basic prototype artwork to scale (in AI format?)

[columbus]

Hello,
I am new to Inkscape.  I have been working on a project for a while now and need to create artwork for the vendor to produce. They have requested AI format.  I have attached the basic artwork I created in excel so I could have a grid in the background to keep everything to scale.  I played around with creating in Inkscape and got close to what I wanted but was never able to save a good file that would work.  Does anyone have advice for me on how to create this basic file to send to vendors for price quotes?

1.  Can I save as an AI file in Inkscape?  If not is  there a similar format?
2.  Are there any videos on creating basic prototypes to scale?  Most of what I have seen is more art related.
3.  Advice on displaying grid in background to represent 1/16 of an inch
4.  Advice on the easiest way to create the artwork attached and be able to make slight modifications
5.  Can I import this jpeg in or just start from scratch?
6.  Advice on saving? ...It's been a while but in the past I created artwork that looked pretty good but then when I saved it shrunk way up or got all funky.

Thanks so much!

[brynn]

Welcome columbus!

First, since you mentioned using Excel, to have a grid, I thought I'd mention that Inkscape has a grid too.  In fact, 2 kinds, rectangular and axonomic/isometric.  Both are fully configurable to any proportions that you want.

1 - As far as I know, Inkscape can Save As AI.  At least current versions can.  If the vendor wants AI, it may be that's all they will accept.  You would have to ask them if they'll accept anything else.  Inkscape is fairly versatile for saving in other formats (as long as you don't want JPG or GIF).

2 - I've seen a lot of tutorials, both text and video.  I don't remember seeing any that aren't more art related.  But for making things to scale, the next new stable release of Inkscape, expected out pretty soon, has a new Measure tool.  The good news is that you can already get that version in 0.91pre2 https://inkscape.org/en/download/  Plus the aforementioned grids should be helpful as well.

Also, you may want to learn about Snapping.  Used with a grid, it makes working to scale pretty easy!

3 - Ok, the grids I mentioned are stictly for use in desiging your drawing.  They do not show up in the finished image, like for example, if you print it, or post on the internet.  If you want a grid to be actually an object in your drawing, Inkscape can draw several different types of grids.  Extensions menu > Render > Cartesian Grid, or Grid, or Polar Grid, or maybe even Wireframe Sphere.

4 - Whenever someone asks for "the easiest way" to do something, we always have to qualify that.  There are often several different ways to accomplish a particular goal, and it often comes down to whoever happens to answer your message, as to which technique is suggested.  Everyone develops their own particular preferences for drawing.

I would use a grid, snapping, and Pen/Bezier tool.  If you want the grid to be part of the image, then use one of the extensions.

5 - If that drawing is already to scale, you could import the JPG into Inkscape, and just trace over it with the Pen/Bezier tool.  However, Inkscape can be so very precise with snapping to a grid.  You'd probably get a better result using both the JPG (as a general guide) and Inkscape's grid (with snapping).

6 - I'm not sure I understand what might have been happening in your past experience.  With Inkscape, the drawing will be saved exactly as you see it.

Note that when you first open Inkscape it opens at 35% zoom, which causes newbies all sorts of headaches  .  They make their drawing, and save it, and it turns out huge!  So be sure to switch it to 100% (Zoom tool, 3rd button from the left on the control bar).

Sometimes, certain fancy effects, usually filters, or in the past, gradients, can't be converted to certain file types.  I don't have any personal experience saving as AI.  But it doesn't look like there's anything in that drawing, that should cause a problem.

Let us know how it goes 

[Lazur]

This is a good topic to look at.
Should I say, perfect material for beginner tutorial articles?

On a side note on multipurpose tools I always have some doubts about usability.
Just to mention the two most obvious ones.
Rulers always seem too short to me, probably a chair can be more useful.
Measuring? It is not in metric units, so the human body is a good reference.

[columbus]

Thanks for all the advice.  Attached is a first draft.  What do you think?

Does this file format seem like an IA format/artwork that a manufacturer could use?

Any advice on design, style, etc?  Thanks!!

[brynn]

Lazur:

probably a chair can be more useful

   That reminds me of some of the teachers/professors I've had over my school/college years.

If you submitted that  (k1II.svg) as an Article/tutorial, I would probably put it in the Intermediate Skills section, because of using the LPE to accomplish the curve of the key.

OH!  I just had an idea!  As I was reading through the referenced thread, and examining the k1II.svg file, I thought:  rather than a tutorial that shows 1 way to draw some particular object, what about a tutorial that shows a few different ways to accomplish it.  And for a variation on that theme, the different sections could be written by different people.  Although the logistics would probably be daunting.  But still a tutorial showing all the ways to possibly accomplish one particular drawing, could be quite helpful!

columbus:

Hey, not bad! 

