Aligning what to what?

[Rick Altman]

I was really hoping that Version 2007 would address a long-standing
objection that I have with the Alignment controls for objects. It has not.
In short, I never know which object is going to align with which and that is
tremendously frustrating when working to create precise alignment across
multiple elements.

Most graphic programs do this in a very sane way:

1. Object you select first gets aligned to the object you select second.

2. Or the object that is lower in the stacking order gets aligned to the
object above it.


It seems that PowerPoint adheres to neither of these guidelines. I honestly
have ZERO idea how the program decides which object moves and which object
stays in place during an alignment.

If anyone can shed any light on this, he or she would be my hero for the
day. Perhaps for the week...

 

[Chris Watts]

If you say align left then it aligns everything with the left edge of the
left-most object. and so on for right, top, bottom.
Not sure what rule applies to middle and centre!

Chris

 

[Ellen Finkelstein]

Rick,
Here's my understanding; I'm working with 3 rectangles
Imagine 3 rectangles in a horizontal array, but not aligned.
Align Top will align all with the top border of the top rectangle. Top means
not in order but closest to the top of the slide.
Align Bottom will align all with the bottom border of the bottom rectangle.
Align Middle is harder to understand. It takes an imaginary box that goes
from the top of the top rectangle to the bottom of the bottom rectangle. And
it puts all 3 rectangles vertically centered around the middle of that
imaginary rectangle.

The same principle works with vertically-arrayed rectangles. Does this jive
with your experience?
Ellen

 

[Katt]

As Chris said, left align chooses the left most object, right the right-most
object, and center works the same... it aligns the objects according to the
center of the most central object.

If you turn gridlines on, and draw three various size boxes, you can play
with them as deduce the method to the madness. Plus, you can play a little
and it still counts as work...

Hope this helps.

 

[Rick Altman]

Thanks, Ellen and all.

I now understand how the Alignment engine works...and now I can say that I
really am disturbed! I think that is a very poor determinant. It makes
multi-dimensional aligning (where an object needs to be aligned with the
left side of an object below it and the top of an object adjacent to it)
virtually impossible.

I'm going to start kvetching to the development team right now for a
different way to calculate the anchor for alignment procedures. Order of
selection is so much easier...

But I appreciate everyone's explanations...



RA

 

[Lucy Thomson]

Thanks, Ellen and all.

I now understand how the Alignment engine works...and now I can say that I
really am disturbed! I think that is a very poor determinant. It makes
multi-dimensional aligning (where an object needs to be aligned with the
left side of an object below it and the top of an object adjacent to it)
virtually impossible.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding but can't you select the object & the one
below -> align left then select object & object adjacent -> align top? You
have to move the object to the 'correct' place to begin with of course...
i.e. so the left side of the original is to the right of the left side of
the below object, and the top edge is below the top edge of the adjacent
object.

Lucy

 

[Rick Altman]

Hi Lucy --

Let's say that you are creating a tic-tac-toe board of squares--three rows
and three colums, okay?. Your anchor is the top-left square and you start by
performing a distribute command and a bottom align with the top row. So now
your top row is perfect and you don't intend to move it any more.

Now you want to left-align the two squares directly below your anchor
square -- the left column. You select those three squares, perform the align
command, and what happens -- the top-left square moves to align with one of
the other ones, throwing it out of alignment with the other squares on its
row. Undo...and then swear at it.

Now that I know the formula, I will make sure that the two squares below my
anchor square are to the right of it before I align, but that is a tedious
and silly thing to have to pay attention to. It would be smarter, in my
view, to simply heed my selection order: All objects that I select before
the last one move to align with the last one selected.

That's my rant for tonight. Tune in tomorrow for a new rant...

 

[Lucy Thomson]

Hi Rick

That is a fair point. I suppose my ambivalence is to do with the fact that I
hadn't used any graphic programme before PowerPoint so I'm used to its ways.
And to be frank, it took me a long time to discover the alignment buttons so
when I did I was so overjoyed I was happy to work around their foibles (this
was as I wept for joy and mourned the wasted hours).

In your example I would approach this in a different way. I would create &
place the top row (in the way you suggest) then select them & use ctrl+d to
duplicate, move the still selected duplicates with the cursor keys (they
usually snap to the left alignment of the above shapes quite easily) then
use ctrl+d again - PowerPoint remembers where I placed the first set of
duplicates relative to the originals & repeats this 'formula'. But then we
all have our own way of working...

Lucy

--
Lucy Thomson
PowerPoint MVP
MOS Master Instructor
www.aneasiertomorrow.com.au

 

[Rick Altman]

Duplicating is huge, no question about it. And if all of my situations
involved squares that were alike, as in my 3x3 grid, I'd be a happy camper.
Most of the time, though, I am aligning elements that are quite dissimilar,
like a title in a rectangular placeholder to a longer string of text
directly underneath. Or a photo to a headline. That sort of thing, where
duplicating is not practical.

