Rant Help Make Our Lives Better: Reform Illustrator's Canvas Size Limit

[Rick]

For accuracy and scale NOTHING beats cad! We use Rhino. All of the tools are ten times more efficient than any graphics software. I rarely "design" but when I do, all of the base work starts in Rhino. I even secretly love the command prompt...nice to not have to find a specific palette or use the mouse for every single thing. I do however find myself trying to type in "generic command" in Illustrator, and use key commands in Rhino! Neither work!

I use key commands (stock/ custom/actions) with no problem - never had accuracy issues with Illustrator with CADTools and I can design in multiple scales on a single artboard, for CAD I did use Auto-Cad, have tried Rhino... but are clunky for graphic work.

 

[Bobby H]

IMHO CAD programs, such as AutoCAD or whatever, are lousy for sign making. They're good for designing buildings, not signs. Just about any CAD file I receive has problems with it. Paths are often "exploded" into thousands of little 2 point line segments. Hardly any "closed" shapes exist in the document. If the lettering has been converted to outlines the path quality is all chunky and crude looking (and often consisting of lots of little 2 point straight line segments). I usually request anyone sending over CAD files of building elevations to export it as a PDF in a set scale. Anything they've stuck in there representing sign graphics has to be re-created. Their CAD art doesn't cut it.

Type handling stinks in most CAD programs, even the really expensive ones. I consider it mandatory for any real design application to support the full OpenType standard. Too many applications out there only see the basic character set in OTFs and ignore all the cool bells and whistles often built into those fonts. For instance each weight of Bookmania has over 3000 glyphs, but many applications don't see any more than the 250 or so characters originally supported in the old TTF and T1 standards. It's like these applications are stuck in the 1990's. And now there's two new OpenType font standards. There's OpenType Variable fonts, which brings the Multiple Master concept back to life, but with much larger OTF character sets. And there's OpenType SVG Color fonts. As far as I can tell Adobe's core applications (Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign) are the only mainstream graphics applications that support these new types of fonts.

 

[Rick]

IMHO CAD programs, such as AutoCAD or whatever, are lousy for sign making. They're good for designing buildings, not signs. Just about any CAD file I receive has problems with it. Paths are often "exploded" into thousands of little 2 point line segments. Hardly any "closed" shapes exist in the document. If the lettering has been converted to outlines the path quality is all chunky and crude looking (and often consisting of lots of little 2 point straight line segments). I usually request anyone sending over CAD files of building elevations to export it as a PDF in a set scale. Anything they've stuck in there representing sign graphics has to be re-created. Their CAD art doesn't cut it.

Type handling stinks in most CAD programs, even the really expensive ones. I consider it mandatory for any real design application to support the full OpenType standard. Too many applications out there only see the basic character set in OTFs and ignore all the cool bells and whistles often built into those fonts. For instance each weight of Bookmania has over 3000 glyphs, but many applications don't see any more than the 250 or so characters originally supported in the old TTF and T1 standards. It's like these applications are stuck in the 1990's. And now there's two new OpenType font standards. There's OpenType Variable fonts, which brings the Multiple Master concept back to life, but with much larger OTF character sets. And there's OpenType SVG Color fonts. As far as I can tell Adobe's core applications (Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign) are the only mainstream graphics applications that support these new types of fonts.

I agree, when I used Auto-Cad, we were required to have all drawing in Auto-Cad format in a specific format and style, I designed the project in Illustrator to the sheet size we were using in Auto-Cad and imported them in, making sure we kept the segments together in case a sign shop used those files for production.Did all our call outs and measuring in AutoCad. Occasionally they would get messed up in someone exported them wrong. We ended up sending over the .ai files when the projects were awarded.

 

[yor]

Or.... Give up the fight and switch to CorelDraw

=))

 

[ams]

I actually really liked Freehand.
Was never a huge fan of Corel, however I liked it's bare bones feel. Any vector software is great if you are creating and producing it all. We can't get away from Adobe due it's popularity among designers. Every time I see "non-native" effects in Illy my head hits the desk. With our rip using the APPE it only makes since to keep everything Adobe. There is a postsript engine in Caldera as well, but I haven't had much luck with it's transparency and color handling.

I really feel like Adobe has broken Illustrator and all of their apps. It's all more focused on looking a certain way than acting a certain way. The newest version is buggy as hell.

