solarDog

Here are a few things to comment on that I think are being overlooked:

This thread exists within a section of Affinity's forum under "Feature Requests & Suggestions"
- My message is a Feature Request and a suggestion about why it is needed.
None of the feedback / flashback to my comment has provided a justifiable reason to not warrant the addition of the image trace feature.
I have seen the developers mention that an image trace feature is only not currently implemented because they are unhappy with the existing performance of their version of image trace.
In other words, not only is my Feature Request valid, but they agree and have been working on it.

Adding this feature will in no way damage the viability of the program or make it less desirable as @JET_Affinity seems to imply.
It will only make it more desirable because it will service an additional user base. If existing users don't like / want to image trace, then they don't have to.

As for an argument that they should not implement this feature because they charge a comparatively small fee for their software already.
Well I expect that the Affinity team would love it if their software became the premier #1 software used by all designers. They are working to get there from what I can see, by offering what those at the top offer but doing it better. But the Affinity software will never make it to the top if it is missing key components.

We as Users are in an extremely fortunate position with the Affinity team because they are currently working to build their name.
This means we can get their very excellent software for much less than it's actual value.
They are being very smart about their business plan if you ask me.

I keep saying this software looks great, but I think it can still improve, and adding Image Trace is one particular way they can do that.

I work in the printing field.
Reason 1) My clients frequently give us their own artwork.
It is OFTEN terrible - a copy of a copy of... etc
Pass the artwork over with image trace and poof - the image looks (mostly) nice again.

Reason 2) Our products include items made using a Vinyl Cutter / Laser Cutter.
Everything produced from these must be vector.
(Laser engraving can also be done via raster, but not laser cutting)
Anything produced for a customer by raster and later needed in vector format is easily handled with image trace.

Basically, there is a lot of raster stuff out there. If you need it vector, image trace is the multi-use tool to get the job done, or at least partially done.

Yup. And so is the one I already have.
If I'm going to image trace then I'll use a program that can image trace - makes sense.

But what about buying a new program that doesn't image trace when what I want to do is image trace?
See the problem there?
Honestly it's a little confounding to talk about a program that doesn't do something it should, then the defender tries to support it by offering some other program that can do what the first program should already be doing.

I already said this - the Affinity programs look great, but Affinity Designer SHOULD image trace, it's an integral function to many aspects of design.

This seems to correspond with certain fonts. I was having the same issue with Gotham. Switched to another font and it worked.
What could be causing that to happen?

+1
 
The app is beautiful and really nice to use but Live Trace is a must for my needs. What Niconemo said!