Not too long ago, I read a post exclaiming the virtues of some Xara apps. I was doubtful but still curious so I downloaded a trial of Xara Xtreme and Xara 3d 6. Well, I wasn't happy with Xtreme. The demo is sans textures and a few other things and seems to have the need to contact home for everything. I really don't like demos that don't offer the full app. Xara 3d 6 however was really quite a surprise. Then I recalled purchasing 5 last year just for fun but never installing it. I located the disk and ran it. What I didn't know was that I could export quite a few file formats usable in PS, not just animated gifs. That the image can be fully manipulated using keyboard commands and that you can create textures in other apps like Bryce, ZBrush and PS and place the jpegs into Xara's texture folder and use them as applicable textures. Now, as you may know, a great source for shapes can be found using fonts. Using fonts in Xara, applying some homegrown textures along with the inherent 3d capabilities of Xara 3D will be a great source of elements for the type of work I do in Photoshop. So thanks to the author of the Xara post ( I think it was Welles). You've given me a great "new" tool. I will be posting some results soon
Photoshop Gurus Forum
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Xara and PS
- Thread starter ronmatt
- Start date
ronmatt. Xara products are great! If you saw a post of mine about Xara, I was just passing on my enthusiasm about them as I'd recently learned about them from Gary David Bouton (right here at Application Convergence forum). Gare is quite expert with Xara products.
My response was so great that I bought a small but adequate PC primarily to run them (and Dragon Naturally Speaking, too) although I'm a pretty hardcore Mac user. Oh and they work great with Illustrator, too.
Here's that review of Xara 3D5....
http://www.photoshopgurus.com/forum/index.php?topic=6135.0
My response was so great that I bought a small but adequate PC primarily to run them (and Dragon Naturally Speaking, too) although I'm a pretty hardcore Mac user. Oh and they work great with Illustrator, too.
Here's that review of Xara 3D5....
http://www.photoshopgurus.com/forum/index.php?topic=6135.0
http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/8650/xara9wy.jpg Here's a sample of using a Xara element with Photoshop. The figure 8 was done in Xara using a texture from PS. It was done on a white BG and saved as a .jpg, then opened in PS( I resampled it to 100 from 72). copy to a new canvas with transp bg and delete the white bg. I used the wand with a px ratio of 40. This still leaves a halo around the image, so if you save it as a .png and use that .png the halo goes away (I'm open to suggestions as to how to eliminate that step). Anyway, now you're ready to go to work. If this sample was anything but a sample I would have worked with the angle a bit in Xara, it's not the best. But it serves it's purpose as an example. I'm excited about the possibilities here. As an illustrator, it will provide a powerful tool to help create visuals that my competition can't [unless they are members of this forum and pursue this]. For my needs, Xara 3D 6 has nothing new to offer, so Ver.5 will do. I bought 5 for 10 bucks at a local computer store (the price of a Taco Bell run).
Thanks again Welles. not only do you help me considerably with your PS knowledge, now you're helping me with my tools. Well done.
Thanks again Welles. not only do you help me considerably with your PS knowledge, now you're helping me with my tools. Well done.
the problem with the demo is that the BG is watermarked. You can, of course, get around that in PS by erasing but it's a lot of xtra work and could be difficult with complex shapes and curves. Look around at BB ( no spam intended). An older version, even 3, works fine.
theKeeper
Guru
- Messages
- 2,308
- Likes
- 63
I just so happen to be a bit of an 'expert' at Xara programs myself. 
I've been using Xara since version 2 and love it. Xara Xtreme is actually a very nice program. I can understand not being happy about there not being a load of textures in there to play with, at first.. but i think you'll find that if you let Xara "phone home" it'll go get textures, fonts, brushes, photos, web design elements, etc for you. One of the main reasons Xara make 'the call" is to check for updates and see also if there are any new resources for you to download - like all of the tutorial movies that are avaliable for it.
Let it "do it's thing", i think you'll enjoy it more.
One of the coolest new features added to the Xtreme version is the ability to use PS compatible plugs and filters (after converting your vector shape(s) to Bitmap Copies)... AND... it will allow you to at any time change the effects you apply. Very much like PS's Blend Options does; even after the document has been saved and closed.
I'm finding this to be a very nice feature.
If anyone has any questions or whatnot about Xara Xtreme feel free to ask away in the Vector Apps board. Or you can also checkout the Xara forum @ TalkGraphics.com.