In my opinion the dream team will always be Illustrator 10 and Photoshop 7.

Before X3, Corel was trash. Then X4 made a huge head way and now with X8 it's becoming standard in the sign industry. It's above Flexi and pretty much tied with Illy.

 

[Bobby H]

CorelDRAW has been a "standard" in most sign shops for over 25 years. It didn't just start growing into that role. Nevertheless, CorelDRAW is not a replacement for other sign production applications such as Flexi or other "CAS" programs. CorelDRAW doesn't replace large format RIPs, like the one you can have added to Flexi or stand-alone RIP software like Onyx Thrive, VersaWorks, etc. It sure doesn't replace an application like EnRoute either. Any credible sign shop is going to be running at least a few different applications. I don't see there ever being a single application that "does it all."

As for CorelDRAW being "trash" prior to X3, I don't agree with that at all. Some versions have been better (and more stable) than others. CorelDRAW has been able to do tasks like technical drawing better than its rivals, and that dates back to the early 1990's. I crank out sketches with dimensions, specifications and all sorts of other stuff much faster than I can in Illustrator simply because CorelDRAW has a lot more in the way of anchor point editing tools built directly into the program. Adobe Illustrator's stock tool set is pretty lousy in that regard; the user is forced to buy add-ons to get the same functionality.

Now, I'll often start a design that has to be large format printed in CorelDRAW, building up all the objects there, but then I'll usually bring that art into Adobe Illustrator to do all the color work. Adobe's color accuracy is better. Things like gradients and transparency effects turn out far better in Illustrator. Corel's gradients have all sorts of banding issues (even when maxing the steps out at 999). I was previously forced to use Illustrator or InDesign if I wanted to use any special OpenType characters in a typeface. CorelDRAW finally started properly supporting OpenType at version X6 (and actually bringing some nice ideas to the table there, which Illustrator later copied).

Our shop is kind of forced to support both CorelDRAW and Adobe's applications. We have over 25 years worth of CDR archive files (some of which we're having to re-save forward since the latest versions of CorelDRAW stupidly remove support of the first few versions of CDR files). Lots of client art comes over in Adobe formats. CorelDRAW is still pretty flaky at importing AI and PDF files.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Our shop is kind of forced to support both CorelDRAW and Adobe's applications. We have over 25 years worth of CDR archive files (some of which we're having to re-save forward since the latest versions of CorelDRAW stupidly remove support of the first few versions of CDR files).

This could be a couple of things, either a passive aggressive way of getting some people that are still using the older software (by however means they are doing so, I still have older software that I still run, some go as far back as 86) or coding changes may have rendered some functionality deprecated in how they are translated in newer versions. So even if they did import those older files, they may not render the same way.

Lots of client art comes over in Adobe formats. CorelDRAW is still pretty flaky at importing AI and PDF files.

More then likely always will be. Even disregarding proprietary format concerns, who knows how widely different they are under the hood.

 

[ams]

CorelDRAW has been a "standard" in most sign shops for over 25 years. It didn't just start growing into that role. Nevertheless, CorelDRAW is not a replacement for other sign production applications such as Flexi or other "CAS" programs. CorelDRAW doesn't replace large format RIPs, like the one you can have added to Flexi or stand-alone RIP software like Onyx Thrive, VersaWorks, etc. It sure doesn't replace an application like EnRoute either. Any credible sign shop is going to be running at least a few different applications. I don't see there ever being a single application that "does it all."

As for CorelDRAW being "trash" prior to X3, I don't agree with that at all. Some versions have been better (and more stable) than others. CorelDRAW has been able to do tasks like technical drawing better than its rivals, and that dates back to the early 1990's. I crank out sketches with dimensions, specifications and all sorts of other stuff much faster than I can in Illustrator simply because CorelDRAW has a lot more in the way of anchor point editing tools built directly into the program. Adobe Illustrator's stock tool set is pretty lousy in that regard; the user is forced to buy add-ons to get the same functionality.

Now, I'll often start a design that has to be large format printed in CorelDRAW, building up all the objects there, but then I'll usually bring that art into Adobe Illustrator to do all the color work. Adobe's color accuracy is better. Things like gradients and transparency effects turn out far better in Illustrator. Corel's gradients have all sorts of banding issues (even when maxing the steps out at 999). I was previously forced to use Illustrator or InDesign if I wanted to use any special OpenType characters in a typeface. CorelDRAW finally started properly supporting OpenType at version X6 (and actually bringing some nice ideas to the table there, which Illustrator later copied).

