Using Xara images in Word?

I am doing illustrations for a document that I am producing in Word 2000. My problem comes when deciding how to get my images created in CorelXara (& now Xara X) in to Word.

A straight copy paste obviously just produces a bitmap (even if paste as Xara object).

Enhanced metafile (EMF) isn't interpreted correctly by Word (not sure if Xara or Word is at fault).

Xara EPS is not recognized by Word as valid EPS (although Ghostscript interprets it fine).

Adobe Illustrator or Artworks EPS are recognized by Word (but crash Ghostscript) & are not as nice as working with a format that you can see on screen as well (bitmap preview is just not the same).

That leaves me with WMF which does a pretty good job - interpreted correctly, can view & resize in Word, prints cleanly. The only down size is that it doesn't allow for curves - so any curves are turned into a whole lot of short straight lines.

I was hoping that maybe Xara X would sort out the problems with EMF, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Does anyone have any bright ideas about what the problem is, if there is a workaround or a better solution?

Cheers,
Tikka

Tikka - the easy solution is to export your graphic as a tif, jpeg, or gif. These days almost every program is capable of inserting these formats.

Regards, Ross

<a href=http://www.designstop.com/>DesignStop.Com</a>

Thanks for the suggestion Ross, but exporting as a bitmap (whether gif, jpeg or tif) means I lose the ability to conveniently resize the image within Word & retain image quality, text suffers especially. Also to get the same quality for set image dimensions, the file size is much bigger as a bitmap.

The crux of it is, if I can I'd prefer to retain the image in a vector based format. Currently wmf is a better solution for me than any of the bitmap options.

Thanks again for the suggestion though,

Tikka

You can embed a xara document into Word if you go to Insert -> Object -> XaraX Document

This opens XX on a blank drawing. Either import, paste or draw what you're doing and then close XX, the file will open into Word.

If you want to edit the document, from word just double click on it.

I just tried this method with a shape with a rainbow fill and another with a graduated transparency. Both work, but are subject to a grainy appearance - both on screen and when printed.

That's quite disappointing for me, I thought Xara said they had improved OLE. Maybe this is a limitation in Word (but it can still show perfectally well a TIFF or a JPEG photo quality?) or Xara need to do more work.

[This message was edited by Daniel on October 01, 2000 at 11:39 PM.]

WMF already has the ability to be much more efficient and use Beziers and ellipses (like AI or EPS files), however most programs choose a 'join the dots' approach. The enhancements in EMF are largely unrelated to that choice, so it's unlikely to be better.

OLE support in Xara is pretty grim and does little more than insert a 256 colour screen shot of the object. The dithering worsens the already poor 96 dpi, however you can improve matters by enlarging the drawing in Xara and reducing it by a corresponding amount in Word. The on screen appearance will be less good but the printed quality will be better. An alternative approach is to export as CMX and paste it as an OLE object from CorelDRAW. DRAW's OLE works seamlessly.

Regards - Sean

Tikka,

I am faced with exactly the same is issues you are. I hate what Word does to my artwork made in Xara. Sean's suggestion is a good one (you would want to test various affects and see how they translate to CMX ... not sure if Version X's filter has any improvements over CorelXara 2).

The other method I use most often, especially when I have time restrictions (ie., last minute changes made by engineers which cause text flow issues relative to associated graphic frames)is this. GET THE PRECISE SIZE OF THE WORD FRAME (our word processing person inserts blank Text Frames as place holders during the preliminary stages of the document) then, in Xara, size the vector shape to that exact size and then export the file. I often use the PNG format to conserve disk space as I also use the same images latter in Power Point presentations. One other "trick" to keep Word happy. I often find that images "bleed" into the graphic or text frame so what I do is add a white rectangle in Xara which is on a layer behind all other images. Then I make sure that spread of the top images is slightly less than the size of the white rectangle .... this causes a small white "margin" around the top objects and serves as a buffer so that artwork will not bump into Word's frame. This will also allow you to set the margins of the frame in Word to zero, hopefully, allowing you to optimize the layout area of your Word document.

