Best method to export a shape from Xara, and import it into Photoshop as vector?

Hi,

I'd appreciate your help. As shown in this screencast (http://bit.ly/34l6Qpc), I’m trying to import into Photoshop a spiral shape created in Xara, being my expectation to import a vector shape, instead of a rasterized image.

My XAR file is attached and is constituted of two spirals, one plain, and the other with a shadow applied.

The tests:

a) Since I want the spiral shape into Photoshop, I thought to export from Xara as .PSD would be my best choice. However, both spirals where rasterized, and the .PSD format seems to not fit my need.
=> Is there any workaround to export Xara’s shapes as vectors using the .PSD format?

b) Then I exported as .SVG and I had a mixed result:
b.1) The solid spiral seems to be imported as vector into Photoshop, since I can upscale it without notice pixelated edges.
b.2) The spiral with shadow was imported as raster, since I can notice the pixelated edges.
=> Why those differences? Shouldn’t the import (b.2 pixelated) be the same as (b.1 no pixelated)?
=> My evaluation in Photoshop about having the image properly imported as a vector is just by eye. By chance does anyone know how to clearly identify in Photoshop when the imported spiral is vector or raster?

c) Besides those tests, would there be a better method to export a shape from Xara, and import it into Photoshop as a vector?

Thank you,
Carlos



Attachment 125471

PSD does not do vector

which version of PS are you using ?

Carlos, some Shapes are too complex for SVG. Shadows and text with a Line width may be troublesome. It is worth the effort to maintain a vector drawing for as long as possible.

If you are using the Xara Export Settings, set dpi to 600 & Bitmap fills to Clip path (Adobe). This will cut down on the jaggies.

Also avoid using a Xara Shadow: clone behind and change the spiral to a grey colour and introduce a Flat Transparency. You get an Opacity Mask and a grey SVG Shape. The fall-back will still be a PNG but at 600 dpi.

Acorn

PS v20

double post....sorry

[managing the attachmnents can be a pita]

same as me :)

the only way I know to work properly with vectors in PS is as smart objects, for which you would need Illustrator CC too ideally

xara shadows created with xara shadow tool are not true vector shapes

you will know it is a vector in PS if it is on a shape layer [ie vector layer]

a shape layer has a symbol in the bottom right corner of the layer gallery thus:

Attachment 125474

Thanks a lot all you for the tips and teachings!
Carlos

Disregarding my mumbles Xara creates bitmaps (rasters) for shadows and contours, possibly for other things too. If you want to export as total vector ensure you do so in Xara first as shapes.

Hi Egg,
Thank you very much for the video and explanations!
Have a nice weekend,
Carlos

Hi,

I’m trying to get aware of all Xara’s caveats and shortcomings when exporting to SVG, since I do need to keep content as vector.

I'm considering SVG as the best solution to export Xara's content, keeping its vectorial properties. Is this assumption correct?

Besides the Shadow Tool, is there any other Xara’s inbuilt tool (contour, bevel, blend, etc.) that interferes with vector shapes, creating rasterization, or causing any trouble when exporting to SVG?

Thank you very much!
Carlos

I use PDF if I am porting to adobe program

I don't use SVG a lot except for simple black and white lineart, but I know there can be issues - it is probably best to convert everything you can to editable shapes before you export, as mentoned by egg [who does use SVG a lot]

rasterisation is the conversion of vector to bitmap - it will happen to everything when you edit using photoshop [as opposed to illustrator] - the issue may be the resolution of that rasterisation for things like shadows

Thanks for the reply!
After more tests exporting SVG, PDF, and PSD, I did notice that the rasterization resolution can be a culprit for bad pixelated exporting.
I've adopted the maximum rasterization value (300dpi for SVG/PSD, and 600dpi for PDF) and the results are much better.
Cheers,
Carlos

glad to hear you are making progress :) - if you really wanted to keep vector editable you would need illustrator, but for bitmap [raster] in photoshop or elsewhere you do need to watch that resolution value

I scan my sketches at 600 dpi, 300 dpi would be ok for print, but 600 dpi gives me a margin that is especially useful if I have to zoom in really close

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadudesun

I've adopted the maximum rasterization value (300dpi for SVG/PSD, and 600dpi for PDF) and the results are much better.
Cheers, Carlos

---

Carlos, you can type in a larger dpi value directly.

Acorn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acorn

Carlos, you can type in a larger dpi value directly.

---

Hi Acorn,

Thanks for the further direction. Really convenient the trick!

A further point:
Having in mind webgraphics creation (not for print), is there a general DPI high value that is expected to deliver great rasterization when exporting from Xara to PSD, PDF and SVG?
Would 300dpi be enough? Should I set 600dpi to deliver the best results ever?

Thank you,
Carlos

Attachment 125541

for vector conversion I would suggest an alternative mehtod:

for rasterisation of vector that cannot be preserved I would suggest you make your vector drawing in xara at least 3840 pixel units wide

if you do this it will cater for resolution up to 4K on conversion, and you can leave the dpi at it's default value - what matters to the screen is the pixel dimension resolution, not the dpi

this works for animation, so i guess it will work for websites...

sorry aboiut delay with this...

... and if you wish to double check first - make a bimap copy of your 3840 pixel unit wide vector drawing at xara's default copy resolution of 96dpi and check that it all looks ok...

Thanks for the further tips @handrawn
I've learned a lot through this thread. My thanks to all of you who contributed!
Cheers,
Carlos

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadudesun

Hi,

Besides the Shadow Tool, is there any other Xara’s inbuilt tool (contour, bevel, blend, etc.) that interferes with vector shapes, creating rasterization, or causing any trouble when exporting to SVG?

Thank you very much!
Carlos

---

Hi Carlos,

In answer to this part of your question, bevels result in rasterisation, alongside shadows / glows and also if you use Xara's edge feathering feature (e.g. to smooth the edge of shapes / lines).

If you can avoid these features in your raw vectors, you should have a smoother journey through creating an SVG for use in other apps.

I use similar techniques to you, but take the raw SVG data and render this through software I've created in Delphi - then apply any shadows / fancy effects there, rather than in Xara.

Good luck,



KultiVator

You need to be aware that Xara's svg now exports bitmaps via the data uri scheme and not as bitmaps as most folks understand them. As an example view here

This isn't exported as a jpg within the svg file but is exported directly within the html (?) such that the dom contains code to generate the image and doesn't call on an external file such as 'tiger.jpg'.

If you look at the page source it contains the following to draw the image:

Quote:

---

 ..... with lot's more of meaningless code to you & I

---

It's a data uri code. I don't even pretend to understand 1% of it but the image is within the page code and doesn't require a call to another external file.

egg - what you say may have implications for websites, I realise that, but for graphics I am not at all sure

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egg Bramhill

You need to be aware that Xara's svg now exports bitmaps via the data uri scheme and not as bitmaps as most folks understand them. As an example view here
This isn't exported as a jpg within the svg file but is exported directly within the html (?) such that the dom contains code to generate the image and doesn't call on an external file such as 'tiger.jpg'.
If you look at the page source it contains the following to draw the image:
It's a data uri code. I don't even pretend to understand 1% of it but the image is within the page code and doesn't require a call to another external file.

---

Egg, that that you are going is trading an HTML call to an image over one to an image. Both are of a similar size so the download time will be too. Data URIs (Base64 encoded) are larger than the original. Data URIs are not cached.

Never simple, is it.

Acorn