I've been using Xara since version 2 and love it. Xara Xtreme is actually a very nice program. I can understand not being happy about there not being a load of textures in there to play with, at first.. but i think you'll find that if you let Xara "phone home" it'll go get textures, fonts, brushes, photos, web design elements, etc for you. One of the main reasons Xara make 'the call" is to check for updates and see also if there are any new resources for you to download - like all of the tutorial movies that are avaliable for it.
Let it "do it's thing", i think you'll enjoy it more.
One of the coolest new features added to the Xtreme version is the ability to use PS compatible plugs and filters (after converting your vector shape(s) to Bitmap Copies)... AND... it will allow you to at any time change the effects you apply. Very much like PS's Blend Options does; even after the document has been saved and closed.
I'm finding this to be a very nice feature. If anyone has any questions or whatnot about Xara Xtreme feel free to ask away in the Vector Apps board. Or you can also checkout the Xara forum @ TalkGraphics.com.
I'll take another look at it. I'd like to find a simple 3D app in which I could create quick 'real time' renders of curved shapes (with shading) so that I could construct elements to use in PS. Some of these obscure apps do 1 or 2 neat things that are usable such as Real Draw 3.5 or even PSP and Fireworks (not that PSP and Fireworks are 'obscure' apps) but none of them provide the look that I'm looking for. Even Xara 3D has sort of a fake look to it in my opinion. I want a certain look or feel to the image. So far only PS provides the look I'm going for. Omitting the 3D apps like Lightwave, Studio Max and C4D, do you have any suggestions?-RM
theKeeper
Guru
- Messages
- 2,308
- Likes
- 63
That's hard to say without seeing a graphic example. Got any?ronmatt said:
PS: There ARE a few 3D plugins for PS that can render 3D on shapes and text. They're a bit older... not sure if they're even compatible with PS CS/2. Hard to say whether they'd suit your needs though without a visual exmaple from you.
theKeeper
Guru
- Messages
- 2,308
- Likes
- 63
Nice stuff ron. I like the cruisers.
There's no 3D app/plugin that will give you that kind of 3D look though. Those are obviously photoshopped 3D images; for the most part. A 3D app/plugin would produce a different kind of 3D look; i.e. prolly more complex looking in nature (ala more details).
There's no 3D app/plugin that will give you that kind of 3D look though. Those are obviously photoshopped 3D images; for the most part. A 3D app/plugin would produce a different kind of 3D look; i.e. prolly more complex looking in nature (ala more details).
Could you be more specific on what that would include? I can prolly give you some tips on how to do that stuff.ronmatt said:
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/7580/examples8dr.jpg
I know that I'm looking for something that doesn't exist. Kind of like driving a 70's muscle car and bitchin about the gas mileage. Anyway, These are FLAT. I have no trouble creating the image and I know I can do a better than average job of adding a 3d effect to a 2d space. I've been accused (in other forums) of submitting 3d work and trying to pass it off as Photoshop. You and I know that's not true. It's obviously not 3d. It's the subtleties I am looking for. It won't make me any more money or put my stuff over the top as far as my clients are concerned, they're pleased with what I do. It's all about personel satisfaction. I just don't have the time to learn a steep learning curve app like Maya, C4D etc. There is nothing I can't do in PS and I want to stick with it. Any suggestions will be most appreciated. By the way, these images are copied from other images and haven't been cleaned up ( shadows etc.)
I know that I'm looking for something that doesn't exist. Kind of like driving a 70's muscle car and bitchin about the gas mileage. Anyway, These are FLAT. I have no trouble creating the image and I know I can do a better than average job of adding a 3d effect to a 2d space. I've been accused (in other forums) of submitting 3d work and trying to pass it off as Photoshop. You and I know that's not true. It's obviously not 3d. It's the subtleties I am looking for. It won't make me any more money or put my stuff over the top as far as my clients are concerned, they're pleased with what I do. It's all about personel satisfaction. I just don't have the time to learn a steep learning curve app like Maya, C4D etc. There is nothing I can't do in PS and I want to stick with it. Any suggestions will be most appreciated. By the way, these images are copied from other images and haven't been cleaned up ( shadows etc.)
theKeeper
Guru
- Messages
- 2,308
- Likes
- 63
Ok cool. Those are nice ron.
They do however, to my eyes, have a distinctive drawn/painted look to them. And there's a few specific reasons why. One in particular which i'll cover with some examples.