If you have any Word formatting questions ... you can email me at Jclements@Brwncald.com and I will ask our word processing person to get a hold of you.

Regards, Jo

Try exporting to to .wpg format. In Word go Insert -> Picture -> From File and point it to the .wpg file. It looks good on the screen and you can resize without image quality loss. Just don't double click it or try to edit it.. because it will lose it's quality for some reason. It prints pretty good and keeps all your curves.

I was wrong... [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img] If you have a small graphic and try to strech it too much it will lose it's image quality.

-Michele

Try PNG If the one you make is reasonably big you can shrink it to fit.

James



<font face="dom casual, verdana>James</font>

Thanks for all the suggestions people. I think the idea of using CMX has the most promise so I'll see if I can get my hands on a copy of CorelDraw & do some experimenting. Having said that it seems crazy that it has to be this hard to do something as potentially simple as this!!!

It would seem to me that the potential market for Xara would increase substantially if there was a simple way to reuse Xara created vector images in Office applications, either by improving OLE support or by providing a good export to a vector based file format supported by MS Office.

Thanks again,
Tikka

Overview Pasting and Exporting WMF, EMF and Xara Pro Objects into MS Word
Xara Pro (4.01.5601) to word 2007


Ive had to do some experimenting to get the best print outcome in Word 2007 (used for technical reporting at work).
To save someone the hassle of working this out - here are some results:


I need to keep my images in a vector based format to keep the lines and text crisp and clean for technical reports. That leaves out using jpg, png or or any other bitmapped graphics formats.



Pasting EMF file format
EMF pro
Preserves mixed text fonts. For example mixing Symbol and Time new Roman fonts in the same line for electrical representation such as 10 Ohms


EMF con
Any text in boxes (for diagrams) gets messed up. The text moves and overruns the end of the box.
Pasting results in FUZZY IMAGE prints in word


Pasting WMF file format
WMF pro
Text in boxes maintains fidelity from Xara to MS Word.

WMF con
Mixed font text gets messed up. Font Symbol plus Times new roman becomes all Symbol font.
Pasting results in FUZZY IMAGE prints in word



Importing EMF image into Word
EMF and WMF Pro
Importing gives CRISP image and text PRINTS in word

EMF and WMF Con
Text in diagram box gets messed up - text spills over end of boxes.


Pasting XARA object into Word

Pro
Preserves image and text fidelity

con
images from Xara printed in word are FUZZY



SUMMARY for crisp text / vector graphics in word
-----------------------------------------------
Use import EMF or WMF into word for print quality
Try not to use text in boxes with diagrams created in Xara
(place text over or under the box to avoid text over-run through end of box in the final diagram in word)


DONT USE PASTE function (not emf, wmf or Xara object)
Pasting seems to result in bitmapped prints of vectored objects in Word.

Good report and tips thanks.

One question, are you not able to present your reports in PDF format?
I'm just wondering why 'Word 2007'?

If I print out a word document in PDF format - The pdf is simply a PDF printer driver and it faithfully preserves any graphic diagram translation errors - like the text overruns.


If you mean using or Adobe PDF editor or similar ( does anyone have any recommendations ?), its because I hadn't considered that as an option.
Are there any good / inexpensive PDF editors around (Fox edit ?)


Why using Word 2007 (instead of Word 2003 ?) or do you mean a PDF editor ?

Word 2003 presents some SERIOUS document stability issues when you go beyond about 20 to 30 pages with lots of figures, tables, citations, cross referencing and Table of contents.

Word gets its knickers in a knot - pictures start jumping around (loses its anchor points), cross referencing has problems, documents freeze etc.

Word 2007 has corrected most of these problems though it too still has some issues. The product is stable with up to about 70 megs per document.

