VectorPaint comparison sheets: show three options in consistent columns

English translation of the Chinese original, translated on 2026-10-26. Original publication dates, attribution, code and version notes are retained.

A useful comparison uses the same conditions for every option. Create a static sheet for three fictional desk setups so differences are easy to follow across a row. Example values are chosen for the exercise; drawing them does not calculate or verify real specifications.

Prepare a consistent comparison matrix

List three options against footprint, storage, mobility and use case. Each cell must answer its row’s criterion. Standardise numerical units and mark unknowns explicitly. Use a 1200 by 900 pixel landscape canvas with a criterion column and three option columns. Test the longest explanation before fixing row heights.

Draw a restrained table framework

Draw the outer frame, header and row divisions with consistent strokes, making internal rules lighter. Align and distribute only the intended parallel lines. A light column background can replace some vertical rules if used consistently. Put framework and text on separate layers and lock the framework while editing cells to prevent accidental movement.

Align headers with their contents

Place each option name at the top of its own column, keeping any illustrations within that column. Left-align criteria and use a consistent rule for short values, while prioritising readability for explanations. Finish and check one row before duplicating it. Extra whitespace in shorter cells is preferable to invented content added merely to fill the table.

Place conditions beside the relevant claims

State qualifying configurations in the relevant cells and explain them below when necessary. Match every footnote mark to a note. Example use cases are illustrative; real comparisons need sources, dates and equivalent version scopes. Keep column treatment fair rather than enlarging one option and shrinking the others to imply a conclusion.

Make colour supplementary

Use an accent in headers or a light row background to help tracking, but state support, extra requirements or uncertainty in words. Define any checkmarks or crosses in a legend. Check whether row relationships remain understandable without colour. Replace inconsistent icons with text rather than allowing the same mark to imply different claims.

Audit the sheet row by row

Read the headers, then audit each criterion across all options, including a reverse pass from the third column. Compare against the source matrix because stale copied text may look correct. Save the editable file and inspect exported notes for clipping. At publication width, split an overly dense sheet instead of shrinking type further. Keep explanatory notes with the image.

Test how the sheet handles an unknown

Set one storage value to “to be confirmed” and ensure it is distinguishable from unsupported. Add an extra-configuration condition elsewhere and verify its footnote can be found. Adjust the whole row if needed. Replace unknowns only after verification, maintaining sources with revisions; a visually complete sheet does not itself validate the comparison.

Resolve narrow columns

For a long cell, remove unrelated criteria or move detail to notes. Increase the entire row height when the text is essential, maintaining continuous rules. Unexpected alignment can indicate a mixed framework-and-text selection; undo and select again. If exported rules disappear, adjust their weight at the target size and recheck their relationship to the text.