AutoTrace (convert raster image to vector)

[fde101]

3 minutes ago, HuniSenpai said:

6 years is quite a long time to wait for a vectorizing feature in a vector program

Illustrator didn't get tracing until version 9, which was released more than 13 years after version 1.

It gained its "Shape Builder" tool in CS5, about 10 years later.

Adobe is a much larger company with a lot more developers working on the products...

[MikeW]

7 minutes ago, fde101 said:

Illustrator didn't get tracing until version 9, which was released more than 13 years after version 1.

It gained its "Shape Builder" tool in CS5, about 10 years later.

Adobe is a much larger company with a lot more developers working on the products...

But...Adobe first provided Streamline in 1989 (4 years after AI). It was discontinued when CS2 gained "Live Trace." So Adobe beat Serif by a few years as regards time from first AI release to providing a solution...😁

[HuniSenpai]

19 minutes ago, fde101 said:

Illustrator didn't get tracing until version 9, which was released more than 13 years after version 1.

It gained its "Shape Builder" tool in CS5, about 10 years later.

Software has to catch up to modern times quickly, though. Things like this were cutting edge back when Adobe first implemented them, but it's 2020. 

Content aware fill was added into Photoshop CS5 as well, that was 2011, 21 years after first release of Photoshop. As far as I can tell, inpainting has been in Affinity Photo for a long, long time. Possibly since release. So, it took Serif anywhere from 0-3 years to add it (i've been using Affinity Photo for about 2 years, and inpainting was there when I started).

Adobe blazed the trail for many of these features. While Affinity is also adding its own features and its own take on certain things, it is largely following in the footsteps of Adobe. Adobe originally took so long to add these features because 1) these features were often on the cutting edge (although they aren't anymore) and 2) they delivered these new features slowly but surely to ensure people would buy the next version. Affinity is catching up: they have to. They have to make themselves a viable competitor so they can start earning a good amount of money to stay afloat. The same goes for any business that enters into a competitive scene with many established competitors who have been around for decades.  

[Kuttyjoe]

On 4/10/2020 at 1:47 PM, HuniSenpai said:

I know the Affinity team is scared that people will complain that it isn't perfect, but I think the vast majority of us know that vectorizing isn't perfect.

That comment isn't quite working.  There's a difference between saying that vectorizing isn't perfect, and having a laughable implementation of this feature included with the software.  To be clear, if Affinity Designer had the exact same vector tracing that DrawPlus had, it would create an endless stream of complaints.  I think that many people would give up even attempting to use it and end up using something else anyway.  Vectorization isn't perfect, but how close to perfect can it be?  If you test all of the popular vector tracing solutions that we know of, you'll find that there's a pretty big range of results you can get when tracing the same image.  Eventually, there are some that you will go back to time and again, and some that you wouldn't waste time with, if it's an accurate result you're looking for.

[HuniSenpai]

7 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

That comment isn't quite working.  There's a difference between saying that vectorizing isn't perfect, and having a laughable implementation of this feature included with the software.  To be clear, if Affinity Designer had the exact same vector tracing that DrawPlus had, it would create an endless stream of complaints.  I think that many people would give up even attempting to use it and end up using something else anyway.  Vectorization isn't perfect, but how close to perfect can it be?  If you test all of the popular vector tracing solutions that we know of, you'll find that there's a pretty big range of results you can get when tracing the same image.  Eventually, there are some that you will go back to time and again, and some that you wouldn't waste time with, if it's an accurate result you're looking for.

Yes. Which is why Serif needs to meet our expectations, but not exceed them. Given how long we've went without this basic feature, they are either trying to exceed our realistic expectations (something which is effectively impossible to do with vectorizing) or they are saving it until version 2.0. I really hope it's the latter, that way we have to wait only a year or two more. They can refine the feature in the future if they need to. 

I will also add that not having a vectorizing feature in the first place creates an even longer stream of complaints, evidently.