I was forced to revert from word 2003 to word 2007 about 1/4 way through writing up a PhD due to document stability issues. Ended up having to split the total document into nine separate word documents with a total of about 450 megs ( I use a lot of pictures).

I had the same issues with word 2003 with a masters back in 95 but back then I had to live with the document instabilities (nightmarish - I wouldn't even wish MS on my worst neighbour :) )


George

.

Actually what I was wondering was why you are copying from Xara Xtreme into Word at all when Xtreme is equipped and capable of exporting to many PDF standards including PDF/X

PDF is more widely used for document transport and professional printing than Word 2007.

I use XXP to design and layout a 4 page weekly publication, and I find it much easier to use than Word. I export to pdf using the commercial printing settings and e-mail it to the printers.

Instead of pasting your graphics into Word why not paste the text into Xara?

But if this is the kind of work the requires headers/footers/referencing/tables/hyperlinks etc etc etc - you are not going to try to use xtreme for that are you - xtreme is not a word processor?

I think ' ......lots of figures, tables, citations, cross referencing and Table of contents.' gives the clue here :)

I have what might be seen as an extreme view, because I used to work in a print company and would get lots of Word files to deal with and get to a state where they can be printed upon a press, perhaps as a book, booklet or magazine or whatever.
....Don't use Word at all for anything!
For word processing use Notepad or if you're really fussy use Wordpad. For DTP use a DTP program. Optimally use Quark Xpress which was given away FREE here in the UK last year several times with several magazines (v5, very nice, I registered two copies for future expansion of ebbs studio?!?!). Or else try Serif PagePlus v9 for $9.99 which supports Pantone colours and PDF output. Or make the complete pages in Xara like Angelize suggests.

sure Fred - use a DTP program I'd go with that - but making the pages in xtreme if you need a lot more than just plain text is not on is it? No headers no footers no referencing in the body of the text, no hyperlinking - can't even page number automatically....

To solve the OP's problem it would be useful to know the nature and complexity of the document they wish to produce. Xtreme might be fine for it. But indeed, footers, referencing, hyperlinking, page numbering might be needed (maybe not hyperlinking in a printed doc). Indexing and tables might be needed too!

agreed :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fredbassett

For word processing use Notepad ...........

---

That's a really loose definition of word processing. Agreed, you can get the text on the computer, but that's about all.

Georgerai,

Word 2007 is clearly and measurably the best document writing software I've heard of—even more so than Latex (although disagreements can be put in a new OT thread, and are usually subjective).

I'm surprised you don’t use any raster format in Word 2007 docs; at a resolution of 200-300 ppi, you cannot notice any pixelation when printed. I never use W/EMF formats as they are hard to optimise for file size and come with compatibility limitations.

As for producing PDFs or the superior XPSs from Word docs (although there really isn’t a need if you embed the font and the recipient has the free Word 2007 doc viewer), MS provide a free PDF/XPS exporter that produces very clean and optimised PDF and XPS docs. The free XPS viewer may be required to read XPS files. Another useful download is the free docx compatibility pack which allows docx files to be loaded into older Word versions.

As for the claim of stability issues with Word 2003/7 for large docs; I also wrote my enormous PhD thesis using Word 2003. It contained several dozen figures and was tens of thousands of words and hundreds of pages long. I never once had the slightest issue, and when I hear stories like this, I'm always inclined (from past experience and observations) to suspect user error or misunderstanding in document production. This may not have been true in your case--I don't know, but I happen to be fortunate to know how to use Word as intended and never ever have any stability or document production issues (version 2003 onwards, earlier versions are another matter). I am seriously considering producing a lot of video tutorials for Word 2007 in the coming months which demonstrate how to use all its great features and how to produce structured documents correctly. Similarly for using EndNote correctly and creating new output styles etc. If you (or anyone else) ever needs advice on how to do something, let me know.

