Pixel perfect transformable vector shapes that keep their borders while scaling..?

What is the best approach to creating a vector rectangle that could have a gradient fill and a solid border of, say, 3 pixels and this shape could be animated (seperately for W and H) while no anti-aliasing or warping of the border would occur?
Is it best to start with a AI shape or a native AE shape?
I have noticed that both AE and AI can have faded borders, there are semi transparent pixels on the edge of the border so it is not a clean 3 pixel solid. I have also noticed that its difficult to create an extact width and height even while taking the border into account.
I can't calculate it to the pixel like I would in CSS. So is there any working method to create extact pixels for AE?
Thanks

As I re-read your qustion I thought you might be asking how to scale a shape layer with a stroke but keep the stroke the same size visually so that a shape layer with a stroke of 10 pixels would still have a stroke of ten pixels when scaled to 200%. If that is what you want then add this expression to the stroke with and scale the shape layer with the transform>scale property.
sf = transform.scale[0] / 100;
sv = value;
sv / sf

Similar Messages

Checkboxes that keep their value after a refresh

Hi
I am trying to work with Checkboxes in an HTML region which will make another region appear or disappear when they are checked or unchecked. As I understand it I need to submit the page to make regions appear or disappear - but when I do this by default the checkbox forgets its value.
My checkbox is based on the static love: STATIC2:;Y which should make it ticked when the value is 'Y' and unticked when it is 'N'. I have set its default value to Y.
I have read online about how to make a checkbox remember its value by putting a computation on it that will set the value of the checkbox to 'N' when it is null. Unfortunately when I refresh the page - if the checkbox is ticked then everything is fine (as it was before) - but if it is unticked then I suddenly get two checkboxes - both of which are ticked and one of which has an 'N' after it.
Does anyone have any idea what I'm doing wrong? It's driving me mad trying to achieve something that that I'd expect to just work without any effort.
I am using Apex 4.1.1.00.23
Thanks
Dan

user5476823 wrote:
HiWelcome to the forum: please read the FAQ and forum sticky threads (if you haven't done so already)), and update your forum profile with a real handle instead of "user5476823".
When you have a problem you'll get a faster, more effective response by including as much relevant information as possible upfront. This should include:
<li>Full APEX version
<li>Full DB/version/edition/host OS
<li>Web server architecture (EPG, OHS or APEX listener/host OS)
<li>Browser(s) and version(s) used
<li>Theme
<li>Template(s)
<li>Region/item type(s) (making particular distinction as to whether a "report" is a standard report, an interactive report, or in fact an "updateable report" (i.e. a tabular form)
With APEX we're also fortunate to have a great resource in apex.oracle.com where we can reproduce and share problems. Reproducing things there is the best way to troubleshoot most issues, especially those relating to layout and visual formatting. If you expect a detailed answer then it's appropriate for you to take on a significant part of the effort by getting as far as possible with an example of the problem on apex.oracle.com before asking for assistance with specific issues, which we can then see at first hand.
I am trying to work with Checkboxes in an HTML region which will make another region appear or disappear when they are checked or unchecked. As I understand it I need to submit the page to make regions appear or disappear - but when I do this by default the checkbox forgets its value.
My checkbox is based on the static love: STATIC2:;Y which should make it ticked when the value is 'Y' and unticked when it is 'N'. I have set its default value to Y.
I have read online about how to make a checkbox remember its value by putting a computation on it that will set the value of the checkbox to 'N' when it is null. Unfortunately when I refresh the page - if the checkbox is ticked then everything is fine (as it was before) - but if it is unticked then I suddenly get two checkboxes - both of which are ticked and one of which has an 'N' after it.
Does anyone have any idea what I'm doing wrong? It's driving me mad trying to achieve something that that I'd expect to just work without any effort.Don't set the checkbox value to "N". Leave the default as null, and check that the value is "Y" or null as necessary.
APEX checkboxes probably don't work in the way you expect: a checkbox is displayed for each value in the LOV. With the checkbox item LOV Display Extra Values property set to Yes, extra values that are not included in the LOV definition—like your "N" default—will be displayed as additional checkboxes.
See +{message:id=10738376}+ for a similar situation.

How do I change the units for the vector shape stroke in the option bar?

I work with vector shapes very often in Photoshop. In CS6, they have added the stroke and fill tools in the option bar.
If I open a file with vector shapes that was created in CS5, the stroke defaults to 3pt. I would prefer it to default to pixels instead of points. I have found that if I change the settings prior to creating a new shape, it retains those attributes for all future shapes. However, if I am working on an older file, and would like to use this tool, it is frustrating to have to change this unit every time.
Any assistance would be helpful. Thanks!