It looks like you might have used Trace Bitmap?

I did notice 1 tiny place, where the nodes might be "off".  Please see attached.  In your original JPG, those 2 selected nodes appear to share the same Y value.  But they don't in this new PDF.

Are the 3 white shapes, that lie on top of the larger gray piece, (rectangle, hexagon, circle) supposed to be holes in the object, or just what they are - white objects on top??

Again, the vendor/manufacture may specifically require AI, and nothing else (for all I know).  Even though PDF, or EPS, or CDR, or many other formats, may contain vector elements, sometimes they are very particular.  (edit -- "they" meaning the vendor)  I'm not familiar with this kind of professional, but with professional printers, I've heard all kinds of stories about them.  So for example, if they say they want EPS, they may not accept anything else.  Is there any reason why you can't ask them if they'll take other formats?

[Lazur]

Intermediate skill because of spiro path?
Even if it would be achieved with the pen tool?


On the idea to accomplish the same result different ways, the meander tutorial was alike -there were about five examples in the original topic.
Or the shutter one.
The labyrinth too.


On the original topic:
I would rather not worry about the format but instead focus more on the accuracy.
In the attached file grids, units are set and the drawing is scaled to its true size.
Details are so much off, it might as well be redrawn.
Can you add a description about the actual functions and shapes?

[brynn]

On topic:
The reason I made those comments about the file format, is because of the many messages I've read about professional printers who will only take AI (or EPS or SVG or whatever) and nothing else.  We actually don't know what kind of "vendor" columbus is using.  But just to avoid having the submitted file rejected, it seems better to confirm what file format is required.

When someone is preparing the file for someone else to use, to produce the final end product, knowing what file type to submit seems equally important as the precision of the drawing.  I looked at about half the nodes in their first draft, and except for the one I noted, (and the half I didn't select), the ones that should be horizontal, are precisely horizontal or vertical, or whatever. 

Trace Bitmap would not have done that.  However, there are some odd node placements that look like what Trace Bitmap would create.  So maybe he used a combination of TB and node editing.  I can't be sure at the moment.

I also know he posted the same message at IF, and has had other help there.  So since yesterday, I don't know what's been discussed there.  Maybe there's an issue I don't know about yet?

Off topic:

Intermediate skill because of spiro path?

Yes, that's just the way I've been informally categorizing tutorials.

On the idea to accomplish the same result different ways, the meander tutorial was alike -there were about five examples in the original topic.
Or the shutter one.
The labyrinth too.

Yes, yes!  That's what I mean.  For now, to get that kind of excellent perspective, people have to search out those messages.  And how would they know where to look?  There aren't any keywords attached to the messages, that would produce only those topics in a search.  I'm thinking, why not make it easier to find that kind of info?  Why not write tutorials that show several different approaches?  Like for example, instead of "One way to draw curly ribbons", what if it was "3 Ways to draw curly ribbons"?

I don't mean to suggest that you should do that.  It's just an idea I had, and wanted to get some reaction about it.  I think I might use that topic, with all those different ways to accomplish the end goal, and use it as a base to write a tutorial.  Certainly I would credit everyone with their ideas    (might be titled - 5 ways to vectorize a line drawing, originally in raster format)

When I write tutorials, I always write them using the techniques I would use.  And I don't always realize there are other ways to do it.  Maybe I'll write a series of that kind of tutorial.  That's what I was thinking.   

[columbus]

Thanks again,
I used the draw Bezier curves and straight lines and then edited paths and nodes where needed.  I also used shapes to create the cutouts or holes.  Is there a better way to represent cutouts vs. something printed on the piece?  I?m not sure what trace bitmap is, does that try to trace a design automatically?
On my original I had the grid represent 1/16? squares and tried to do that on this new drawing although it changes if I zoom.  The piece should be a total of 1? h and 3 and 1/8? w including the two little points that stick out on the right.  Is my scale off or does my design indicate this?
The bottom part should be a ruler showing ?? increments, the top weird looking part is a bottle opener design, the polygon shape cutout is for a bit driver which actually needs redesigned to be 6 points.  I fixed that node issue you found already.  Thanks!
I will ask the manufacturer if they can accept .pdf and try to see how they want the design to look like as far as cutouts, printing, etc.  I did notice on one of their mock ups they had the piece design to cutout and then below that they had another section where they showed what printing would be done.  Is there a way to drag just the lines and print down to a new section to show separately?
Thanks!

[Lazur]

Depends on the machine and software they use.
As far as I could see it cut machines -at least vinyl or laser cutters- use an identication by the stroke attributes. It is colour coded which part to be cut, which part to be engraved.

