-
I sure hope that Xara improves EPS export. The bitmap headers are really low res and when you import them into Quark you have a hard time seeing where edges are sometimes so it makes it very difficult to line up graphics that need specific placement. The only way I have found around this problem is to enlarge the graphic quite a bit before exporting so that when you scale it down in Quark, the bitmap header looks reasonable. Also, I have had some problems with some service bureaus and printshops not being able to print my eps graphics.
s.g.
-
I sure hope that Xara improves EPS export. The bitmap headers are really low res and when you import them into Quark you have a hard time seeing where edges are sometimes so it makes it very difficult to line up graphics that need specific placement. The only way I have found around this problem is to enlarge the graphic quite a bit before exporting so that when you scale it down in Quark, the bitmap header looks reasonable. Also, I have had some problems with some service bureaus and printshops not being able to print my eps graphics.
s.g.
-
Hi
Yeah I had a lot of trouble with eps files. But as far as I can tell it wasn't the export filters in Xara that was the problem, but the eps import filters in other programs. I tried to import an eps file into Photoshop. As my print bureau was using this software, I downloaded a trial version just to check what they were getting when they imported the Xara eps and whether to get a copy myself as so many print shops use PS. I found that, colours went haywire and also Photoshop couldn't handle some of the linear fills from Xara.
When I imported the same eps file into Paint Shop Pro it was fine.
The eps was very grainy in Photoshop so when I exported the eps in Xara I turned off error diffusion and the resulting eps in PS was a lot clearer.
Although I don't know that the Xara eps is perfect it may be that the import filters in Quark are also to blame?
Su
[img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]
-
Xara's EPS isn't that bad, but EPS is a very inefficient format and interpreters can choke on them. One that works very well is GhostScript / GSView, which also allows you to create a new preview bitmap or add any bitmap of your choice. Xara's existing preview seems only suitable as a thumbnail when importing into CorelDRAW.
Regards - Sean
-
Well, I think that Xara's eps export and import both sucked the big one. WAY too many nodes...which is probably why other aps like photoshop and Quark (etc) had problems with them. I was glad to see that improved eps import/export was listed on the new list of features. EPS is vital for offset press work.
Someone mentioned getting stuff in Photoshop...I personally found that the bitmap export (or bitmap copy) was superb for getting stuff into Photoshop. There was often colour shifts (another area that needs improvement in Xara), but it was good to get the stuff into photoshop for further editing and colour correction. Wouldn't it be lovely if there was a PSD export. And perhaps a mac version too. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif[/img]
Beth
-
I don't believe that you are correct on the nodes issue. Xara doesn't add any more nodesin an EPS file than already there in the first place. I have exported eps files from xara which open fine in Adobe Illustrator although the colors shift, and the nodes are in the exact same place as they were in Xara.
s.g.
-
AFAIK, Xara doesn't add any nodes to EPS vector objects, but watch out if you use bitmaps, fractal fills or transparency! All these things are exported as EPS bitmaps at the resolution set in the export dialog, regardless of the resolution of the original. Also, there is no concept of a "bitmap fill" and all instances of a bitmap are stored separately. EPS bitmaps take up twice as much space as standard uncompressed 24-bit bitmaps and can dramatically increase the file size.
The bitmaps are stored as arrays of 1 pixel high stripes, which may give the impression of many more nodes. The quantity of stripes can often choke import filters.
Regards - Sean