Our shop is kind of forced to support both CorelDRAW and Adobe's applications. We have over 25 years worth of CDR archive files (some of which we're having to re-save forward since the latest versions of CorelDRAW stupidly remove support of the first few versions of CDR files). Lots of client art comes over in Adobe formats. CorelDRAW is still pretty flaky at importing AI and PDF files.

Of course not, Corel is not built to be a RIP program or a routing program. I am talking about designing which is a big part of a sign company. It's not an all in one. Illy is not an all in one, it's for designing, it's not a RIP program or routing program. I am a die hard fan of Corel, but I do know Corel wasn't as popular in the early versions.

 

[Andy_warp]

I use key commands (stock/ custom/actions) with no problem - never had accuracy issues with Illustrator with CADTools and I can design in multiple scales on a single artboard, for CAD I did use Auto-Cad, have tried Rhino... but are clunky for graphic work.

I like the way rhino handles offsets. There are some curve blending tools and being able to input values for moving/scaling/rotating right at the cursor make thinks fast. All of the constraints are very useful, nice to use for keeping opposing curves tangential, things Illy can’t do. Type is definitely not cads strength. Haven’t used cad tools. I only use cad to “design” my base geometry. I’ve found a lot of people cheat on that type of thing in Illy, hiding their less than perfect geometry with strokes and effects. Rhino has a direct export to .ai and they work really well together. The Grasshopper plugin lets you do some pretty awesome and powerful math while keeping parameters open for edits. Just google grasshopper for rhino.

 

[Andy_warp]

IMHO CAD programs, such as AutoCAD or whatever, are lousy for sign making. They're good for designing buildings, not signs. Just about any CAD file I receive has problems with it. Paths are often "exploded" into thousands of little 2 point line segments. Hardly any "closed" shapes exist in the document. If the lettering has been converted to outlines the path quality is all chunky and crude looking (and often consisting of lots of little 2 point straight line segments). I usually request anyone sending over CAD files of building elevations to export it as a PDF in a set scale. Anything they've stuck in there representing sign graphics has to be re-created. Their CAD art doesn't cut it.

Type handling stinks in most CAD programs, even the really expensive ones. I consider it mandatory for any real design application to support the full OpenType standard. Too many applications out there only see the basic character set in OTFs and ignore all the cool bells and whistles often built into those fonts. For instance each weight of Bookmania has over 3000 glyphs, but many applications don't see any more than the 250 or so characters originally supported in the old TTF and T1 standards. It's like these applications are stuck in the 1990's. And now there's two new OpenType font standards. There's OpenType Variable fonts, which brings the Multiple Master concept back to life, but with much larger OTF character sets. And there's OpenType SVG Color fonts. As far as I can tell Adobe's core applications (Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign) are the only mainstream graphics applications that support these new types of fonts.

Just like in illustrator, you have to know how to create clean vectors in cad. Things like closing objects, booleans, and keeping curves native as curves. If you are a hack in cad, you are probably not going to get clean vectors in illustrator. I work in outline view in illustrator for most stuff. Yes type in cad (any flavor) stinks! Scratching my head a bit about the notion that sign shops can’t benefit from cad though. It’s just a tool in my box. Rhino has a direct export to ai, keeping geometry as curves and such. I’ve seen the faceted and bastardized curves you mentioned, but if you have a good handle on 2d cad operations it rarely happens.

 

[Andy_warp]

I agree, when I used Auto-Cad, we were required to have all drawing in Auto-Cad format in a specific format and style, I designed the project in Illustrator to the sheet size we were using in Auto-Cad and imported them in, making sure we kept the segments together in case a sign shop used those files for production.Did all our call outs and measuring in AutoCad. Occasionally they would get messed up in someone exported them wrong. We ended up sending over the .ai files when the projects were awarded.

I have to do a bunch of templating for dimensional signage. Thinks like 8 ft tall typefaces with a couple feet of depth. The analytical tools and unwrapping of curves surfaces are essential to marry up print with a physical surface. Sometimes I have to know the surface area of the round part of a “p” and so forth. Another great function is the ability to project 2 d lines and curves onto 3D surfaces in 3D space. I can show exactly where obstructions will occur in my graphic templates before my clients have even started their design. Another way I’ll use this is to show elevations dims from the ground on a large sweeping curve. It really helps with knowing where messaging will land in the real world.