I linked to that key topic because that key shape is geometrical as well and has less detail, perfect for starting.
With the pen tool, in normal mode you can hardly get circular arches.
Thus, building up the design as presented there can lead to a more precise design.
Here you would need rounded corners almost everywhere.
Inkscape is just a tool, but the construction needs more of a ruler and compass logic to start -drawing tangent circles to intersecting lines, drawing tangent circles to circles.
There are some parts of your work that is complicated to construct geometrically.

[brynn]

I also used shapes to create the cutouts or holes.  Is there a better way to represent cutouts vs. something printed on the piece?

I don't know what the print industry requires, or what might be required by whoever will cut it out from there.  What I can say, is that we can actually cut those pieces out, with Inkscape.  So for example, if you were going to use one of those home craft cutters, to cut this out of paper, it would cut the holes right out!

1 - Select the large outer path, and select one of the cutout shapes, (hold Shift key for multiple selection)
2 - Path menu > Difference (or there's a key shortcut, look it up at Help menu > Key and Mouse Ref).
3 - Select the result of that
4 - Move it below the next cutout shape (in z-order)(Selection tool control bar or Object menu)
5 - With it still selected, hold Shift and click the next cutout shape (multiple selection)
6 - Path menu > Difference
7 - Repeat 4 through 7, to get the last cutout

Yes, Trace Bitmap can automatically trace a raster image.  However, it would not have been a good idea in this case (because there were small imperfections in your Excel drawing) imo.  But I thought you might have used it, and then used node editing (Node tool) to fix individual nodes.  However, I think you got a pretty good result with what you did!

Is my scale off or does my design indicate this

If you select the main outer path, switch to Selection tool, and change the units on the control bar to inches, you can see that your drawing is 5.567" wide and 1.788" high.  So if it is supposed to be 3" by 1", something is "off".  Let's see.....  If I change 1.788 to 1.00, click the lock icon, to keep in perspective, Inkscape calculates the new width to be 3.114".  So it is not quite to scale.

Note that if you use my process to see for yourself, you'll need to change Inkscape Preferences > Tools > Bounding Box from Visual to Geometric.  If it's a Visual BB, the use of the stroke makes Inkscape sort of confused.  Geometric BB ignores the stroke.  Or you could remove the stroke from the drawing, and leave the BB alone.

Oh wait, you said it should be 3 and 1/8" x 1".  So actually your scale might be perfect!  You just need to scale the object, if you want it to actually be 3 and 1/8" x 1".

Zooming doesn't change the size of anything.  It just makes it look bigger, so you can see what you're doing (or smaller if you zoom out, to see the whole drawing).  The grid will zoom right along with the drawing, so you can still snap to it precisely.

For the increments on the ruler hashmarks on your alligator, they look to be 0.45 inches apart.  I mean the ones across the bottom.  That's not exactly 1/4", (almost half inch) so maybe you mean the hashmarks for that upper scale?  But it seems to be exponentially incremented....somehow??

I'm a little lost about redesigning the 6 point polygon/bit driver part.  But there is that hexagon, which afak, is  6 side (6 point) polygon.

Note, Lazur posted while I was writing.  Sorry if I've repeated any of his comments.

[columbus]

Does this look better?

[brynn]

Ok, now with the grid aligned to it, I do see a lot of little issues.  It depends on how precise this needs to be, as to how many you want to correct.

But first, when I open your file, I see that the grid is laid out in inches.  But the rulers and control bar are still displaying pixels.  I'm not sure if that's because of my own default settings (for px), or not.  But if you haven't changed that, you can do it in Document Properties > Page tab > Default Units.  Might be helpful?  So in my following screenshots, I've changed that, to make the screenshots.

So just 5 4 small screenshots, to show what I mean, but there are many areas that have these tiny discrepancies.  Maybe you don't need such precision.  But just in case, I thought I'd mention.

In cold1.png, the highlighted node represents the bottom of the object.  The Y value is 8.502 in.  Is that good enough for you?  Or should it be 8.500 in?  In cold3.png, the highlighted node represents the left edge of the drawing.  The X value is 1.757 in.  Is that close enough, or should it be 1.750? 

In cold4.png and cold5.png, again, the Y and X values respectively are just a few thousandths off.  But there's another issue.  At first, part of the reason I thought you might have used Trace Bitmap, is because of the rounded corners.  But now it occurs to me, that perhaps you didn't intend to have the rounded corners?  For the sake of precision, you may want to either make them all sharp, or make the rounding consistent throughout.  Making them all sharp would seem to me to be easier.  Perhaps Lazur might have a tip, to quickly make them rounded  by the same degree?  For me, it would be some laborious process of simple math, plus node editing.

