11 Replies Latest reply on Dec 20, 2009 3:13 PM by JETalmage

    How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?

    nados Level 1

      Hi all,

       

      How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?

        • 1. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
          Wade_Zimmerman Level 6

          You mean when document takes up the full window height, You don't!i

           

          The best you can do is to make the grid increments to 1 Inch and 1 the number of sub divisions and show the grid.Screen shot 2009-12-19 at 12.05.02 AM.png

          1 person found this helpful
          • 2. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
            JETalmage Level 6

            Illustrator does not provide for user-defined drawing scales or custom rulers. You can only select from the provided unit-of-measure options.

             

            JET

            • 3. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
              nados Level 1

              Well....

               

              I must agree with you JET that while people have created great stuff with illustrator, this program has a lot of issues.

               

              I don't know why Adobe has to re-invent the knobs and dials with every product...

              • 4. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                Wade_Zimmerman Level 6

                nados

                one of the things about illustrator is that it was created to do a certain type of art and that is Illustration but clearly not technical illustration and when invented it was not really expected to be an application that you would print from, rather it was an application  from which you would export and then place the file in another application and print from there.

                 

                Quark and pagemaker were a couple of programs that Illustrator files where placed in, but now everyone is demanding that Illustrator do things it was not intended to do so it seems o those users that hey  Illustrator doesn't have this functionality like other programs that were actually design to work differently than Illustrator.

                 

                Tere are people active here who have used other Illustration programs who often talk about the superiority of other programs and you wonder why they use Illustrator at all but they do. So you are just experiencing the limitation of a program that might not be designed to function entirely in the way you need.It was designed to do Illustration and that does not mean technical drawings otherwise it would technical drawing  and drafting tools which it clearly does not have it has though creative tools and now has much better support for out put then it use to.

                1 person found this helpful
                • 5. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                  nados Level 1

                  Ok i hear you, i withdraw my snippy remarks.

                   

                  So illustrator was not intended to be used in the way it's being used today. So you can say that either illustrator needs to grow into a standalone app or it needs to be redesigned so it works more like a plugin to Indesign.

                   

                  Either way, Ilustrator, Indesign and Photoshop share about 90% of the same functionality. The other 10% is divided into features that are specific to each type of work like photography, publishing, and illustration. The 90% shared functionality needs to be the common engine that drives workflow across all platforms.

                  • 6. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                    Wade_Zimmerman Level 6

                    As others have noted there is a lot of room for improvement but that is true of all applications on the market.

                    • 7. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                      Wade_Zimmerman Level 6

                      Also A does work like a plug in for both Photoshop as smart objects and as linked files for ID which can easily be updated and the originals can be edited ad updated in ID.

                      • 8. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                        nados Level 1

                        I just wish that common features like layers, color, swatches, styles, masks, adjustments, character, paragraph and so on - looked and functioned the same across adobe applications.

                         

                        Is that too much to ask for?

                        • 9. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                          JETalmage Level 6
                          I just wish that common features like layers, color, swatches, styles, masks, adjustments, character, paragraph and so on - looked and functioned the same across adobe applications. Is that too much to ask for?


                          In some cases, that would be absurd. Photoshop and Illustrator are fundamentally differerent environments, as they should be. Photoshop Layers and Illustrator/InDesign Layers are entirely different things, because a vector drawing program works with arranging OBJECTS (raster images, vector paths, text objects) in a Z stacking order and XY position. A Photoshop Layer is essentially just another raster image of the same pixel count as all the others, viewed optionally opaquely or transparently on your screen. It would be ridiculous if Photoshop created a whole new raster image every time you colored another selection of pixels. It would be ridiculous if Illustrator created a new Layer everytime you draw a new path.

                           

                          Regarding text, Photoshop and Illustrator share the same lame text engine. Illustrator's should be like InDesign's, not like Photoshop's.

                           

                          And that is a good case-in-point negating the silly defensiveness of Illustrator's outdated and buggy functionality. Illustrator's text handling remains poor today. But it was not updated even to today's treatment until CS 1. For most of its history, its text handling was pathetically primitive compared to that of other programs which were designed for exactly the same purpose and which competed directly with it. Should one "defend" that fact with some nonsensical argument that 'Illustrator is not meant to be a word processor'?

                           

                          It was not until AI10 that its print dialog acquired a simple Fit To Page command. You had to manually figure and enter a scale factor, and that was limited on the low end to 25%. Can that logically be "defended" on the basis that 'AI is not an imagesetter'? Every dang software on the planet provides a Fit To Page print option!

                           

                          This "It's not a technical illustration program" argument is every bit as nonsensical. Every one of Illustrator's direct competitors provides for user-defined drawing scales, and has for decades. Illustrator is just as "technical" a drawing program as those others are. It's just particularly lame at it in this regard. And since when is "technical" illustration not "illustration"? And since when is user-defined drawing scale only needed for "technical" illustration? Absolutely ridiculous.

