman)Please see the two figures below. The grid distance is 3mm. In the blend options, I'm also specifying a 3mm distance between each arrow.
When the morphed arrows are quite similar (figure 1), the (horizontal) 3mm distance is kept since the arrows lined up with the grid.
When the morphed arrows are quite different (figure 2), the 3mm distance is lost since the arrows do not lined up with the grid any more.
I am assuming that the mean trajectory (going from the mid point of leftest arrow to the mid point of the rightest arrow is not sufficiently horizontal so that the 3mm horizontal distance is lost.
Figure 1 has 15 arrows while figure 2 has 17 arrows enven though the specified distance is the same, 3mm.
A solution would then be to specify the number of arrows between the blended ones but it is somehow something that I want to avoid.
Anyway, it is not a very big concern.
-
6. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
Wade_Zimmerman Sep 18, 2012 7:28 PM (in response to plutonak) -
7. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
plutonak Sep 19, 2012 4:53 AM (in response to Wade_Zimmerman)I agree but it is not as convenient as the specified distance.
-
8. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
W_J_T Sep 19, 2012 5:23 AM (in response to plutonak)plutonak wrote:
I agree but it is not as convenient as the specified distance.
You'll notice I suggested "specified steps" in my original post. ;-)
If your looking to move them every 3mm then you can only have a specified amount between the first and last to begin with, I don't see the issue if that is your goal. Anyway, are you planning to have a grid behind your arrows in the end? I only ask as it was not a concern in your original post and the process of using a blend meets your original requirements of being less steps and more dynamic. Perhaps if we understood what your ultimately wishing to accomplish in the end we could make further suggestions, otherwise I think this approach should be helpful to your needs based upon your requirements.
-
9. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
plutonak Sep 19, 2012 7:52 PM (in response to W_J_T)yes, I forgot to mention that I will have to create many figures using the above technique, and the faster the better. That's why I prefer the specified distance.
With the specified steps, I have to count and it takes more time, that's all. That'd be nice if illustrator could add a feature with the specificed distance : a user-chosen direction.
It is somehow already available with the spine but not exactly like I would like to be able to use it.
-
10. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
Wade_Zimmerman Sep 19, 2012 8:16 PM (in response to plutonak)Your assumption is a little off or pehaps i should say your logic.
If you now the distance you want then you know that the distance is divisible by that distance and then of course you how many instance of the arrow will make that distance probably do not even have to think about it.
So since you know how many you need to specify for the steps. You have to somehwere along the line do this simple math anyway.
You have no advantage doing it your way either in saving time or effort.
-
11. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
plutonak Sep 20, 2012 5:35 AM (in response to Wade_Zimmerman)yes but no, I do not have to do the maths because I always work with the grid on and locked with a gridline every 3mm.
So if the two extreme arrows are lined up with the grid and if I specify a 3mm horizontal distances between blent instances, they will all line up with the grid, which I want.
-
12. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
JETalmage Sep 20, 2012 6:41 AM (in response to plutonak)Plutonak,
While others continue to defend the indefensible, console yourself in the fact that the Specified Distance setting in Illustrator's Blend Options is basically useless. Always has been. As you have discovered, it makes no intuitive sense whatsoever in terms of expected behavior. Nor does its behavior conform to the way it is stated in the documentation:
That simply doesn't happen. If Specified Distance actually did…well…specifiy the distance, between Blend steps, then it would, of course, have to reposition one of your two original paths when you change the distance value entered.
The actual functionality you're looking for really doesn't exist in this program. It's erroneously implied by the poorly designed interface of of the Blend Options dialog. So you have use workarounds.
JET
-
13. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
JETalmage Sep 20, 2012 6:51 AM (in response to plutonak)...if the two extreme arrows are lined up with the grid and if I specify a 3mm horizontal distances between blent instances, they will all line up with the grid...
No, not necessarily. You'll only get the 3mm distance between steps if the heights of the two original paths are within some "range" of each other. That's your original issue. Do what you describe. Then directSelect the topmost anchorPoint of one of the original paths and move it vertically. The number of Blend steps,—and therefore their spacing, which you have ostensibly "specified"—will change when the Blend is redrawn. The behavior you seek does not exist. Not as a live Blend. Illustrator's Blends just don't act the way the Specified Spacing option implies. That's why you need to use the Specify Steps option instead.
JET
-
14. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
emil emil Sep 20, 2012 10:45 AM (in response to plutonak)Out of curiosity to check the problem, I dragged your image in a empty document to use it as a reference and recreated the end arrows. I applied a blend with a random number of specified distance then with the blend object selected I chose Object > Blend > Blend Options. Then I highlighted the spacing value and used the up or down arrows on my keyboard to check interactively how the distribution will fit on the grid. As you can see 32 pixels fit well on your grid, while 27 pixels fit your blend.
I'm not sure if this approach will work for all cases but it seemed to work in this case.
edit: I guess the distance is not calculated along a horizontal line when the blended objects are with different height.