Every time I move the volume, it moves back!
Check, if you have a volume automation set on the software instrument track.
If the track volume automation curve is enabled, the volume slider for the track will move with the automation curve.
Click the automation curves disclosure triangle in the track header and disable the volume automation.

Please bring color back to vector shapes in Layer Palette with no-thumbnails.

Please bring the color box back to vector shapes!
I am one not to use images in my layer palette, and in CS5 this was a breeze, but now the icons are different, there is no white box on the icons anymore (which really helps when scanning, and differentiating from folders), and I can't preview the color of the vector shape that I created in Photoshop. Vector shapes are a big part of my work. Before it would show a box with the color, now it shows nothing. The linking vector box is not neccesarily important as long as when I click it, the points become live.
Also the dividing lines for layers is not strong enough, doesn't have to be white, but at least gray. Black is definately not helping to divide the layers. And for nested layers, having the dividing line go half way to the edge really helps alot.
I noticed that a lot is different about the "no-thumbnails" version of the layer palette, and some I can live with, some changes I cannot. But being able to preview the color of a vector shapes is important for me, and seeing the white box behind the icon really helps when scaning a lot of layers. I've attached a comparison, also I have attached an image of how my layer palette looks on a daily basis from CS5 and CS6, I also opened the folder, and matched the palettes so you can see what I mean. Those little things really make a difference when scanning up and down 50-100 layers.
Even though setting the layer palette to no images may be a rarity among photoshop users, it's something that I value in photoshop, especially since my documents have hundreds of layers.

I think it was a fair assessment given the circumastances of the answer you provided, Jeanne. Also, another thing is that posting under an "employee" account, you are speaking for the company. You are representing the company whether it is your intention or not. Even if you explictly state that what you say is your personal opinion, people might have mixed feelings about what you say and mistake it for a belief that the whole company shares. So be careful with that, just as a note for the future.
But anyway, as for the issue at hand... That still doesn't give us anything other than "we won't do it." And again, I advise you to look through the post I referenced to. There are some very easy solutions there that help make the layers palette much easier to scan and work with. It's not too difficult to fix this and as already said above, you're already working on a fix for the thumbnails themselves anyway.
The solution to this problem could be as easy as this (I can provide another graphic for the darker UI settings, if you want):
What you do is:
Display a bigger thumbnail of the layer icon (yes, that will use up more space in the no-thumbnail view, but that's not a huge problem compared to what you have now)
Clearly display the content of the layer (in this case, both layers are gradients, but it could also just have a solid color fill)
Lighten the color of unselected layer's names (to make the properties of the layer itself stand out better),
Make the layer thumbnail itself (if it's a vector layer) toggle the path outline on and off and
Bring back the separation line from CS5, which indicated the layer's position in the grouping hierarchy.
If you do that, you've already solved quite a lot of the scannability and readability problems. In the future, you could improve the iconography to be better optimized for quick scanning, to make them stand out better (give them more depth) and so on, but for now, this should be enough to make things better for most people. And also, this will not take up too much development time. You've already got the logic of the separation lines from CS5, for example. Shouldn't be too much of a problem to implement in CS6. I'm not going to speak for the other things, because I don't know too much of the internal workings of the program, but it shouldn't be too much of an issue.
Trust me, this change will make a world of difference. People will love this even if they don't understand that it's there or why they love it.
Would you like me to provide detailed wireframes and documentation, so your designers don't have to worry their heads about this one? Just asking, because this is a change that should really be pushed through, no matter what.
Cheers,
Riho Kroll

Converting Vector shapes from Photoshop to Indesign

I am trying to convert a Photoshop document to an Indesign document. I have vector shapes that I want to transfer to the new INDD document. However, I cannot seem to find a workaround that maintains the ability to edit the vector shapes once placed in the INDD document.
Is there a way to transfer the vector graphics from PSD to INDD so they will maintain their editing capabilities? So far, my work around has been to recreate the vector shapes in Illustrator and copy and paste them into the INDD document. However, this is very tedious. Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

Jambo,
You could try to save the file as pdf if you want to take the whole content as one from AI and open the same in Photoshop.
Or save the file as Photoshop and while making the files make sure you put the content in different layers while creating in Ai and then save as PSD (Photoshop Document)
While save make sure you have write layers option selected when you save as PSD in advance options
Mandhir

Application requires an Xtra (vector Shape)...?