                           

                          So what if in its infancy Illustrator was a tool for PostScript workflow? Illustrator's leading competitor for most of its history, FreeHand, was initially based on the path drawing engine of a font design software. But when it went to market as a general illustration tool, it blew the functional and interface doors off Illustrator, and continued to do so throughout its history.

                           

                          The simple fact is this: Throughout its history, Illustrator never kept up with the basic drawing features, interface refinements, and performance of its direct competitors. Its market share is primarily due to its carrying an Adobe label--and to the absurd defensiveness of too many of its users who have next to no experience with anything else.

                           

                          Ilustrator, Indesign and Photoshop share about 90% of the same functionality.

                           

                          Where do you get that?

                          Photoshop's primary purpose is fine-tuning of raster imagery, especially photography. You don't do sophisticated color correction, channel operations, sharpening, etc., in Illustrator or InDesign. That's what I would call its "90% functionality."

                           

                          InDesign's primary purose is automation of repetitive assembly tasks and text handling in high page-count documents. You don't do master pages, indexes, tables of contents, constant spooling the hard disk, hundreds of externally linked raster and vector files, chapters-long threaded text stories in Illustrator or Photoshop. That's what I would call its "90% functionality."

                           

                          Illustrator's primary purpose is general-purpose vector drawing (which most certainly includes many kinds of 'technical' illustration) using cubic Bezier curves, and page-assembly for low page-count, illustration-intensive documents. That's what I would call its "90% functionality."

                           

                          Now ask yourself: Should programs fundamentally structured for different primary purposes necessarily share the same interface? I say no, not necessarily. Example: The mere use of the same term (Layers) in Photoshop and Illustrator for what are fundamentally two different things has led to a gross misunderstanding on the part of Photoshop users who are Illustrator beginners, which is repeated here in this very forum almost every day.

                           

                          Ask yourself this: Should unyielding adherance to the organizational dictates of Adobe's so-called "unified" interface be allowed to result in a palette flyout menu in InDesign that contains only one option? Is the very concept of a 'menu' not fundametally antithetical to a single choice? Is that not just poor interface design, regardless of whether it "matches" that of the other programs in the so-called "suite"? (Frankly, I find Adobe's over-use of flyout menus--which effectively HIDE important options--generally both ill-conceived and poorly executed.)

                           

                          No, there simply is no excuse for Illusrator's still lacking user-defined drawing scales, just as there was no excuse for its lacking multiple pages for two full decades, just as there is no excuse for its still lacking reliable snaps, connector lines, live shape primitives (!), proper arc-drawing, proper corner rounding, inline graphics, auto-fitting textframes, the ability to join multiple paths at once, (note that NONE of those can be called specifically "technical" drawing features) and a plethora of other functions that are bare-bones basic to vector drawing. The programs is just archaic and outdated in all these regards, and that's all there is to it.

                           

                          JET

                          • 10. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                            nados Level 1

                            Jet,

                             

                            "I just wish that common features like layers, color, swatches, styles,  masks, adjustments, character, paragraph and so on - looked and  functioned the same across adobe applications."

                            In some cases, that would be absurd.

                             

                            Yes, i agree - that would to that 10% that needs to be different, those features and functionality that are specific to illustration or publishing or photography and so on....

                             

                             

                            "Ilustrator, Indesign and Photoshop share about 90% of the same  functionality."

                            Where do you get that?

                             

                            Well It's true!

                             

                            Layers, color, swatches, styles, character,  paragraph, crop, mask, brush and so on do provide the same functionallity across abobe apps.

                             

                            How is "Layers" truely functionally different between adobe apps? Yet to some extent, the look of the interface and the way you manipulate it differs between apps.

                             

                            Yes, there may be some things you don't want "Layers" or other functions to do in some apps, but that could be adjusted as a function of selecting one of the apps "Workspace".

                             

                            Generalized apps with  selectable Workspace's. hmmmmm.....

                             

                            theoretically - if thats not whats already happening with many of adobe's products anyway, abobe could just market one universal engine app where you purchase the "Workspace" plugins you need like an illustrator, indesign or photoshop plugin "Workspace".

                             

                            So that 10% could morph into Workspaces!

                            • 11. Re: How do you make ruler display ticks every 12 inches instead of every 16 inches?
                              JETalmage Level 6

                              Layers, color, swatches, styles, character,  paragraph, crop, mask, brush and so on do provide the same functionallity across abobe apps.


                              No, they do not.

                               

                              I've already explained Layers.

                               

                              Crop in Photoshop crops raster images. Illustrator can't even do that. It can't even do that with its own native vector artwork.

                              Brushes in Photoshop repeat raster images.

                               

                              This is not the same functionality. Raster and vector are fundamentally different. Cropping and merely masking are fundamentally different. Repeating an alpha-masked pattern of pixels in a single raster image is not the same thing as repeating a series of individual OBJECTS along a still-editable path, let alone stretching a single instance of an object along a still editable path.

                               

                              JET