We build aluminum tube tension fabric frames. I print the fabric.

 

[Bobby H]

This could be a couple of things, either a passive aggressive way of getting some people that are still using the older software (by however means they are doing so, I still have older software that I still run, some go as far back as 86) or coding changes may have rendered some functionality deprecated in how they are translated in newer versions. So even if they did import those older files, they may not render the same way.

Opening really old files and getting unexpected results is definitely a legit complaint with CorelDRAW. This is one reason why I tend to convert all fonts to outlines and release/finalize any live text on path effects once I am finished with a sign design. The type handling in CorelDRAW has changed over the years. Even if you have the exact same font files installed that were used to create an archived design back in the mid 1990's the type may go all wonky when that old file is opened in a much newer version of CorelDRAW.

Still, I see no legit reason for them to just arbitrarily decide to completely disable file open/import functions for any CDR file saved in a version earlier than version 5. It forces a company to keep an old computer alive running an older version of CorelDRAW that can open those files and save them to a later, more compatible file version. This is a serious knock against them regarding comparisons to Adobe Illustrator. You can still open a 30 year old Illustrator 88 file in Illustrator CC 2018.

I am talking about designing which is a big part of a sign company. It's not an all in one. Illy is not an all in one, it's for designing, it's not a RIP program or routing program. I am a die hard fan of Corel, but I do know Corel wasn't as popular in the early versions.

I've been at my current job for almost 25 years and have been doing sign designs and other computer graphics work for almost 30 years. I know the history very well. When vinyl cutters and routing tables started revolutionizing the sign industry the activity was all very much PC-dominated (MS-DOS then Windows). Companies developing graphics software for the Mac platform didn't seem to be interested in the sign industry niche at all. Not nearly as much sign making software was available on the Mac side. That confined most sign shops to using DOS/Windows-based PCs. And on that platform back then CorelDRAW was the only credible choice for mainstream vector graphics software. The alternatives to CorelDRAW were either garbage or non-existent until the mid-to-late 1990's.

CorelDRAW also sold itself pretty well by including a lot of bonus goodies, like fonts and clip art. Adobe Illustrator hardly included squat in the standalone box. Freehand was a little better in terms of bonus fonts and clip art, but it paled in comparison to what CorelDRAW included. Deneba was the only one that really tried to match Corel on the fonts and clip art front with what they bundled in Canvas (over 2000 URW fonts for instance). I remember picking up a competitive upgrade of Canvas 7 for $99. I didn't use the application very much, but the fonts and clip art were worth it.

By the way, the Mac platform still isn't well supported in the sign manufacturing industry. Gerber Omega is Windows-only. Flexi and the other SAi applications like EnRoute are Windows-only (Flexi used to have a Mac version, but not anymore). SignLab is Windows-only. Our RIP software, Onyx Thrive and Roland VersaWorks are Windows-only. The LED message center software we use from Daktronics and other vendors is Windows-only.

I like the way rhino handles offsets. There are some curve blending tools and being able to input values for moving/scaling/rotating right at the cursor make thinks fast. All of the constraints are very useful, nice to use for keeping opposing curves tangential, things Illy can’t do.

This gets into why I use CorelDRAW rather than Illustrator for building up objects in sign designs. OTOH, there are plug-ins from Astute Graphics (VectorScribe, PathScribe, etc) that add a great deal of technical drawing capability among other things. Too often I wind up back in CorelDRAW anyway when I need larger art board real estate -which gets back to the original topic: Illustrator's 227" X 227" art board limit.

Just like in illustrator, you have to know how to create clean vectors in cad. Things like closing objects, booleans, and keeping curves native as curves. If you are a hack in cad, you are probably not going to get clean vectors in illustrator. I work in outline view in illustrator for most stuff. Yes type in cad (any flavor) stinks! Scratching my head a bit about the notion that sign shops can’t benefit from cad though. It’s just a tool in my box. Rhino has a direct export to ai, keeping geometry as curves and such. I’ve seen the faceted and bastardized curves you mentioned, but if you have a good handle on 2d cad operations it rarely happens.

I'm not the one creating these CAD files; they're supplied by customers. They don't care about creating objects with closed paths because they're not applying fills to those objects, much less sending them to vinyl cutters, routing tables, etc. It's just like customers home-brewing their logos or some other artwork, dropping off a JPEG of it and expecting that to work. To these people a digital file is a digital file and because it's digital it should automatically work, "it's in the computer already!"