[Kuttyjoe]

25 minutes ago, fde101 said:

Illustrator didn't get tracing until version 9, which was released more than 13 years after version 1.

It gained its "Shape Builder" tool in CS5, about 10 years later.

I don't think it's a good comparison.  Adobe, Corel and others were innovating without the benefit of what came before them.  Essentially, not much came before them.  Affinity Designer comes along with the benefit of decades of software development that came before them, not to mention their own 30 year history in software development.  It would not be unreasonable to think that any vector software created today would have vector tracing in version 1.0.  We're not talking about the newest, latest, most amazing, stuff like Adobe's puppet warp, etc.  We're talking about a feature hat is decades old.  Adobe integrated vector tracing into Illustrator at version 9, but Adobe Streamline existed for many years before that.  I was using it in the late 90's.

Shapebuilder was a part of Macromedia's software which Adobe acquired.  So they merely integrated it into Illustrator, but it's still very old functionality.  The real question is regarding the intended scale and scope of Affinity Designer.  These features may never appear in Designer along with a lot of other stuff that people want, simply because it's not what Serif intends for their software.

[Kuttyjoe]

3 hours ago, HuniSenpai said:

Yes. Which is why Serif needs to meet our expectations, but not exceed them.

I think they need to exceed expectations.  People need a reason to use one tool vs another.  With Affinity Designer, the reason is price, and also because for some people it's enough to do the work they need to do.  Vector tracing in Affinity Designer has to be better than whatever it is we're currently using.  If not, we'll continue to use what we're using.  It's that simple.  If I try it, and get a poor result, once, twice, thrice, I'll stop risking wasting time on it and go straight to where I know it will work.

[HuniSenpai]

5 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

I think they need to exceed expectations.  People need a reason to use one tool vs another.  With Affinity Designer, the reason is price, and also because for some people it's enough to do the work they need to do.  Vector tracing in Affinity Designer has to be better than whatever it is we're currently using.  If not, we'll continue to use what we're using.  It's that simple.  If I try it, and get a poor result, once, twice, thrice, I'll stop risking wasting time on it and go straight to where I know it will work.

That's not true though. It has to be roughly the same as what we are currently using for it to be beneficial, it does not have to be better. If Designer does an identical job as Inkscape (which is that other tool i'm using right now) then I will certainly choose Designer over Inkscape. The idea is to not have to keep switching between programs. 

Ideally, Designer's vectorizing feature should be about equivalent to Adobe Illustrator's. That's the expectation. They should aim to meet that expectation because I don't think it's reasonable to try to exceed this expectation. If they can match Ai's vectorizing feature (alongside shapebuilder and the other missing tools 😕), then i'm sure many people will consider moving to Designer because of the price. Especially hobbyists and illustrators who don't need to open files in the .ai file format constantly.

 

[Kuttyjoe]

1 minute ago, HuniSenpai said:

That's not true though. It has to be roughly the same as what we are currently using for it to be beneficial, it does not have to be better.

I agree with that.  If it's as good as an existing solution, for you, then I guess that's fine too.  But, we we talk about expectations, there's no way to quantify what our collective expectations are.  I was recently talking with some people on here who seemed to think that all vector tracing solutions were the same, and they only had a single use.  We did not have similar expectations, or use cases. So for me, it needs to EXCEED my expectations, because my expectations are that it will be a hair better than what that was in DrawPlus.

6 minutes ago, HuniSenpai said:

Ideally, Designer's vectorizing feature should be about equivalent to Adobe Illustrator's. That's the expectation

That's what I would call seriously exceeding my personal expectations.  I didn't dare dream it but OK, I'll take that.

[HuniSenpai]

2 minutes ago, Kuttyjoe said:

I agree with that.  If it's as good as an existing solution, for you, then I guess that's fine too.  But, we we talk about expectations, there's no way to quantify what our collective expectations are.  I was recently talking with some people on here who seemed to think that all vector tracing solutions were the same, and they only had a single use.  We did not have similar expectations, or use cases. So for me, it needs to EXCEED my expectations, because my expectations are that it will be a hair better than what that was in DrawPlus.