4 of these screenshot show some of these areas, and there are many more throughout, that I haven't shown or mentioned.  Another way to have drawn this image, from the start, which might have reduced the need for all this tweaking, would have been to use Snapping to the grid.  If you haven't tried it yet, you might want to experiment.  It looks like you already have the Snap control bar set up (unless again, my own default settings have taken over).  If the top button on the Snap bar (probably on the right side of your canvas) isn't engaged, go ahead and click it, then set it up like in coldsn.png.  Now just grab a node, drag slightly, and watch it snap to a grid intersection.

You can also use snapping while drawing.  With the Pen/Bezier tool, when you click in the vicinity of a grid intersection, Inkscape will place the node precisely on that intersection.  Some tiny text will flash, to show the target, so you know you "hit" the right thing.  (If you have a lot of different options engaged on the Snap control bar, Inkscape will try to snap to the closest one.  So on a more complex canvas, it's helpful to see that you hit the target.)

One more thing grabs my attention, but I'll have to post a new message, because only 5 screenshots are allowed per message.  So I'll continue in the next message

[brynn]

So the other issue is not Inkscape related.  Since you said (somewhere) this is to be a bottle cap opener, I guess that tiny hook at the top of the main object is the part that would grab the edge of the bottle cap, and leverage it against the opposite side, to bend the bottle cap and break the seal?

And note, not that I'm any kind of engineer, lol.  But has this design been tested?  Oh right, you said this is the prototype.  Ok.

Anyway, just by looking at it (and being old enough to have seen zillions of different kinds of bottle cap openers  ) I might be a little concerned that that tiny hook, being so rounded along its outer edge, might just slide right out of the cap's edge.  I think removing the hook, and just have a straight horizontal spike, might work a little better.

And then the opposite side which provides the leverage point, looks like it might have too much slope.  So I made a quick drawing to show.

Ok, that's all I have.    

Still glad to answer any further questions   

Edit
Oops, actually, I missed your last question:

Is there a way to drag just the lines and print down to a new section to show separately

Unfortunately, I don't understand what you mean.  Are you asking about duplicating the whole object, moving it down on the page and highlighting different parts.....or something like that?

[Lazur]

Some notes.

Boolean operation might got alot more precise in the pre 0.91 builds but in general they produce inaccuracy.
Instead, you can use node editing and combining. That won't have any side effects -won't move the nodes with 0,02 pixels here and there.

There is a quick way to add a rounding to each corner by dynamic offsetting, but that is nowhere precise.
Meaning, after converting back to path it can be all messed up.

[Lazur]

Attached is an example what you can achieve by constructing.
I might not get the dimensions right as I don't see the actual functioning, so it is largely based on my perception how it would look right.
It was made as described before. It would make no sense to produce a step by step guide as it could take forever. Maybe if split to pieces. 

[columbus]

attached is updated.  I changed properties to inches.
I tried to fix some of the nodes that were off like you mentioned.  I probably should try to snap more of them to grid but it is probably ok.
I actually manually rounded all of the edges..I don't want sharp corners.  I did this by adding nodes to the side of each corner and then deleting the corner node so it is not precise...there may be a better way to do this?

I had a few prototypes created locally and the bottle opener didn't seem to work great, it would start to pull off the cap and then kind of just fall off...so I added that subtle hook design thinking it would catch the cap and pull all the way off in one try.  Who knows though?

I tried to copy down just what would be printed or etched, it seemed to work?

I really appreciate all of the replies, it has been so helpful.  Any more advice?   

[Lazur]

There is a better way to do that, and, I have directed you there at least three times already.
Still, if you want a more straightforward guide, draw measures all around your image, rounding corners, where to start the segments, what lengths, what diameters to be used.
Then I can break it down to steps you could construct the image from.
Until that it is only guesswork. 

[brynn]

I did this by adding nodes to the side of each corner and then deleting the corner node so it is not precise...there may be a better way to do this?

That's probably how I would have done it.  The important part, for making them all have the same radius, is to place the new nodes exactly the same distance from the corner, on all corners.  Snapping to the grid makes that really easy!

I don't see any huge issues.  Just those tiny hundreths of inch discrepancies.

I had a few prototypes created locally and the bottle opener didn't seem to work great, it would start to pull off the cap and then kind of just fall off...so I added that subtle hook design thinking it would catch the cap and pull all the way off in one try.  Who knows though?

My best guess, based on my simplified idea of physics, is that side opposite the hook has too much of a slope.....either that, or the area is too deep. Seems like it would allow the cap to slide loose, at a certain point.  If I had time, I'd draw a nice smooth loop in that area, that's tight enough to keep the cap secure.  But you'll be able to try it too, once this prototype is produced.

Except for more precision with the nodes, and consistent rounding of corner radii, I don't see any glaring issues.

Good luck!  I hope it works out with the rest of the process.