 

[WildWestDesigns]

This is one reason why I tend to convert all fonts to outlines and release/finalize any live text on path effects once I am finished with a sign design.

See to me, this should be done period anyway. Once you get in the habit of doing it, it's no big deal.

Still, I see no legit reason for them to just arbitrarily decide to completely disable file open/import functions for any CDR file saved in a version earlier than version 5.

Not knowing if it's due to a coding reason or not, they may or may not have arbitrary changed it (they could have changed the functionality of something that could have altered how a newer version reads an older file, I'm not saying that's the case, just a possibility that it could be). Having said that, it's their software, if they want to do that, it's their call. Like it or not, that's legit enough.

The joys of archiving in a proprietary format. Don't archive solely in a proprietary format if you don't want to run that risk.

It forces a company to keep an old computer alive running an older version of CorelDRAW that can open those files and save them to a later, more compatible file version.

Not necessary true. Always have a VM or even an emulation option (most think that they are the same thing, they are not). Now someone else may not like those other options, but they are other options. Of course, a lot of open source programs have the ability to open those older files as well, Ai, CDR, PSD etc, so that's an option if it's only opening.

I'm running Win 98 programs on a 3 year old Lenovo workstation. I'm not a fan of running older equipment along the lines of computers, so software solutions, especially if the newer computer is properly spec'ed out, is better for me. But like I said, there are open source programs that may be able to read those files as well.


But by and large, this is a risk that everyone runs when operating only in closed source programs and only using their proprietary formats. Just the game that they play.

 

[Bobby H]

The problem is there is no complete "open source" solution for all the software needs of a sign shop. Going open source is pretty much a non-starter. And even plenty of open source applications and the file standards they try to establish come and go.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

The problem is there is no complete "open source" solution for all the software needs of a sign shop. Going open source is pretty much a non-starter. And even plenty of open source applications and the file standards they try to establish come and go.

I said open source to view, said nothing about total operation certainly beyond that scope.

I actually can, and have, gone totally open source (including the OS), but I am not a sign shop. It does depend on the specific need(s) of the shop.

 

[Andy_warp]

Opening really old files and getting unexpected results is definitely a legit complaint with CorelDRAW. This is one reason why I tend to convert all fonts to outlines and release/finalize any live text on path effects once I am finished with a sign design. The type handling in CorelDRAW has changed over the years. Even if you have the exact same font files installed that were used to create an archived design back in the mid 1990's the type may go all wonky when that old file is opened in a much newer version of CorelDRAW.

Still, I see no legit reason for them to just arbitrarily decide to completely disable file open/import functions for any CDR file saved in a version earlier than version 5. It forces a company to keep an old computer alive running an older version of CorelDRAW that can open those files and save them to a later, more compatible file version. This is a serious knock against them regarding comparisons to Adobe Illustrator. You can still open a 30 year old Illustrator 88 file in Illustrator CC 2018.



I've been at my current job for almost 25 years and have been doing sign designs and other computer graphics work for almost 30 years. I know the history very well. When vinyl cutters and routing tables started revolutionizing the sign industry the activity was all very much PC-dominated (MS-DOS then Windows). Companies developing graphics software for the Mac platform didn't seem to be interested in the sign industry niche at all. Not nearly as much sign making software was available on the Mac side. That confined most sign shops to using DOS/Windows-based PCs. And on that platform back then CorelDRAW was the only credible choice for mainstream vector graphics software. The alternatives to CorelDRAW were either garbage or non-existent until the mid-to-late 1990's.

CorelDRAW also sold itself pretty well by including a lot of bonus goodies, like fonts and clip art. Adobe Illustrator hardly included squat in the standalone box. Freehand was a little better in terms of bonus fonts and clip art, but it paled in comparison to what CorelDRAW included. Deneba was the only one that really tried to match Corel on the fonts and clip art front with what they bundled in Canvas (over 2000 URW fonts for instance). I remember picking up a competitive upgrade of Canvas 7 for $99. I didn't use the application very much, but the fonts and clip art were worth it.

