Monday, June 29, 2009
Photo-PAINT hair tutorial
I used the first part of this tutorial from Alfred to create the extra hair on the image below.
I didn't draw any single hairs as shown in the tutorial. I used the Brightness/Contrast Effect Tool afterwards.
click on pic for larger version of my 5 -min test:
I didn't draw any single hairs as shown in the tutorial. I used the Brightness/Contrast Effect Tool afterwards.
click on pic for larger version of my 5 -min test:
Friday, June 26, 2009
One of my Favorite Corel Artists
Stefan Tetreault's work is some of the best I've seen.
Many years ago he saw some of my work at the first serious world-wide gallery for Corel Artists. He said he was really impressed with some of the things I was doing.
Then... he emailed me a few things he had worked on and designed – and I was amazed with what I was seeing! So, I urged him to have a gallery there also.
Anyway... since those old days, Corel has created their own galleries. Here is his.
Many years ago he saw some of my work at the first serious world-wide gallery for Corel Artists. He said he was really impressed with some of the things I was doing.
Then... he emailed me a few things he had worked on and designed – and I was amazed with what I was seeing! So, I urged him to have a gallery there also.
Anyway... since those old days, Corel has created their own galleries. Here is his.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Reliable Output - what works for me
Either you control your files, or they control you.
A fan wrote:
The last time I had a problem with large format output? Never.
The reason: I'd come from the print industry where I'd used manually flattening techniques for many years with equally great success.
So much heartache, uncertainty, and wasted materials can be prevented with my approach. It's not a new idea, but it seems it's only held by the top 20% of users who really understand digital imagery from start to finish.
I learned the basic idea from Ron Richey in 1998. A good guy, and also a Multi-Winner of the Corel World Design Contests back in the day.
The concept allows you to run wild with all of the crazy things you can create with CorelDRAW and Photo-PAINT. Transparencies... effects... whatever.
We need to ensure that what you design will output as you expect. Doesn't it by default? Sometimes.
Sometimes is not good enough for me. Should Corel be blamed? Not really, since Adobe also recommends this workflow! I saw it in the Illustrator 10 help file!
So why do we need to jump through hoops to enjoy reliable output? Point your finger directly at Adobe for a fragmented, patched-together page description language called PostScript. It often struggles to handle the artwork that many digital artists create.
Until something better comes along, it's all we've got. Both Adobe and Corel engineers have both had to spend enormous time trying to shoe-horn artwork into the limitations of PostScript. They can only do so much.
Make a choice:
My approach is to render them myself, so that I can see surprises on my screen, instead of on the final substrate.
I also create single bitmaps from many whenever possible, leaving vectors on top.
Instead of a complicated file with numerous transparent bitmaps all over the place, the RIP will prefer to see a single bitmap instead with your vector shapes on top.
Ensure your files are simplified when possible so the RIP (or any printing device) can digest the data easier. Convert everything to a single bitmap (except for pure vector shapes or fonts/curves which already sit on top).
There is no reason to have numerous bitmaps and drop shadows etc and then to send as a very complicated multi-bitmap file. Shadows, transparencies etc. are always rendered as bitmaps when sending out of CorelDRAW.
In a new file (or a new page of working file), Select interactive transparencies, drop shadows, lenses, etc. and bitmaps. Convert all to single bitmap.
I choose the CMYK color model so that I have most control for what inks are being used.
This is artwork dependent... you'll need to think about what's in your files and how the RIP sees it later.
Below, I have numerous shadows and transparencies. All should be made into a new bitmap at for best and reliable results.
The resolution you choose should be reasonable for the circumstances. 200 DPI is plenty for most signs over 4 Sq ft.
Click for large version, compare Object Manager for both.

My fan asked about my EPS settings;
A fan wrote:
Hi Jeff,
I've been reading many of your great posts and thank-you for your teachings.
I'm using CorelDRAW X4 and VersaWorks for my Roland SP540-V. I've been using PDF's for 2 years now with great success, however we just started wraps and PDF's are not my friend anymore.
Would you mind telling me the settings you use for exporting to an EPS. I cannot see to get the CutContour to work when exporting as an EPS.
What follows is like a public service announcement, for those that prefer saving time and money in the sign industry. OK.. any industry that outputs to PostScript devices, which is nearly all of them.The last time I had a problem with large format output? Never.
The reason: I'd come from the print industry where I'd used manually flattening techniques for many years with equally great success.
So much heartache, uncertainty, and wasted materials can be prevented with my approach. It's not a new idea, but it seems it's only held by the top 20% of users who really understand digital imagery from start to finish.
I learned the basic idea from Ron Richey in 1998. A good guy, and also a Multi-Winner of the Corel World Design Contests back in the day.
The concept allows you to run wild with all of the crazy things you can create with CorelDRAW and Photo-PAINT. Transparencies... effects... whatever.
We need to ensure that what you design will output as you expect. Doesn't it by default? Sometimes.
Sometimes is not good enough for me. Should Corel be blamed? Not really, since Adobe also recommends this workflow! I saw it in the Illustrator 10 help file!
So why do we need to jump through hoops to enjoy reliable output? Point your finger directly at Adobe for a fragmented, patched-together page description language called PostScript. It often struggles to handle the artwork that many digital artists create.
Until something better comes along, it's all we've got. Both Adobe and Corel engineers have both had to spend enormous time trying to shoe-horn artwork into the limitations of PostScript. They can only do so much.
Make a choice:
- Live in denial and demand everything outputs perfectly every time without intervention.
- Learn sensible workarounds and apply them manually to erase job failures and anomalies on your ouput substrates/press sheets.
My approach is to render them myself, so that I can see surprises on my screen, instead of on the final substrate.
I also create single bitmaps from many whenever possible, leaving vectors on top.
Instead of a complicated file with numerous transparent bitmaps all over the place, the RIP will prefer to see a single bitmap instead with your vector shapes on top.
Ensure your files are simplified when possible so the RIP (or any printing device) can digest the data easier. Convert everything to a single bitmap (except for pure vector shapes or fonts/curves which already sit on top).
There is no reason to have numerous bitmaps and drop shadows etc and then to send as a very complicated multi-bitmap file. Shadows, transparencies etc. are always rendered as bitmaps when sending out of CorelDRAW.
In a new file (or a new page of working file), Select interactive transparencies, drop shadows, lenses, etc. and bitmaps. Convert all to single bitmap.
I choose the CMYK color model so that I have most control for what inks are being used.
This is artwork dependent... you'll need to think about what's in your files and how the RIP sees it later.
Below, I have numerous shadows and transparencies. All should be made into a new bitmap at for best and reliable results.
The resolution you choose should be reasonable for the circumstances. 200 DPI is plenty for most signs over 4 Sq ft.
Click for large version, compare Object Manager for both.

My fan asked about my EPS settings;
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Adobe Reader Quirks
Sometime Corel users have tough moments and wonder about other brands of software.
Those who use various brands besides Corel know that it's not a perfect world over there either.
Here's an example of a PDF that was sent in to a print shop today. Things run at a fast pace, but thankfully I caught something rather important on the printout from Acro Reader 5. Can you see the problem? I took a quick photo of the output sheets from 2 vers of Reader.
click on image for a clear view.
Those who use various brands besides Corel know that it's not a perfect world over there either.
Here's an example of a PDF that was sent in to a print shop today. Things run at a fast pace, but thankfully I caught something rather important on the printout from Acro Reader 5. Can you see the problem? I took a quick photo of the output sheets from 2 vers of Reader.
click on image for a clear view.