-
15. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
Jacob Bugge Sep 20, 2012 6:32 PM (in response to plutonak)Plutonak,
The issue is caused by Illy measuring the distance between the centres of the basic objects regardless of how you select them; when the last line is shorter, its centre is lower so the distance becomes greater (if you calculate by the W(idth) and the h(eight distance of the Blend), the distance becomes √(W^2+(h^2)/2), the squares root of the sum of the square of W and the square of h/2. This means that the specified distance should be multiplied by √((1+(h/W)^2)/2).
You may use that expression to adjust the distance:
1) Create the First and last arrowhead lines at the distance W and determine the height difference h,
2) Calculate √((1+(h/W)^2)/2) and multiply the desired specified distance by that,
3) Create the blend with 2) as the specified distance.
An action or a script may apply, especially for repeated use.
To only apply simpler calculations, you may, maybe more sillily (Smart Guides are still your friends):
1) Create the First and last arrowhead lines at the distance W and determine the height difference h,
2) Object>Path>add Anchor Points once,
3) Drag out a centre connexion line with the Line Tool between the centre Anchor Points (Smart Guides say anchor point at both ends),
4) Determine the length using the secret programmer's debugging palette (Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12/Cmd+Option+Shift+F12 to open it), or use the free Pathlength/PathArea Filter plugin from Telegraphics, http://www.telegraphics.com.au/sw/ and divide it by the W(idth) of the blend,
2) Multiply the desired specified distance by 4),
3) Create the blend with 4) as the specified distance.
Once again, an action or a script may apply, especially for repeated use.
To get round all that and do things without calculations, only drawing, you may, maybe even more sillily (Smart Guides are still your friends):
1) Create the first arrowheaded line,
2) Move a copy to the right to become the last arrowheaded line,
3) Drag out a bottom line with the Line Tool between the bottom ends of 1) and 2), if there is no line there already as part of the artwork (Smart Guides say anchor point at both ends),
4) Reduce the height of 2) without aligning it to the bottom of 1) (keep the centre Reference Point in the Transform palette/panel),
5) Create the Blend with specified distance as desired, this will give you the right distances and the right number of step, but not bottom aligned,
6) Expand the Blend,
7) Select the Shear Tool (bundled with the Scale Tool), click the bottom of the first arrowhead line where it meets end of the bottom line to set it as the reference point and ClickDrag the bottom of the last arrowhead line down to meet the other end of the bottom line (Smart Guides say intersect at both ends), and you should be there with the right number of arrowheaded lines at the right distances, bottom aligned,
8) Delete the bottom line if desired.
An action or a script may ease the pain of having to do so much for so little.
Edit: Where are Carlos and Theunis tonight (three hours after midnight over here, at the beginning of a new day)?
-
16. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
JETalmage Sep 21, 2012 5:14 AM (in response to Jacob Bugge)Jacob,
It is not a simple matter of the Specified Distance being measured between the object centers. That's a simple thing to check:
1. Turn on the Grid. Create a Blend between two identical vertical lines, separated by, say, six inches; Specified Distance: 1 inch.
2. DirectSelect the rightmost original path. Nudge it left or right.
If the Specified Distance were being abided by any normal meaning of the words, there are only two possibilities you would see after nudging the right key object leftward: The rightmost space would be less than all the others, or the rightmost object would disappear.
The program certainly is doing something to calculate the spacing, but whatever that is, it is not in any reasonable sense spacing the interpolated steps by anything that can meaningly be called the "specified distance."
Just another example of the absurd interface of this sloppy consumerish drawing program. Much like its redefinition of "radius" in the Round Corners Effect.
JET
-
17. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
emil emil Sep 21, 2012 10:08 AM (in response to JETalmage)Looks like they programmed it with first priority to keep the original objects building the blend and with minimum of one generated blend with equal distribution. Then after fulfilling these priorities, the specified distance is used which cannot be absolute and they made it with a tolerance of 150%.
My observations are based on a test with setting the ruler to millimeters and making a blend with specified distance of 100 mm between several copies of vertical lines. When one of the end lines is moved to X50 mm from the other line a new blend segment is added.
And that's on top of the fact that the distance is calculated along a line between the centers.
The documentation should have been written to explain this better.
edit:
@ Plutonak,
So, given this is the behavior, I would recommend for fitting the generated blends to an existing grid, my previous suggestion with trial and error using the up down arrows on the keyboard - doesn't seem a lot of effort to me. And for that matter, the same can be used with specified steps, just press the up or down arrow and hold it (no need to only press it multiple times) until the distribution is close to the grid then release and press up or down arrow a few times to fit to the grid.
-
18. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
Jacob Bugge Sep 21, 2012 11:11 AM (in response to plutonak)plutonak, James,
I agree with Emil, with the same findings.
Apart from that, the use of Specified Steps (SS) is simpler and (thereby) more realiable, and the not that complicated to calculate: with a certain desired Specified Distance (SD) across a certain width (W), you get SS = W/SD - 1 (the number of divisions less one).
-
19. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
plutonak Sep 22, 2012 6:28 AM (in response to Jacob Bugge)Thank you all for your detailed and useful contributions.
-
20. Re: Transformed arrows with same arrowheads
Jacob Bugge Sep 22, 2012 8:30 AM (in response to plutonak)For my part you are welcome, plutonak.