Xhris

Our office regularly produces documents for property leases that go over 80 pages (although admittedly they don't contain too many pictures). These have been produced in Word 2000 and more recently in Word 2003. We have NEVER had a stability problem or any other issues with Word. I would suggest that if you are having problems it is probably hardware related not the software.

Xhris, like you I did my Ph.D. dissertation in Word 2003. (I finished it just before Word 2007 came out. I had a lot of tables, etc., including a lot of illustrations done in XXP. My printed output was totally acceptable. (I got my piece of paper...LOL) And like you, mine was almost 1,000 pages (more if you count the bibliography, index, table of contents, etc.)

And I wish I had Word 2007 for it! The upgrades to it are really awesome, not the least is working in XML.
---
Will

I still use word 2000 for all my writing - never had a significant problem with it that was not down to me not understanding - sure there are limitations - but thats different.

My other half has upgraded her laptop to word 2007 for sync with her office job - and like others here I am impressed with it - had illustrator not been a higher priority for me, I would have upgraded too.

All

Thanks for all the great feedback,

SS-Kalm

The PC I work on is quite stable - no other s/w gives me stability issues - so that tends to point to word 2003 as being the problem. Ive moved on and use word 2007. This seems to be relatively stable.


Xhris

You mentioned:
"I'm surprised you don’t use any raster format in Word 2007 docs; at a resolution of 200-300 ppi, you cannot notice any pixelation when printed. I never use W/EMF formats as they are hard to optimise for file size and come with compatibility limitations."

As I said before when I print bitmaps from word - they definitely look fuzzy - (raster scanned). Thats when Im doing simple cut and pastes XXP to word.
If there is a way of increasing bitmap resolution - please let me know.
In particular - the text created in XXp becomes fuzzy

True that wmf and emf formats have issues maintaining graphic fidelity - things change slightly in mapping across to word.



As for optimising for file size - I don't think thats really an issue anymore in these days of so cheap hard disk real estate.

Using XXP as my work base rather than word ?
Very novel Idea - but on second thoughts - probably wouldn't work - I have to do equations, contents pages (nice to have these auto generated by word), headers, cross referencing etc. Work centres on a fair bit of technical reporting.


Xhris
Keep me posted if you end up making video tutorials for word 2007. In particular how to keep the styles minimally populated - with just 3 or 4 header styles, body of text, and titles. The way MS have styles ordered does not seem logical. At least to me.


George

The reason why images pasted from Xara into Word print funny (look fuzzy) is because they paste as OLE objects and Xara does not support a resolution of more than 96 ppi for these objects (Xara's limitation which should be addressed). What I do is export the figure from Xara as a png or jpg (depending on the figure) at a resolution of 200 to 300 ppi and then import it into Word. I'm guessing you know how to export images in Xara. To correctly import images into Word 2007 (quoting from a tutorial I am writing for some other organisation):

Figures can be inserted from the Insert tab of the Ribbon by clicking on Picture in the Illustrations group, or by revealing the Developer tab (Microsoft Office Button > Word Options > Show Developer tab in the Ribbon) and clicking the Picture Content Control button in the Controls group.

Yes, I'll produce videos on creating custom styles (subscribe to my YouTube page and you should automatically get an email when I add anything). They are very useful and not hard to make.

Xhris

Many thanks for the tips, on the 96 DPI OLE limitation for Xara pastes. I will experiment with higher resolution export / import jpgs. Yes - no problems with using the word import feature.

Thanks for the heads up on You Tube tutorials.

George

I'd also recommend designing the image in Xara at the correct physical size (X cm x Y cm) and export at 200/300 pixels per inch (ppi). Then if after importing into Word the object is not correctly sized, go to the Format tab of the Ribbon, and on the Size group, click the button at the bottom-right corner to bring up the Size dialogue. Then click the Reset button at the bottom of the Size tab to set the object back to 100% (i.e. the physical size you designed it at). This will ensure the correct resolution for printing.