Hi.

If I say, draw two squares and group them. Let say one is 10x10 and the other is 8x8. Is it possible to somehow resize such that the bigger one will measure 5x5, and the other one will measure 3x3. That is the number of px the outer object will decrease it's size, is directly transfered to other object too.

I don't use rings with stroke width when I will have the diameter accurate, so I draw two rings inside each other instead to make it llook the same. However, I cannot resize without also having the difference between the diameter also decrease the same percent.

Thanks

when you scale grouped or multi-selected objects, they all scale by same factor, a multiplicant.
been able to do what you describe though by:
- instead of grouping, do path combine
- select the two top nodes of each square, so you have 4 nodes selected
- drag down by any of the selected nodes
- then repeat in the horizontal direction by selecting two side nodes on each object

chriswww wrote:when you scale grouped or multi-selected objects, they all scale by same factor, a multiplicant.
been able to do what you describe though by:
- instead of grouping, do path combine
- select the two top nodes of each square, so you have 4 nodes selected
- drag down by any of the selected nodes
- then repeat in the horizontal direction by selecting two side nodes on each object

HI. Thanks for the response. There is two backdraw concerning that technique:

• Works exclusively for rectangle shaped objects (other types get out of shape, litterally)
• Cannot lock height/width factor AND also have ability to manually enter new size (width height for outer object)

yeah...pretty much anything other than a multiplicant and same ratio for resizing grouped objects is the norm in graphics software. in theory it's possible to setup your own function for an object in javascript/svg which could trigger custom resizing, but that's beyond the realm of doing it inside inkscape at the moment. in other words anything other than multiplicant resizing is a programmatic task.
if you're after that sort of outcome in a complex svg drawing, then one way to do it is to somehow mark the parent and children objects in inkscape, and then parse the saved svg with a script that scales children objects accordingly.

I don't use rings with stroke width when I will have the diameter accurate, so I draw two rings inside each other instead to make it llook the same. However, I cannot resize without also having the difference between the diameter also decrease the same percent.

???
I can't understand what you are saying here. but if you are saying that there is a very specific reason that you are not using a stroked object (*see note below), then of course that is too bad, because resizing while keeping the stroke width the same is exactly what has been set up in the selection tool control bar and in the preferences - the option to scale or not to scale stroke width when resizing objects.



*Note that the diameter (or width) of a stroked object is its dimension in the control bar PLUS its stroke, e.g. a circle of 300px diameter with a stroke of 50 px will be an object with an onscreen diameter of 350 px. Therefore if in your current method of working you are drawing two circles, one within the other, to get an object that is, say, 200 px from outside edge to outside edge and 100 px from inside edge to inside edge, this is the same as a single circle150 px wide with a 50 px stroke. Object width plus stroke equals outside diameter, object width minus stroke equals inside diameter. Please note that the transform dialog will show the size of objects with the stroke added in!

Dont understand?

I have two (or more) circles inside each other. I wish to resize them, but maintain the distance from one circle edge to the next. Using stroke is not a solution to the problem.

So a series of concentric circles. And you want to scale them, so that the distance from one circle to the next stays the same as it was before you scaled them?

Or 2 concentric circles. 10 x 10 and 8 x 8. Scale to 5 x 5 and 3 x 3. So you want to make them each 5 px smaller?

Either way, I think you have to scale them separately. In the Transform dialog > Scale, there is an option to "Apply to each object separately". I'm thinking that's what you're looking for.....if I understand the problem. I think there's a bit of a translation issue, but we do our best, just keep trying

Edit -- PS - I'm not sure your native language, Grobe, but there are some Inkscape forums for a few different languages. Not that I'm trying to get rid of you

Grobe wrote:I have two (or more) circles inside each other. I wish to resize them, but maintain the distance from one circle edge to the next. Using stroke is not a solution to the problem.

OK then. You have a project that requires you to scale concentric circles. You don't want to use stroke and you don't want to enter values manually. I think I understand the problem now. Thanks for the explanation!
Are you also not allowed to use snapping and aligning, because there may be some possibilities in the align dilaog (some numbers may have to be manually entered...), but I think you may have an unsolvable problem. Not just in Inkscape either...

druban wrote:OK then. You have a project that requires you to scale concentric circles. You don't want to use stroke and you don't want to enter values manually. I think I understand the problem now. Thanks for the explanation!
Are you also not allowed to use snapping and aligning, because there may be some possibilities in the align dilaog (some numbers may have to be manually entered...), but I think you may have an unsolvable problem. Not just in Inkscape either...

Hi. I'm agreed this is probably not possible to solve. And no, I' can't use snapping to fix this.

What I have done so far is that I have resized the objects independently of each other. I have about a dosen different variants of the object (concerning sizes) so I just made an independent document that I stored all those variants. Then I just cut'n paste whenever I had a need for a specific size.

@brynn: I live in Norway, but english is my second language so I don't see that as a problem. You seems to understand me very well.
Also I think I stick to this forum, as you guys seem to have huge knowledge about this program. I've been around for a while and I found if nobody on this forum can answer my questions, it's probably because it's impossible to achieve. Like this very question.

Thanks

been able to reproduce that sort of scaling (also) by using circle shapes as linked or dynamic offsets, can't remember which, but worked.