By the way, the Mac platform still isn't well supported in the sign manufacturing industry. Gerber Omega is Windows-only. Flexi and the other SAi applications like EnRoute are Windows-only (Flexi used to have a Mac version, but not anymore). SignLab is Windows-only. Our RIP software, Onyx Thrive and Roland VersaWorks are Windows-only. The LED message center software we use from Daktronics and other vendors is Windows-only.



This gets into why I use CorelDRAW rather than Illustrator for building up objects in sign designs. OTOH, there are plug-ins from Astute Graphics (VectorScribe, PathScribe, etc) that add a great deal of technical drawing capability among other things. Too often I wind up back in CorelDRAW anyway when I need larger art board real estate -which gets back to the original topic: Illustrator's 227" X 227" art board limit.



I'm not the one creating these CAD files; they're supplied by customers. They don't care about creating objects with closed paths because they're not applying fills to those objects, much less sending them to vinyl cutters, routing tables, etc. It's just like customers home-brewing their logos or some other artwork, dropping off a JPEG of it and expecting that to work. To these people a digital file is a digital file and because it's digital it should automatically work, "it's in the computer already!"

I work with compound shapes sometimes, like funnels and domes. We have to explicitly map the geometry to 2d so a customer even can design for it. The funnel template I've attached demonstrates why the art we receive can only be as good as the templates we provide. Figuring out gores for a sphere is a nightmare! If I leave that math up to the customer, shame on me.

 

[myront]

...In Illustrator you can numerically define object dimensions out to four decimal points. In CorelDRAW you can only go to 3...

About two versions ago they added an opt out to never see the "zoom" message" again (good move)
You've had the ability to customize the decimal place up to 6 for probably 20 years or more
You can write your own custom macros AND assign any shortcut key combo you desire (adobe only allows F keys)
Corel allows multiple signs on one doc -doesn't have to be on the "artboard" / Page
Which of these tools would the average person most likely know how to use.

p.s. the bottom image represents corel - many uses, easy to use
the other is a specialty tool that someone would have to show you how to use.

p.s. I'm self taught courtesy of the U.S. Government who, by the way, uses corel

 

[Rick]

I want to thank Bobby H for his sensible answers regarding use of Corel Draw, it also helps knowing you are a good designer and have full command of the design process. Most Corel clowns who only go as far as saying Corel is best with no information to back it up... and they design like a$$... been a Corel user since version 3 and though I prefer Illustrator with CadTools and a few add-ons, plenty of my former workmates I keep in touch with do Corel justice as well.

 

[Bobby H]

About two versions ago they added an opt out to never see the "zoom" message" again (good move)

Whether a CorelDRAW user gets the pop-up message or not the application is still herky-jerky viewing the whole page/art board when the zoom gets out to around the 100' level. Keeping the focus on the original topic of this thread, this point is kind of important since at least some people seem to be under the impression that Adobe Illustrator is the only drawing application with any pesky art board size/view limits.

You've had the ability to customize the decimal place up to 6 for probably 20 years or more.

Yeah, and good luck actually getting CorelDRAW to accurately and reliably define objects out to that level of precision. When I change CorelDRAW's default numerical editing view of 3 decimal points out to like 5 or 6 decimal points the size and position of objects is often a bit off. A letter or object sized at 24" tall will often show up as 23.99998, 24.0001 or some other nonsense when re-selected. So the extra decimal points end up being more of a distraction than anything. This, too, has gone on for a long time and can be duplicated in CorelDRAW 2018, X8 or other previous versions. The application's resolution goes only so far. The same criticism applies to virtually any other vector drawing application, sign making application, etc. They all have their sweet spot where they work best/most accurately. Blow things up past a certain size and any of them will start acting weird or just block you with some kind of brick wall (like what Illustrator does with its 227" X 227" art board limit).

You can write your own custom macros AND assign any shortcut key combo you desire (adobe only allows F keys)

Illustrator can run its own macros (actions). It doesn't provide as much keyboard short cut customization as CorelDRAW. But then there's hardly any default settings I have to change in Illustrator (such as disabling the aggravating Flash-style object isolation mode). Although CorelDRAW offers a lot of customization, it still won't let me properly duplicate the Ctrl-Alt-Shift-Space bar shortcut combinations for manually drawing paths, adjusting paths on the fly while they're being drawn and toggling zoom-in/out and hand-panning at any time while drawing paths. So I have to get around that by adding extra tools to Corel's zoom tool bar and remembering extra short cuts. CorelDRAW doesn't have animated zoom like Illustrator and Photoshop.

