basic photo vectoring techniques?

[Clear80]

hi xaranauts! i have some vector art questions. im very new at this vector art stuff and in general, art and drawing. so what ever i draw, i have to look at a photograph to see how it should be drawn perspective especially. i wont let it drag me down though, everybody has to start somewhere.

what ive been doing, is downloading sporstcar, and jet pics and hand tracing over them. i seem to be getting pretty good at hand tracing, you know, using the pen tool. i can completely hand trance a pic so it looks kinda close to the real pic, but what i really want to do is assemble to drawing together in layers and shapes the way you assemble a model.

how would i go about vectoring an image from a picture? what are some things i need to know?

[steve.ledger]

You answered your own question I think.

*Layers*

Your reference image is placed on a layer and locked, you can then trace each *part* (shapes) on it's own new layer. Each layer can be locked as you work on the next. Completed layers can be switched off so they don't block or interfere with your view of the reference image.

And there's nothing wrong with using a reference image for the trace.
That's what tracing actually is right ..??
*a drawing created by superimposing a semitransparent sheet of paper on the original image and copying on it the lines of the original image

If you'd like feedback on what you'd done so far, feel free to attach an example in the Xara Gallery, the monthly Stop and Post forum or even in this thread.

[Clear80]

if im say, tracing a car, should i trace the entire car first? or should i just trace the outline of the car? or should i even, trace the car in sections. what is the easiest method?

[Clear80]

And there's nothing wrong with using a reference image for the trace.
That's what tracing actually is right ..??

lol. i got chewed out on the illustrator forums for mentioning vectoring photos. they told me it was a waste to buy illustrator to just trace and vector photos. they said it wasn't art

[steve.ledger]

Depends on who you listen to.
Art is very interpretive. Not an issue I really like to discuss.
However, suffice it to say, many famous paintings used an outdoor scene or a model as the reference image.

As far as which part of the car you want to start with, well that's up to you.
Perhaps important if you want to learn how to draw like someone else, but not so if you simply want to learn how to draw using Xtreme.

Getting used to how the program functions, how the tools work and which methods you feel comfortable with are likely the first important steps and, like anything else, requires patience and practice. You'll soon develop you won techniques along the way.

[raynerj1]

All images are art... Some people like them and others don't. Those folk who said that about tracing are just pompus windbags. Draw what pleases you and the heck with anybody else.

On what to draw first... some like to draw the background objects, others the foreground objects. It is just easiest to draw with layers. That way you can hide a layer if it gets in the way or protect it if it gets in the way but still need to see it for a reference.

In the clipart gallery there are 2 folders with examples from skilled xaraians. You can open these xara files and see how the "masters" created these works of art. Gary has over 100 step by step tutorials in the xaraxone, showing you how to create many, many things.

In the end, whatever you draw will be your interpretation of the subject, be it abstract, impressionist, surreal or photorealistic. Photorealistic is what my muse coerces me to create. As with any artist, you create what your muse forces you to create. You have no choice in the matter. My drawings take me forever to create, that is why I use a camera for most of my creations.

[handrawn]

they told me it was a waste to buy illustrator to just trace and vector photos. they said it wasn't art

if you manually trace the photo then yes it is art, but what it is not is 'original' art - it's derivative.

but that said - all art is derivative to a degree [if it is to stand any chance of being understood] - and more to the point here it is good practice, and the best way to learn the tools, as has been said...

[gwpriester]

Tracing photos is a good way to learn. You can figure out how the individual parts of an object come together and you can figure out how to recreate the effect using Xtreme's tool, which run circles around Illustrators (IMHO) once you get the feel for them.

Xtreme has tremendous transparency capabilities including seven kinds of gradient transparency. The last time I looked, I don't think that Illustrator offers even one, am I correct.

You can apply transparency to a group of objects or a blend as if it were one object. I am not sure if Illustrator can do that either.

You can blend groups of objects to groups of objects even if the groups contain some different kinds of transparency.

Illustration is one area in which Xtreme is a superior product to Illustrator. Both are excellent products to be sure. And each has its strong points.

[MarkMyWords]

There is nothing wrong with tracing it is merely copying and copying is copying, whether it is done by tracing or by eye. The latter is more impressive certainly, but it is the end result that counts, especially with digital art, so how you achieve your results is simply a matter of personal preference.

As for those on other forums who object to tracing, point out to them that some old masters used cameras, Vermeer for example was thought to have used a camera and Durer is famous for using a "tracing frame". Many big name illustrators of today have professional photographers take reference images for them to trace/copy.

Just one small note of caution, remember that most photos that you find on line will be copyrighted. You can trace them to your hearts content and even publish the results on line - as along a you neither; claim the original as your own, make money from them, use them to advertise a money making enterprise or use them in a way that will bring disrepute to the owner.

What this means is; if you are just doing this for fun, then for the most part you will get away with using any image in a reasonable manner (i.e. not as part of some sleazey gonzo-porn-pirate-international scamming site or some such). If the owner objects to your use of his image, then you may have to take it down, this is not always backed up by law, when the image is used for non-profit reasons, but most site operators will want to avoid any threat of lawsuits and will usually back such demands.

If you are meaning to go on to look for work using these images, you should ask the originator if you can use them. They will often agree if you include a credit or sometimes a link to their site. Many glamour models actually ask pro or even amateur illustrators to use their photos if you want to try pin up art at some time.

In any case, it's good practice to credit the originator/owner, where you can, even if you don't ask them for permission.

[ankhor]

Depends on who you listen to.
Art is very interpretive. Not an issue I really like to discuss.
However, suffice it to say, many famous paintings used an outdoor scene or a model as the reference image.

I would go even further, there artist who used to trace too.
They used a camera obscura system to paint and in many
paintings it is proven by looking at the shape of certain
objects and in those paintings and the conclusion was that
a system like a camera obscura was used.
So even some old masters in painting used a similar system.
So don`t worry. They call that art, so yours is also art