I plead guilty to taking alignment and distribution for granted. My graphic
drawing program of choice handles both with extraordinary deftness and
aplomb. My expectation has been raised -- shouldn't every program that deals
with objects do it as well?

Harrumph! <g>

 

[Glen Millar]

Hi Lucy,

There is a graphic program other than PowerPoint?

--
Regards,
Glen Millar
Microsoft PPT MVP

Tutorials and PowerPoint animations at
the original www.pptworkbench.com
glen at pptworkbench dot com
------------------------------------------

 

[Rick Altman]

LOL!

 

[Echo S]

I'd use Ctrl+Shift+drag to constrain the objects as they're copied.

 

[Echo S]

I think one of PPT's strong suits is that it is not terribly complicated and
is accessible to the unsophisticated user. For this reason, I don't want to
see complicated alignment options (although I myself might actualy prefer
them).

 

[Chris Watts]

Yes, I agree with what you say 1001%
Just look at programs like Coral Draw, Paintshop Pro and Adobe equivalent.

You know that they must be able to do a simple function but can you find/use
it - NO!

KISS is the word.

End of rant!!
cheers
Chris

I think one of PPT's strong suits is that it is not terribly complicated
and is accessible to the unsophisticated user. For this reason, I don't
want to see complicated alignment options (although I myself might actualy
prefer them).

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
What's new in PPT 2007? http://www.echosvoice.com/2007.htm
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances http://tinyurl.com/36grcd
PowerPoint 2007 Complete Makeover Kit http://tinyurl.com/32a7nx

Thanks, Ellen and all.

I now understand how the Alignment engine works...and now I can say that
I really am disturbed! I think that is a very poor determinant. It makes
multi-dimensional aligning (where an object needs to be aligned with the
left side of an object below it and the top of an object adjacent to it)
virtually impossible.

I'm going to start kvetching to the development team right now for a
different way to calculate the anchor for alignment procedures. Order of
selection is so much easier...

But I appreciate everyone's explanations...



RA

 

[Glen Millar]

Hi Chris,

Rant away. You are among friends! I agree fully!

--
Regards,
Glen Millar
Microsoft PPT MVP

Tutorials and PowerPoint animations at
the original www.pptworkbench.com
glen at pptworkbench dot com
------------------------------------------

Yes, I agree with what you say 1001%
Just look at programs like Coral Draw, Paintshop Pro and Adobe equivalent.

You know that they must be able to do a simple function but can you
find/use it - NO!

KISS is the word.

End of rant!!
cheers
Chris

I think one of PPT's strong suits is that it is not terribly complicated
and is accessible to the unsophisticated user. For this reason, I don't
want to see complicated alignment options (although I myself might actualy
prefer them).

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
What's new in PPT 2007? http://www.echosvoice.com/2007.htm
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances http://tinyurl.com/36grcd
PowerPoint 2007 Complete Makeover Kit http://tinyurl.com/32a7nx

Thanks, Ellen and all.

I now understand how the Alignment engine works...and now I can say that
I really am disturbed! I think that is a very poor determinant. It makes
multi-dimensional aligning (where an object needs to be aligned with the
left side of an object below it and the top of an object adjacent to it)
virtually impossible.

I'm going to start kvetching to the development team right now for a
different way to calculate the anchor for alignment procedures. Order of
selection is so much easier...

But I appreciate everyone's explanations...



RA






in message Rick,
Here's my understanding; I'm working with 3 rectangles
Imagine 3 rectangles in a horizontal array, but not aligned.
Align Top will align all with the top border of the top rectangle. Top
means
not in order but closest to the top of the slide.
Align Bottom will align all with the bottom border of the bottom
rectangle.
Align Middle is harder to understand. It takes an imaginary box that
goes
from the top of the top rectangle to the bottom of the bottom
rectangle. And
it puts all 3 rectangles vertically centered around the middle of that
imaginary rectangle.

The same principle works with vertically-arrayed rectangles. Does this
jive
with your experience?
Ellen

--
Author of How to Do Everything with PowerPoint 2007
http://www.ellenfinkelstein.com


:

I was really hoping that Version 2007 would address a long-standing
objection that I have with the Alignment controls for objects. It has
not.
In short, I never know which object is going to align with which and
that is
tremendously frustrating when working to create precise alignment
across
multiple elements.

Most graphic programs do this in a very sane way:

1. Object you select first gets aligned to the object you select
second.

2. Or the object that is lower in the stacking order gets aligned to
the
object above it.


It seems that PowerPoint adheres to neither of these guidelines. I
honestly
have ZERO idea how the program decides which object moves and which
object
stays in place during an alignment.

If anyone can shed any light on this, he or she would be my hero for
the
day. Perhaps for the week...




--
Rick Altman
PowerPoint Live
Oct 11-14, 2009 | Atlanta GA
http://www.betterpresenting.com

 

[Echo S]

Edit Points is another good example, I think. PowerPoint's Edit Points are
pretty rudimentary, but I'm good with that. If I need something more
sophisticated, I use Illustrator or PhotoShop...and I admit I often struggle
with Edit Points (well, the Pen tool) in those programs. I like that PPT's
Edit Points are very simple -- simplistic, even -- so that typical users
actually have a chance of understanding and being able to use them.