Corel allows multiple signs on one doc -doesn't have to be on the "artboard" / Page

Past a certain size CorelDRAW will throw up warnings about objects falling outside of the work space. The 1800" X 1800" boundary is something CorelDRAW will not allow users to cross. Regarding multiple signs in the same document, it's pretty easy to put multiple signs into a single Illustrator file unless each sign is bigger than its max art board size. Illustrator doesn't support multiple pages. The multiple art boards thing is a work-around. Different signs can be placed on different layers. Or the elements can be sent over to InDesign, which does support multiple pages and is free to use for someone with Creative Cloud account.

p.s. I'm self taught courtesy of the U.S. Government who, by the way, uses corel

Why should the government get any credit for teaching you CorelDRAW if you taught yourself? BTW, I wish the government was actually big on using CorelDRAW. The reality is they love them some PowerPoint. That is absolutely the case with the military.

I'm happy for you that you love CorelDRAW so much and want to cheer lead for it (or defend it from any perceived attack). Don't ask me to do the same. I have zero problem at all pointing out the flaws and limitations of both Adobe Illustrator and CorelDRAW. If anyone doesn't like that, well that's tough toogies. CorelDRAW can do certain things better than Adobe Illustrator. But then Illustrator can do certain things better than CorelDRAW too.

 

[spooledUP7]

There has never been a truly singular industry standard application for vector graphics software, nothing like what Photoshop is to image editing and pixel-based art...

I suppose it was foolishly worded of me to say "THE industry standard" when clearly there are many other applications falling within this "Vector Graphics Application" category, many of which may be used more prolifically in large scale businesses and governments. Even a barcode design software can technically fall within this category and perhaps the world may have more barcode label [fill in the blank software] designers than illustrator users. However, (and I leave this opinion open to argument) I think Illustrator is by and large the de facto Vector Art/Graphics Application for the "Creative Artwork" market category where "Creatives" produce content suitable for a broad spectrum of scalable output products, both tangible and virtual.

In my experience, Creatives, on the whole use Illustrator as their primary content creation software for vector art/graphics intended for file output and or final compositions. Admittedly, I have no statistical data to back my anecdotal opinion, but I think I am closer to correct than not. Please don't confuse me though for being a die-hard Illustrator supporter because I certainly dislike it more than I love it. I would however dislike it less if the canvas size were to be dramatically increased, hence the title of this thread. (TO BE CLEAR: I am not insisting anyone buys into or agrees to the need for a larger canvas. For all intents and purposes it's just me who wants this.)

Regarding Flexi, it has some decent design capabilities, but the real reason to have it is for driving sign making hardware. We have 3 licenses of it in our shop, but most of the actual design work is taking place first in CorelDRAW and/or Adobe Illustrator. Flexi has some basic short comings, like not supporting all the features of OpenType fonts.

While I am being provocative here I am going to willfully rattle some cages with the following assertion; Corel users (in whole) ARE NOT "Creative" users. (The noun, not adjective)

Please read that carefully before flaming away.

I am not saying Corel users cannot be Creative users, nor am I saying Corel users are not creative users (confusing yet?), but "Creatives" DO NOT use Corel for their primary design application, because if they do then they are ignored (unless the position requires it). There may be an argument as to why Corel is better than Illustrator, but you will not see any certified Creative worth his/her/zer salt add Corel Draw as their first line item on their resume, and I would argue not even as an "Other". Likewise, Creatives by and large will never list Flexi with top billing, again, unless the position requires it. Furthermore I do not disagree with Bobby H about Flexi's OTF support and I will add too its weak paragraph control or any advanced typesetting features for that matter. Illustrator clearly is exceptional for this type or work.

That said, I am a bonafide outlier because I define myself as a "Creative" who 100% prefers to use Flexi as my primary content creation application for vector art graphics because of its inherent efficacy to design production. Regardless, my preference for initial creation software does not blind me for the importance of having illustrator riding shotgun and I will always output an Illustrator compatible file when I am not the final destination service bureau. (Unless it's to be flattened, then I use Photoshop)

Last rant and I'll end this. I have at least 20 "huuge" and massive (and I think very convincing) arguments as to why Flexi outperforms illustrator in vector graphic art creation (even when adding in a illustrator friendly output to the workflow process), and if anyone is curious will gladly start another rant thread for discussion. I think I've ruffled enough feathers for now.