5

I am learning about the logo creation process from a training course produced by a famous graphic designer. I have observed he seems to be obsessed with the Pathfinder tool.

For a job which can be done easily with Shape Builder, holding alt and deleting all unnecessary parts, he is applying Pathfinder-minus front several times to get that same thing done.

I am wondering if Pathfinder adds something extra to design?

I am confused...is Pathfinder is more powerful than Shape Builder or is it simply his style?

  • 3
    The pathfinder tools (sometimes called boolean operations) were around long before the shape builder tool in Illustrator. Sometimes people just like to use what they are used to. There is no right or wrong here because only the results count. There are also other vector image editors which do not have the shape builder tool, and which use boolean operations instead. – Billy Kerr Feb 24 at 17:30
  • he is reverent personality. so when he does repeat something like that it creats curiosity... and am a keen learner. i want to learn all. :P that is why i asked. – Suraiya Abedin Feb 24 at 17:40
7

Pathfinder actually offers a couple things over Shape Builder, but they are essentially the same operations.

  • You can use Pathfinder to keep things "live" and editable further. This is not possible with Shape Builder.
    • Although, admittedly, I think this aspect is overlooked by most
  • Pathfinder allows you to perform one action in one click. Shape Builder may require many clicks/drags for the same outcome.
    • This is similar to using the Polygonal Tool to draw a shape, or using the Pen Tool. One is simply faster than the other at times.
  • Pathfinder tends to create less superfluous anchor points than shape builder operations. Not drastically less, but less.
    • With Shape Builder you can often get extra anchors art every shape intersection. Pathfinder, at times, can be a tad smarter in this respect.

And lastly as posted by @13ruce, sometimes it's merely habit. If you learned one way that works, a user tends to stick to that. I still use some very old methods for things merely because that's how I learned and have worked forever.

  • Perhaps more imperceptible, but Pathfinder causes the user to think in terms of start/end rather than start/process/end. I find it is sometimes easier to see where you want to go and merely get there with a click after setting up shapes as I know they need to be configured. Shape Builder can cause some undoing and rethinking about how shapes are interacting in order to get to the end. It's really more of how the user thinks as opposed to any specific tool features.

I am often glassy eyed when I see a newer user perform some action in a totally different manner than I'm accustomed to. A good example of this is Live Paint. I learned AI long, long before Live Paint was a thing. So I don't rely on Live Paint at all. I could, but it doesn't really speed up my process. That doesn't necessarily mean my method is better than any Live Paint method, or that Live Paint is better than my method. They are merely different.

| improve this answer | |
  • your explaining clears all... he is habituated to pathfinder, its not obsession... Thank you so much. – Suraiya Abedin Feb 24 at 18:25
3

It's probably just a matter of him having learned by using the pathfinder, and sticking to it. The shape builder tool is newer, so he probably just isn't as familiar with it. The shape builder is arguably more powerful because it's more flexible with the use of keyboard commands. If the same end can be achieved more easily and faster with the shape builder tool, there is no reason to use the pathfinder instead.

| improve this answer | |
  • exactly my point. i personally find pathfinder difficult. Thank you so much. – Suraiya Abedin Feb 24 at 16:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.