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
What's new in PPT 2007? http://www.echosvoice.com/2007.htm
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances http://tinyurl.com/36grcd
PowerPoint 2007 Complete Makeover Kit http://tinyurl.com/32a7nx

Yes, I agree with what you say 1001%
Just look at programs like Coral Draw, Paintshop Pro and Adobe equivalent.

You know that they must be able to do a simple function but can you
find/use it - NO!

KISS is the word.

End of rant!!
cheers
Chris

I think one of PPT's strong suits is that it is not terribly complicated
and is accessible to the unsophisticated user. For this reason, I don't
want to see complicated alignment options (although I myself might actualy
prefer them).

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
What's new in PPT 2007? http://www.echosvoice.com/2007.htm
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances http://tinyurl.com/36grcd
PowerPoint 2007 Complete Makeover Kit http://tinyurl.com/32a7nx

Thanks, Ellen and all.

I now understand how the Alignment engine works...and now I can say that
I really am disturbed! I think that is a very poor determinant. It makes
multi-dimensional aligning (where an object needs to be aligned with the
left side of an object below it and the top of an object adjacent to it)
virtually impossible.

I'm going to start kvetching to the development team right now for a
different way to calculate the anchor for alignment procedures. Order of
selection is so much easier...

But I appreciate everyone's explanations...



RA






in message Rick,
Here's my understanding; I'm working with 3 rectangles
Imagine 3 rectangles in a horizontal array, but not aligned.
Align Top will align all with the top border of the top rectangle. Top
means
not in order but closest to the top of the slide.
Align Bottom will align all with the bottom border of the bottom
rectangle.
Align Middle is harder to understand. It takes an imaginary box that
goes
from the top of the top rectangle to the bottom of the bottom
rectangle. And
it puts all 3 rectangles vertically centered around the middle of that
imaginary rectangle.

The same principle works with vertically-arrayed rectangles. Does this
jive
with your experience?
Ellen

--
Author of How to Do Everything with PowerPoint 2007
http://www.ellenfinkelstein.com


:

I was really hoping that Version 2007 would address a long-standing
objection that I have with the Alignment controls for objects. It has
not.
In short, I never know which object is going to align with which and
that is
tremendously frustrating when working to create precise alignment
across
multiple elements.

Most graphic programs do this in a very sane way:

1. Object you select first gets aligned to the object you select
second.

2. Or the object that is lower in the stacking order gets aligned to
the
object above it.


It seems that PowerPoint adheres to neither of these guidelines. I
honestly
have ZERO idea how the program decides which object moves and which
object
stays in place during an alignment.

If anyone can shed any light on this, he or she would be my hero for
the
day. Perhaps for the week...




--
Rick Altman
PowerPoint Live
Oct 11-14, 2009 | Atlanta GA
http://www.betterpresenting.com

 

[Rick Altman]

I think one of PPT's strong suits is that it is not terribly complicated

and is accessible to the unsophisticated user. For this reason, I don't
want to see complicated alignment options (although I myself might actualy
prefer them).

I agree entirely with this sentiment, but I reach a different conclusion
from the sentiment. Basic object manipulation and movement should be as
simple as possible, and I can't think of anything simpler than the basic
premise of order of selection:

- First object selected moves to align with the second object selected.

- Multiple objects move to align with the last object selected.



Take a look back at this thread to see what is required to explain some of
this now:

Align Middle takes an imaginary box that goes from the top
of the top rectangle to the bottom of the bottom rectangle.
And it puts all 3 rectangles vertically centered around the
middle of that imaginary rectangle.


Whew! That does not pass the KISS test, in my view.


Yes, CorelDraw is a more complicated program, requiring more patience and
practice. For that reason, its developers know that they better not make the
simple stuff hard, too. Programs like it can and should serve as a model for
handling basic object work.



RA

 

[Echo S]

Take a look back at this thread to see what is required to explain some of
this now:

Align Middle takes an imaginary box that goes from the top
of the top rectangle to the bottom of the bottom rectangle.
And it puts all 3 rectangles vertically centered around the
middle of that imaginary rectangle.


Whew! That does not pass the KISS test, in my view.

Well, I'd just say it splits the difference. That's not as accurate, but
it's an easier concept to get across. That passes the KISS test.

I'm not thrilled with the way PPT does center alignment, either -- however,
there are indeed times when I select two objects and center them, and one
object doesn't move. And it's usually when I don't want it to, and the one I
don't want to. Dunno how PPT knows, but it often does... (Maybe it's got
to do with the relative size of the two objects or something?)

 

[Rick Altman]

I get into a mental rhythm that is comfortable for me...

This one moves to that one


I can't create quite the same rhythm the other way

This one will be the one that that one moves to



But you know what, I'd take either one of them in a heartbeat over the
current scheme...

 

[Rick Altman]

I'd be your first customer...