6 replies to this topic

[frax]

Martin, or anyone else who is using manifold, I would like to hear some comments/reviews on M. as the main GIS software -- is it good for working with the GIS data for preparing this for cartography (to be further manipulated in Illustrator)?

[Martin Gamache]

If you search the forum you'll find we've discussed this in the past...

The Illustrator export of Arcmap is cleaner than that of Manifold. the resulting file has less artifacts and useless layers. Arcmap also handles text better, any text in Manifold output that is rotated from horizontal results in a partial file and you need to work around this by exporting text layers to a flat PDF format. Manifold files only handle RGB colors, Arcmap exports native CMYK and can handle Open Type. Manifold only TT fonts.



PM me if you have specific questions...

[Nick Springer]

The other thread is here.

[frax]

my bad (not the first time) -- I should remember to search first...

Conclusion from the discussions -- if one has access to ArcInfo, there is no reason to play with manifold.

[Nick Springer]

The only thing Manifold does right out of the box that Arc doesn't do without costly extensions is raster image processing and projection.

Although I'm sure someone will correct me.

[Martin Gamache]

Nick, in version 9.0 Arcmap does raster reprojection I think. But in terms of raster processing you need one or several expensive plug-ins ($1,500 US).

mg

[Hans van der Maarel]

Hugo,

Correct, however: if you don't have acces to ArcInfo and can't afford it, Manifold is a very interesting alternative. You could buy 5 copies of Manifold for just the price of the ArcInfo plugin that Martin mentioned.

I bought it last year, more or less on instinct, and haven't had a moment of regret yet. It has paid for itself several times already.