In the examples i've attached here, what's one main visual characteristic that make them look different from your examples? It's sometimes hidden to the eye, but always perceived in the subconcious. It lends great detail and depth to the visual efgfect, and helps greatly in producing a photo-realistic appearance.
It's a physical characteristic, not an esthetic one.
Can you see what it is i'm referring to?
They do however, to my eyes, have a distinctive drawn/painted look to them. And there's a few specific reasons why. One in particular which i'll cover with some examples.
In the examples i've attached here, what's one main visual characteristic that make them look different from your examples? It's sometimes hidden to the eye, but always perceived in the subconcious. It lends great detail and depth to the visual efgfect, and helps greatly in producing a photo-realistic appearance.
It's a physical characteristic, not an esthetic one.
Can you see what it is i'm referring to?
very close to what i'm after. I'll keep these examples and study them. Seems I'm simply missing some detail work that I know I can accomplish with a little work. Thanks for all your time and effort. I'll be posting my progress. Not so much for me, but for others to see the progress and realise that it CAN be done. RM
Mark, those are awsome! Ever since I saw those orbs I was impressed. I think I'm still geek'n out about them. I can do a orb but what gets me is the reflection.....I'm sure if I just needed the right pic to use, or If there's some special technique you use...If there is I'd really like to here it.
theKeeper
Guru
- Messages
- 2,308
- Likes
- 63
Ok be my guest ron, give 'em a study and see what you can do. 
Most of these images/effects are not real complex. Especially the 3D interface stuff. Those didn't take long to make. Just long to think through. Don't overthink the creation process.
In case you're wondering too ron... the 'special' characteristic i'm speaking of is reflections and surface imperfections/details. Give those some thought.
(i'll explain reflections a little at the bottom of the post)
Patrick i do nothing special in creating those types of images. About the most work i actually do is to study real world objects like those and figure out what makes them look the way they do. Albeit i'll admit i've been 'learning' how to make images like that for several years now. It's taken a long time to get them to come out looking 'natural'. Some still aren't where i'd like them to be. But i'll keep practising.
One REAL important 'trick' to these kinds of images too i must say... is when studying real objects, try to see specifically what makes the object look like the object it is. Get what i mean? A simple example of this would be to look at a coffee mug and try to understand WHY it looks like a coffee mug. This isn't to teach one to become real 'deep'
... it helps one to become proficient in studying details.
And a second 'trick' to these images is to study a real object and tear it down visually into layers. i.e. going from the outermost surface to the innermost characteristics... highlights/reflections/texture/imperfections/etc etc etc... Get what i mean? To me THE most crucial aspect is to study imperfections. Most often, over the past 8yrs or so, i've come to notice that the most often made mistake is for folks to create images that are very shallow in detail and usually way to perfect/mechanical looking. If you can train your eyes to detect these things (some being very subtle), then you'll be able to apply this level of detail to your graphics.
Now about the reflections...
Most often people will make a mistake when choosing a 'scene' to use as their reflection on an object. Mainly because they're not really thinking about what type of 'scene' should be most appropriate to their situation. Just grabbing a photo of some indoor/outdoor scenery and slapping it on, turning down the Opacity and Spherizing it, won't make it believable to the eyes. Our eyes are much to 'experienced' to be fooled that easy.
On-the-other-hand...
A lot of the time i won't choose a photo based on it's appropriateness to my scene/image. I'll apply a photo that has specific lighting in it, because i know it'll fit well into the lighting in my scene/image. People really underestimate how lighting/shadows can work to make a believeable scene/image. This is something that'll take some forethought and a bit of experience to do, but it's not rocket science. So it's doable without too much learnin'.
Here's a simple example...
Say you're creating a coffee mug, sitting on a table at a 3/4 view from above.
All other details aside, what most important in this situation is to 1) find a photo of a scene that might actually be a reflection on a REAL coffee mug, in a REAL life situation; and 2) be weary of the angle you're on when viewing the mug. Sometimes it can be difficult to apply the reflection photo to your object at some odd angles, but getting it as close as you can or exact will make a world of difference toward fooling the eyes.
Do up some spheres or other objects and post your results in a new thread if you wish. I'll be happy to provide any help i can toward helping you understand how to apply these types of details to them.
Hpe that helps. [honesty]
Most of these images/effects are not real complex. Especially the 3D interface stuff. Those didn't take long to make. Just long to think through. Don't overthink the creation process.