I am getting the error "This application requires an Xtra
(vector Shape) that either does not exist or failed to initialize
properly. Please make sure the appropriate Xtras are in the Xtras
folder(s)." and when you click on OK it gives another similar error
with the Xtra parenthesis name changed.
I am working on XP and on the same computer it works perfect
for the local admin user but whenever you do it with another user
it gives the error. (Even if that user is given local admin user
rights). I am going nuts!
Please help

Chris Will wrote:
>
http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/shockwave/default/english/win95nt/latest/Shockwave_In staller_Full.exe%3E
>
> HTTP 404 Not Found.
What's with the %3E entity on the end of the URL you posted?
What
happens if you remove it ;-)
Here's a tinyurl that hopefully won't wrap (being the reason
I bracketed
the original in with <> characters)
http://tinyurl.com/2f2brm

How to create a custom pattern that tiles without borders

I know that I can save a pattern as a swatch and use it as fill, but how to create a shape that tiles without borders?
My pattern now has closed paths on its edges which show up in the tiling. I don't know how to create it with open paths.
Thanks for your help!

rahneo,
As I (mis)undersatnd it, you may Direct Select and delete the unwanted path segments.
Deselect first before (each time) you do it.
Otherwise, you may create a nofill/nostroke rectangle covering the exact part you wisg to have in the tile and bring it to the bottom of the stack of objects that forms the tile.

Pixel perfect vector shapes

Hi There,
How do you get Fireworks to display/output sharp edges? I'm using a 10px x 10px grid which I'm snapping to and all my shapes are exact pixel dimensions but still don't get sharp edges.
Is there a trick to achieving this?
Cheers

You should try setting stroke alignment to outside or inside of shape to get pixel perfect strokes and set stroke itself to full pixels. As per CSS box model borders are outside of box dimensions, but I prefer setting them to inside in Illustrator so that I can control visual dimensions of blocks.
I'm using Illustrator for most of my web designs and the hardest part is to get new objects to be in precise pixel dimensions. Snapping is not pixel perfect unless you turn on pixel preview and snap to pixel options. Drawback of enabling 'pixel preview' and 'snap to pixel' is that smart guides are then turned off.
Currently I am looking for a solution to make existing designs pixel perfect. That could be some kind of script which iterates over all selected objects and rounds position and dimensions to full pixels.
It's tiresome to correct hundreds of imperfectly placed and sized objects in designs created by web-unaware designers.

Holding Shift when creating Vector Shape - No snap to pixels!

Hi there,
Adobe Photoshop Version: 13.0.1 (13.0.1 20120808.r.519 2012/08/08:21:00:00) x64
Operating System: Windows 7 64-bit
Version: 6.1 Service Pack 1
I'm experiencing the following problem:
When creating vector shapes and holding shift the shape do not snap to pixel. Snap to pixels is turned on.
It is pretty strange.
Please check the video below:
http://screencast.com/t/1iys3tDJHpJt
Initially when do not hold shift shapes is pixel perfect. As you can see in the image first 2 shapes are made free hand.
SK

Instead of holding the shift key try pressing the + key to change the path operations to Add to Shape Area and the - key to subtract from shape area.
That is strange behaviour compared to cs5 where having snap to pixels checked for the rectangle tool does align the edges when holding down shift
where as cs6 13.01 doesn't align the edges when holding shift either with the snap vector preferences of align edges checked.
It only seems to align the pixels when snap vectors in the preferences is checked and using add to shape area is actually selected in the drop down.
That's what the plus key does.
I guess i was under the impression that align edges was supposed to be the same as the snap to pixels was in cs5.
Message was edited by: R_Kelly

CS4 Vector shapes look pixelated

I'm new here. In fact I just signed up to get help with this issue.
Anyway. In school last semester, I took a computer art class in which we made things in Photoshop CS4. Now that the semester is over, I took my work home with me (I also have PS CS4). Anyway, one of the exercises we did was creating vector art. In school, the vectors that I made turned out fine. The edges were clearly defined and there where no real issues to be see. However, when I took it home to look at it, I noticed that all of the vector shapes and lines look pixilated... as if I drew them with a brush or something.
Here is a screenshot of what it looks like in CS4:
Also, for clarification, here is another example:
First, the new image settings:
Red elipse:
Zoomed in:
Anyway, I admit to not being 100% knowledgeable in the program... so it might just be a silly simple mistake or setting that I don't have checked or something. Any help would be appreciated as this issue is really annoying me.
Also, if it matters, my computer is much better standing that the ones we used in school.

Two things:
First, if the Vector Mask path is active in the Paths panel, the path will be visible. This can cause the edges of shapes to look raggedy.
The main culprit, though, is that you need to view the image at 100% (Control+Alt+ZERO, 'Actual Pixels' in the Zoom tool Option Bar) for the shapes to look smooth. Very often, viewing at other than 100% can cause visible artifacts to appear on the screen that aren't actually in the image.