That's what I would call seriously exceeding my personal expectations.  I didn't dare dream it but OK, I'll take that.

I see what you mean. 

My personal expectation for vectorization is just to be as good as Inkscape because I haven't used Illustrator in a long, long time. But I recognize that Designer will, hopefully, be able to compete with Illustrator some day. For people moving from Illustrator to Designer, they are going to expect a similar quality of vectorizing. It doesn't have to be identical, but close. 

As it is now, though, Designer's vectorization meets absolutely no ones expectations because there isn't vectorizing in the first place. Just implementing something as good as Inkscape's will satisfy 75% of us, and maybe 99% will be satisfied if Designer can match Illustrator. Only those who have unrealistic expectations of what vectorizing should do will be disappointed, that's the 1%. 

On something like this, I feel like it's about just getting the feature implemented sometime in the near-ish future. Unless Serif is able to use some new technique to vectorize like machine learning, I doubt they will ever meet that 1%'s unrealistic expectations.

In my opinion, Designer should put a rough version of vectorizing into the program to start, and refine it until it is similar to Illustrator's.  If Serif doesn't want their only selling point of Designer to be "price," then they can focus on countless things other than vectorizing. For example, Designer has an excellent system for isometric work and an isometric grid that far exceeds anything in Illustrator, that's a selling point. Spending years on trying to perfect a vectorizing feature is ineffectual. This stuff has been around for decades without massive improvements. It's much better to focus on areas where you can make big changes.

[techinteaching]

Love AD, would love it more if image trace becomes a thing. 

Edited May 11, 2020 by techinteaching

[halina.photography]

Any Update on a tracing tool in Affinity Designer ?

[v_kyr]

6 years later the answer is still no.

[Jowday]

On 4/14/2020 at 9:21 PM, HuniSenpai said:

Software has to catch up to modern times quickly, though. Things like this were cutting edge back when Adobe first implemented them, but it's 2020. 

Content aware fill was added into Photoshop CS5 as well, that was 2011, 21 years after first release of Photoshop. As far as I can tell, inpainting has been in Affinity Photo for a long, long time. Possibly since release. So, it took Serif anywhere from 0-3 years to add it (i've been using Affinity Photo for about 2 years, and inpainting was there when I started).

Adobe blazed the trail for many of these features. While Affinity is also adding its own features and its own take on certain things, it is largely following in the footsteps of Adobe. Adobe originally took so long to add these features because 1) these features were often on the cutting edge (although they aren't anymore) and 2) they delivered these new features slowly but surely to ensure people would buy the next version. Affinity is catching up: they have to. They have to make themselves a viable competitor so they can start earning a good amount of money to stay afloat. The same goes for any business that enters into a competitive scene with many established competitors who have been around for decades.  

Exactly. I have a feeling that many features (algorithms) in Affinity are based on open source components - in-painting especially. Or perhaps they purchased a license for some components here and there. If I am right they are indeed not inventing things in a lab as they go and can move on faster than back in the day when everything was pioneered and every program came with its own printer drivers.

The more obvious explanation is that too few developers are working on the Affinity line.

BTW I am not sure you are all waiting for anything better (or else) than Potrace (used in fx free Inkscape) or vectorization.org, so...

[spidermurph]

So many of the features we are all asking for already exist in their Serif Plus programs. I can only assume that the problem is adapting the code for Mac and iPads.

These features and so many more work brilliantly in the Serif titles. That is why for the PC users it often feels like a huge step back.

[imageready]

8 hours ago, Jowday said:

Exactly. I have a feeling that many features (algorithms) in Affinity are based on open source components - in-painting especially. Or perhaps they purchased a license for some components here and there. If I am right they are indeed not inventing things in a lab as they go and can move on faster than back in the day when everything was pioneered and every program came with its own printer drivers.

The more obvious explanation is that too few developers are working on the Affinity line.

