Bitmap Tracer Blues

[Xhris]

Thanks for the video showing how you reproduced your result. As I suspected, my inability to reproduce the same trace result was because the final image posted was post-edited and not representative of the tracer’s raw output. As such, it’s probably not meaningful to conclude much about the tracers based on a comparison of the earlier images because post editing and corrections will always improve the final result.

In general, higher resolution images will always produce considerably better results due to the increased amount of information available for the tracer. Having played a bit more, both tracers seem to produce comparable levels of accuracy in their raw output relative to the original source image (in this example at least) as the attached file shows; the traces are overlaid on the original bitmap set to be all red pixels (can turn antialiasing off for clarity). I would argue that, at least in this case, the Inkscape tracer is easier to produce a final result given that it cuts out holes automatically. This is not surprising though given that Potrace is many years newer. Given that Inkscape is free and you can export to PDF, it’s probably the tracer of choice for this kind of usage as of Feb 2017.

Logo comparison.xar

[ernie-f]

Having played a bit more, both tracers seem to produce comparable levels of accuracy in their raw output relative to the original source image…

Hi Xhris,
I dont agree with You. The poor quality output of Xara's tracer is not comparable to Potracer's output and is unacceptable for me as a professional graphic designer and printer..



You can see how jiggy the trace from Xara is.
I don't know when Xara build in the tracer but potrace was written by Peter Selinger and the initial release was 2001. More information about potrace you can find here: http://potrace.sourceforge.net/

I attached an other example of a tracing job I got often to do. To trace a handdrawn logo from a customer like this one is a job for a tracer. Not so good idea to redraw it into Xara.
Feel free to play arround with it. Maybe You got better results in Xara then my but I don't think You got a better result then with Inkscape/Potrace.

Servus Ernie

[handrawn]

if you go back to around 2007/2008 you will find a whole series of threads on TG about using bitmap tracers, often relating to the creation of vector for the dreaded spinning logos in xara3D, and the subject of which was best between xara and inscape was thrashed to death

I use tracers a lot - the default settings on inscape/potrace make it easier to get a smooth egde than do the default settings in xara.. but smooth edges mean the edge deviates from it's original path more than if the edges are jagged with xara

look at the attached file - I have highlighted where your inkscape trace has simplified the outline - I have also traced in xara and you will see how the outline follows the original more closely - I have also included the xara tracer settings that I used in the xar file

[ernie-f]

Sorry maybe I'm blind? Or You?
Did You realy think the jigged trace from Xara will be better? If I tracing a logo i will have smooth but detailrich pathes with a minimum on nodes and not the sawtooth effect what Xara tracer made. That what You postet as an example is so terrible I wouldn't sell it to a client or let it plot for vehicle labeling.
That is a no go!
Xaras tracer is a piece of crap. I You are happy with it, o.k. For my purposes it's not suitable.

Servus Ernie

[handrawn]

did I say it was better? - my point is that it is different

For my purposes it's not suitable

sure I understand that - but it does not make it a piece of crap; nor is anyone 'blind'

back in the day I used to think the inkscape tracer was better because it produced smoother outlines and that was what I needed; but I reckon now that it is horses for courses - for example if you are doing poster work for walls would the jaggies matter if you could not see them unless you came so close you couldn't see the picture anyway - this is an argument that has been thrashed out before as well

in any case given the choice I would these days prefer to use illustrator for the sort of work the OP posted

[handrawn]

a quick example [very quick ]

[handrawn]

and again in colour - photographic 10 pass

you can see a bit of banding - but again only if you are up close - there is some tweaking needed on the beak - but that is tweaking of the source, not the trace

personally I don't think the xara tracer was ever meant to convert raster into perfect vector, not sure any tracer can be that accurate, but the xara tracer can do a very good job of converting raster 'pencil and paint' effects into a vector format and that is what I think it was originally meant for....