Sharing a vector mask that shapes effects

I want to have multiple effects on a shape defined by a vector mask: two strokes--with different blend modes--and a bevel. Because I need different blend modes, I cannot use the trick of using a two-color gradient for the stroke. Because of the order in which effects are applied, I cannot use inner glow, stroke, and bevel. (I can't get the inner glow to apply correctly.)
I can get the result I want by duplicating my shape layer and applying different effects to each layer, using 0% fill. However, changes to the shape of the vector mask on one layer must then be propagated to the other layers. (Tip: this isn't as bad as it sounds if you alt-drag the vector mask from one to another, replacing the destination with the updated shape.)
I could almost get the result I want by putting the vector mask on a group for multiple layers, except that the opacity of the group doesn't shape the layers within it.
Is there any way you can think of to use a single vector mask that shapes the effects for multiple layers?

Kind of hard to recreate the unseen, but maybe this example will help.
Right clicking on the elayer effect will give you the option to create layers. This will put the effects onto their own layer. Duplicating the stroke layer and changing the blending mode should then be possible like the attached image.

Vector shape- independ on pixel grig snapping

Hi Guys I am wondering. I wanna use to shapee tool or whatever- ractangle tool- Generally said I need to create some shape. But at photoshop is everything snap my new shape to pixels. Like in the backroground is some invisible pixel grids and everything is snaping to whole pixels. I dont want this. I Want to use whole space without automatic pixels adapting to my shapes. I want to be independent in creating my shapes without snaping to pixels grid.
And also want to ask you. If you would like create new guide lines it is non dependable on pixel grid. But after it when I want to snap my nex objects to it- it not possible. And when I tick in preferences/ general: ,,snap vector tool to pixel grid" everything become dependable to pixels and everything is snapping to pixels. I don t wanna this…
please advise.
thank you so much

Untick "Align Edges" in Options bar to prevent shapes being rendered with grid alignment.

HT4859 does anyone have any idea how one can keep their data on iPad after leaving icloud as it appears that you loose all data when doing this...its killing me!!!

does anyone have any idea how one can keep their data on iPad after leaving icloud as it appears that you loose all data when doing this...its killing me!!!

rtilghman wrote:
telling me to buy a new router is NOT a solution.
And why not? Apple is selling these things like BigMacs. They can't make enough of them. You've been suffering since May because you refuse to get a decent router.
Can you imagine if a company that makes a refrigerator told me that I needed to upgrade my electrical system to rectify a problem with their device? What kind of response IS that?!?!
What if the problem with their device is that it requires a new-fangled "grounded" outlet and your circa 1890 house doesn't have grounded outlets. Would you refuse to purchase a $ 25 adapter on principle?

How to only keep overlapping parts of vector shapes

I have a vector shape on top of a vector path drawing. The shape on top protrudes over the edge of the drawing underneath. Is there an easy way to simply remove the part of the shape that overhangs?
In the screenshot here, I want to remove the part of the green circle that is not on the underlying green shape:

Have you tried the Knife tool? Alternatively, you can draw a retangle over the area you want to remove, select both objects and then and choose Modify > Combine Paths > Punch.

Why do vector shapes in scaled smart objects blur?

This remains a point of frustration.
Why does converting a vector shape to a smart object in Photoshop mean that it's then treated as a bitmap and blurs when scaled up?
If i paste the same vector shape into Illustrator and then back into Photoshop as a smart object it then behaves correctly, and remains sharp.
See the image for example of what i mean. Left is the master shape, centre is it converted into a smart object in Photoshop, right pasted to and from Illustrator. These were then scaled 300% resulting in the centre one blurring.
I don't really want to have to invovle Illustrator in this way and keep all my vector work in Photoshop now it has the tools to do so, but this issue creates me a lot of extra work.
Or am i doing something wrong?
Rob

Smart Object layers are transform to other sizes through interpolating the pixels rendered for the embedded object not be using vector graphics on the embedded object.. If your resize resizes the pixel count way un the image will become soft. Yoy can try seting your Photoshop Default interpolation setting to other setting then Adobe default Bicubic Automatic to something like plain bicubic which IMO is a better general purpose option then Bicubic Automatic.
You can also open the embedded object by double clicking the smart layers smart object icon in the layers palette. Once opened in Photoshop resize the vector graphic using Image size and save the embedded vector object larger. Photoshop will update the smart object layers content then.

Pixel perfect transformable vector shapes that keep their borders while scaling..?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for