BTW I am not sure you are all waiting for anything better (or else) than Potrace (used in fx free Inkscape) or vectorization.org, so...

That is a very interesting point. It may be possible to confirm it by looking at the legal info/licensing/acknowledgements (or whatever it's called) area in the app.

Either way, thanks for linking to vectorization.org, that worked.

[v_kyr]

9 hours ago, Jowday said:

... BTW I am not sure you are all waiting for anything better (or else) than Potrace (used in fx free Inkscape) or vectorization.org, so...

There aren't actually that much better described tracing algorithms and most of these have been developed (their basics) years ago. - For Inkscape the community around that has added color quantisation and center-line tracing capabilities etc. to the underlayed and used potrace base. Some also added additional autotrace interoperations for it, since that one (autotrace) supports centerline tracing as default, beside color tracing. - So I doubt one will actually find that much better tracing algorithms for reuse, where licensing for (re)usage in a commercial product is also another theme here then.

 

[KatScratch46]

Has this feature been added yet? I'm currently trying to convert a pixel layer into a vector/trace it, but it doesn't seem like that option has been made available. This is something I've been able to do in Illustrator. 

[PaRunk]

Hello everybody,
so so far I have not yet seen that this function is available in AD. I would also like this function very much because it is very helpful.
I find it interesting that this function in Draw Plus, which Serif unfortunately only developed for Windows users before the new development of the Affinity programs, existed. The same goes for the Shape Builder tool. However, these functions weren't really mature and didn't work quite as well as in AI.
I really hope these two tools can be found in AD soon and work just as well as they do in AI.
I am sure that we are probably already working on these and a few other functions that many users want, and that they will only be gradually integrated into AD when they really work properly. The development of all these functions takes time and there are still one or two problems here and there with existing functions that still have to be resolved.

[dominik]

9 hours ago, PaRunk said:

I really hope these two tools can be found in AD soon and work just as well as they do in AI.

Hello @PaRunk,

I assume you didn't take the time and read through the by now 13 pages of this thread. Otherwise you might have noticed a comment by one of the developers on the topic. It basically provides an answer to your (and others) hopes 🙂

 

Cheers,
d.

[Alfred]

56 minutes ago, dominik said:

I assume you didn't take the time and read through the by now 13 pages of this thread. Otherwise you might have noticed a comment by one of the developers on the topic.

There’s also also this comment from another developer on the previous page of the current thread:

 

[dominik]

4 minutes ago, Alfred said:

There’s also also this comment from another developer on the previous page of the current thread:

 

The good news is that this post was posted years ago. So we have spent already part of the mentioned 'years' 😉

d.

[Alfred]

12 minutes ago, dominik said:

The good news is that this post was posted years ago. So we have spent already part of the mentioned 'years' 😉

This is true, but the main point is that if it’s only coming in version 2.x we’re still going to have to wait until after version 1.9 (and, for all we know, 1.10 and 1.11) and even then we don’t know whether it will be as soon as 2.1 or as late as 2.8.

[dominik]

27 minutes ago, Alfred said:

This is true, but the main point is that if it’s only coming in version 2.x we’re still going to have to wait until after version 1.9 (and, for all we know, 1.10 and 1.11) and even then we don’t know whether it will be as soon as 2.1 or as late as 2.8.

Very true. Actually I personally don't expect this feature too soon. There are so many working alternatives that not much can be gained by implementing it into AD. Unless they come up with something unseen and spectacular... 🤩

d.

[jlarmstrongiv]

I went through this thread and the related closed ones to compile a list of alternatives:

• Inkscape
• DragPotrace mac
• Potrace cli
• imagetracerjs javascript
• Autotracer.org, web
• Rapid Resizer, web
• Vectorization.org, web
• Vectorizer free tier available, web
• Image Vectorizer $5, mac
• Super Vectorizer $40, mac
• Vector Magic $295, mac and windows

P.S.  Does not include iPhone or iPad workarounds.

P.P.S.  If you have a low-res image, try an AI image enlarger first and then image trace.