Rectangle frame tool vs Rectangle tool

[vinny38]

Hi Community

A discussion has started on the French forum based on "why on earth are there two separate tools in the toolbar: Rectangle tool and Rectangle frame tool?"
Since we can assign what we want to one or the other, what can justify this "duplicate"?

Therefore, my question is:
Do you see any interest in having these two separate tools in the tool panel?
If so, can you explain in which specific cases do you prefer to use a particular tool?

Vinny

[amaarora]

Hi,

Rectangle Frame tool- With content as Graphic, has a Basic Graphic Frame style applied

Rectangle Tool-With content Unassigned has a [None] style

Personally, i would create rectangle for backgrounds, fills etc. Clicking inside a rectangle does not select it vs clicking inside a rectangle frame

Rectangle frame can be preferred for holding images (or act as image placeholders because of its appearance) since it can hold an image when a place cursor is hovered over it.

By default, frames with rectangle tool have a stroke applied.

-Aman

[Bdz]

By default, frames with rectangle tool have a stroke applied.

Yes, but it changes easily when you open the software (without opening or creating document)

[vinny38]

Hi Aman,

thanks a lot for your insight.

Rectangle Frame tool- With content as Graphic, has a Basic Graphic Frame style applied

Rectangle Tool-With content Unassigned has a [None] style

...

By default, frames with rectangle tool have a stroke applied.

I think you might have inverted the default object styles.

Anyway, the default style applied to Rectangle can easily be changed.

Clicking inside a rectangle does not select it vs clicking inside a rectangle frame

Yes, as long as the rectangle is empty, that's true... but that's a very minor difference, imho, although maybe the most important one 🙂

Personally, i would create rectangle for backgrounds, fills etc. Clicking inside a rectangle does not select it vs clicking inside a rectangle frame

Rectangle frame can be preferred for holding images (or act as image placeholders because of its appearance) since it can hold an image when a place cursor is hovered over it.

Well, place gun acts the very same way when hovering either unassigned or graphic frame, doesn't it? Same with type cursor.

I can't see any difference between placing an image into either rectangle...

OK, the cross can "suggest" than the rectangle is waiting for an image. That could be useful in certain situations.

But at the end of the day, I must say that I still think these minor differences do not justify the fact that those two tools are present in the Tools panel.

Possibly someone will pop up with a major difference which will make me change my mind ^^

[vinny38]

Steve Werner​ Why did you mark Aman's answer as correct?

Sorry but no...

Let me rephrase my question:

"What major differences between Rectangle tool and Rectangle frame tool justify their presence in the Tools panel as two distinctive tools?"

So far, no good answer to this question, sorry again.

Vinny

[Steve Werner]

We choose to disagree. I think Amaarora gave several reasons. It's also historical because QuarkXPress largely did it that way. You can recognize a placeholder rectangle for graphics by the X across the frame.

I'll also add that there is no good reason to change the way people are used to. InDesign does not have a surplus of tools (look at Illustrator or Photoshop by comparison!). I don't think things should be changed unless there's a good reason. This makes it easier for long-time users.

[vinny38]

Steve,

Nothing wrong with disagreements, they're part of the debate.

Although I'd wish I could choose which answer is correct or not by myself .

As a matter of fact, it looks that there will be no good one whatsoever.

This thread is a debate more than a question really.

You said "there is no good reason to change the way people are used to".

I find this interesting, because I personally almost never use the Rectangle tool. I wouldn't miss it really.

Maybe a good reason would be "because it's useless"?

[BobLevine]

Because it’s useless to you?

I use them both, especially when I need placeholders.

[vinny38]

Could you elaborate?

I'm sure you have excellent reasons to use them both, but I can't see which ones...

[BobLevine]

The rectangle frame tool is excellent for adding placeholders for anything. I can’t explain it much better than that.

And frankly, as far as newbies go, anyone diving into InDesign without any basic training is not going to get a lot of sympathy from me if they’re confused. In fact, if they’re confused by this, they’re pretty much doomed to failure anyway.

[Steve Werner]

Vinny, I'm not sure you're understanding the idea of a placeholder. In some workflows, designers  begin to do a layout when not all the assets are ready. Photos or text are "to come" so you can create placeholder frames which approximate the size and position where the content is going to go. Viewing them with the X across the frame makes it easy to visualize graphic placeholders as does placeholder text. That may not apply to your workflow but it's very common.

[vinny38]

Yes Steve, I know what a placeholder is, thanks anyway for the clarification.

As a matter of fact, it is indeed part of my regular workflow.

[vinny38]

Yes Bob, I have in fact noticed the lack of sympathy you often show to inexperienced users...

Anyway, the Rectangle frame tool sure is excellent for adding placeholders, and for many other things.

But what about Rectangle tool? What makes it so special that you would choose this tool over the other?

Is it just the lacking cross?

Come on, I'm sure you can explain your views better than that!

[Steve Werner]

As Amaarora explained, I use the rectangle tool for background fills or tint blocks (where graphics will NOT be placed). I use Frame tools for where pictures (or optionally text) will be placed in the future. It visually distinguishes the difference when doing layout.

Ideally, InDesign would have customizable tools. Ilustrator CC and Photoshop CC have added that recently. It's more needed in those applications because they have a much larger number of tools. That way you can create your own custom toolsets. While this is a good feature, I think many of think there are many other longstanding feature requests which are probably needed more, since there is a limited amount of engineering resources in InDesign.

[BobLevine]

The rectangle tool will created frames that are going to be filled / stroked based on object styles or default settings. The Rectangle frame tool will create always be no fill / no stroke.

[vinny38]

Yes, that's a difference.

Not sure it's a major one, but I can understand that it may be useful in some workflows.

[BobLevine]

Right…which is exactly why it’s there.

[rob day]

Hi Vinny, I think you could extend the argument to why not eliminate both? It could be just the Type Tool. We can draw a type frame and also change its content either from the menu, contextually, or by selecting the frame and placing an image. In the end I think the reason might be redundancy is good—there are multiple ways of doing almost anything in ID. Having a single frame tool might be desirable for a seasoned user, or confounding for a first time user.

[vinny38]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for your comment.

Maybe your suggestion is a bit extreme... Besides, placing images into Text frames is not as handy as in Unassigned frames. Place gun wouldn't do the job there, but you know that...

However, in an ideal world, yes, why not a unique "Frame tool"?

(Hmmm... thinking about it, Rectangle frame tool kinda act as a "universal frame tool"... )

I intend to believe that first time users are most likely to be confused by this redundancy.

I'm pretty sure that course instructors often hear "what's the difference between those two tools?" while confirmed users don't even bother.