In case you're wondering too ron... the 'special' characteristic i'm speaking of is reflections and surface imperfections/details. Give those some thought.
(i'll explain reflections a little at the bottom of the post)
Patrick i do nothing special in creating those types of images. About the most work i actually do is to study real world objects like those and figure out what makes them look the way they do. Albeit i'll admit i've been 'learning' how to make images like that for several years now. It's taken a long time to get them to come out looking 'natural'. Some still aren't where i'd like them to be. But i'll keep practising.
One REAL important 'trick' to these kinds of images too i must say... is when studying real objects, try to see specifically what makes the object look like the object it is. Get what i mean? A simple example of this would be to look at a coffee mug and try to understand WHY it looks like a coffee mug. This isn't to teach one to become real 'deep'
... it helps one to become proficient in studying details. And a second 'trick' to these images is to study a real object and tear it down visually into layers. i.e. going from the outermost surface to the innermost characteristics... highlights/reflections/texture/imperfections/etc etc etc... Get what i mean? To me THE most crucial aspect is to study imperfections. Most often, over the past 8yrs or so, i've come to notice that the most often made mistake is for folks to create images that are very shallow in detail and usually way to perfect/mechanical looking. If you can train your eyes to detect these things (some being very subtle), then you'll be able to apply this level of detail to your graphics.
Now about the reflections...
Most often people will make a mistake when choosing a 'scene' to use as their reflection on an object. Mainly because they're not really thinking about what type of 'scene' should be most appropriate to their situation. Just grabbing a photo of some indoor/outdoor scenery and slapping it on, turning down the Opacity and Spherizing it, won't make it believable to the eyes. Our eyes are much to 'experienced' to be fooled that easy.
On-the-other-hand...
A lot of the time i won't choose a photo based on it's appropriateness to my scene/image. I'll apply a photo that has specific lighting in it, because i know it'll fit well into the lighting in my scene/image. People really underestimate how lighting/shadows can work to make a believeable scene/image. This is something that'll take some forethought and a bit of experience to do, but it's not rocket science. So it's doable without too much learnin'.
Here's a simple example...
Say you're creating a coffee mug, sitting on a table at a 3/4 view from above.
All other details aside, what most important in this situation is to 1) find a photo of a scene that might actually be a reflection on a REAL coffee mug, in a REAL life situation; and 2) be weary of the angle you're on when viewing the mug. Sometimes it can be difficult to apply the reflection photo to your object at some odd angles, but getting it as close as you can or exact will make a world of difference toward fooling the eyes.
Do up some spheres or other objects and post your results in a new thread if you wish. I'll be happy to provide any help i can toward helping you understand how to apply these types of details to them.
Hpe that helps. [honesty]
Ah, I know exactly what you mean. I look at objects all the time and observe why it looks the way it does, or how light bounces and reflects off it. I notice the dynamics of shadows and stuff like that all the time. Alot of the time I catch myself starring or spacing out. To me, when I'm doing something in PS, shadows make all the difference; they make the object seem alot more real. But you have to get them just right and thats the hard part. The most difficult parts for me are shadows and reflections.
Anyway, here's an example of what I'm talking about. This is an eye I made that I posted a while back: To me the reflection just doesn't look right. It's ok, but I don't like it. I experamented using pictures with different lighting and ended up with a silhoette as the reflection. So what do you think?
Here's the orig w/out the reflection so you can mess with it if you like:
Anyway, here's an example of what I'm talking about. This is an eye I made that I posted a while back: To me the reflection just doesn't look right. It's ok, but I don't like it. I experamented using pictures with different lighting and ended up with a silhoette as the reflection. So what do you think?
Here's the orig w/out the reflection so you can mess with it if you like:
theKeeper
Guru
- Messages
- 2,308
- Likes
- 63
Aaah cool eyeball. I like that.
The first thing that hits me is the reflection around the white of the eye is good, the pupil though is much too detailed and clear. Only in a few specific situations would a reflection completely cover the object's natural details.
I'm gonna play with your original and see what i can do.
I'll post up as soon as i have something.
The first thing that hits me is the reflection around the white of the eye is good, the pupil though is much too detailed and clear. Only in a few specific situations would a reflection completely cover the object's natural details.
I'm gonna play with your original and see what i can do.
I'll post up as soon as i have something.