-
I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...
Logo Reproduction
- Thread starter Morph1
- Start date
Johnny Best
Active Member
I am not a Corel user but thanks for sharing, nice work on redrawing.
Morph1
Print all
Hey thanks !, I was just flying through it and I could've done some things differently , I also noticed I missed the tool bar
- my bad, it was kind of done in a hurry as the sign will be installed this Saturday...I always wanted to video record my process but never had the chance to do that , I am hoping to do more of that kind of stuff , especially to show clients how much work it does take to actually reproduce a logo , most of people outside the sign industry think we just sit on our rear ends click a couple of times and it all magically happens on it's own lol
From now on each time I have to reproduce anything new for any clients , if they ask why it costs so much I will simply link them up with this video and say this is why lol
if anyone new to corel draw had any questions as how I did certain things at specific time in the video just fire away and I will do my best to explain...
I am hoping to do more of those in the near future.
Cheers !
The Vector Doctor
Chief Bezier Manipulator
Yes... why do you draw all of the curved lines as straight segments and then go in and change to curves afterwards? It is easier in Corel to do it this way? When I trace curves in Illustrator I just draw the lines as curves as I am tracing. No need to go back in and change them. I am not criticizing you as I have seen others do it this way in Coreldraw
bob
It's better to have two hands than one glove.
No one no how uses quick trace. At least anyone who wants to be taken seriously. You no doubt are patting yourself on the back but before you break your arm doing so you might want to cognizant of a couple of facts. First the thing you called a 'logo' is utterly indeterminate as to exactly what it was when it started out life. Second, and ergo, any decent smooth trace is inarguably as good as any other.
Corel has a reasonably protean trace facility but 'fast trace' isn't a part of it. You have to use the actual trace tool and, often, diddle the various parameters. Unless your dealing with a Rorschach test image it will usually produce a trace that would be every bit as accurate as the product of all of the nonsense you went through. Remember the actual image is indeterminate so a good trace is the equal of what you did. Both you and Corel are guessing at what is an edge and where, exactly, is that edge. And it's a damn sight faster.
You might have a go at Corel X8. It can do a decent job even on the aforementioned Rorschach test image.
Corel has a reasonably protean trace facility but 'fast trace' isn't a part of it. You have to use the actual trace tool and, often, diddle the various parameters. Unless your dealing with a Rorschach test image it will usually produce a trace that would be every bit as accurate as the product of all of the nonsense you went through. Remember the actual image is indeterminate so a good trace is the equal of what you did. Both you and Corel are guessing at what is an edge and where, exactly, is that edge. And it's a damn sight faster.
You might have a go at Corel X8. It can do a decent job even on the aforementioned Rorschach test image.
C
ColoPrinthead
Guest
Jesus, Bob, you're on a frickin' roll lately.
Morph1
Print all
Hi , great point, to answer your question , it is faster and it gives me more control to smooth the curves individually, this is the process I adopted long time ago and I stick to my guns, I do work in illustrator as well on occasion , but anything like this logo redraw I can do much faster in corel than illustrator, not saying illustrator is a bad vector application , it's just my own preference.
Morph1
Print all
Bob, any trace tool perhaps will do good for a billboard print viewable from 40 ft up, what I did is a router path , print and contour cut , it is an interior sign and it will be wall mounted at eye level, any imperfections would be visible...
another thing is to auto trace you need a good file to start with , the file I worked from looked like it was hand drawn while traveling on a train in the middle of the night lol,
Quality path , vector artwork has to be produced as quality vector graphic and that process does not allow for shortcuts, unless like I mentioned earlier when you produce a 40 ft billboard or a large trailer wrap.
Regarding corel X8 or X7 it will not help your work quality, I would obtain a better quality result working in early corel 3 than trying to autotrace in X8.
50 minute time is not that bad after all , now I have a crisp logo I can use for any future application.
take care !
bob
It's better to have two hands than one glove.
Perhaps your reading for comprehension skills are not as developed as they might be. What part of 'indeterminate' do you not understand?
One more time, I'll type slowly try to follow along. Since the original image is indeterminate any vector interpretation of that image is merely someone's guess as to just where any original component vector might have been. That guess could be made via a decent algorithm or via your excruciatingly painful process and no case could be made for one versus the other.
Just so you know, I've been doing this sort of thing since your parents were making in their pants, don't attempt to school me on the nature of images and the specifications for their various and sundry uses. Moreover I've been dealing with Corel since it was first released, probably back before you were born, and am reasonably familiar with it in most all it's myriad of versions.
C
ColoPrinthead
Guest
:ROFLMAO:
Morph1
Print all
I admire your time spent with the software and your passion for design, you give me the phone number of the retirement home your at and I will call you and we can converse farther, perhaps I can explain you in detail why I had to draw that logo from scratch... , have a great weekend Bob, take care of that diaper, you don't want it to get too full
OldPaint
New Member
bob is 100% right on here. i too have been a corel user since version 3.0, on a 386 DX40, high powered computer of the day)))))))))))))) 3 had a trace, 4 didnt, 5 & 6 were garbage, 7.0 was the only true corel. it had a trace, not so good. version 8.0 corel took a program named XARA and incorporated a bunch of it it into corel 8.0 and above. as for the trace it is good from then on. like anything else...........it takes time to learn to make function well.
i had a hand scanner on the old 386DX, would do a 4" wide scan)))))wasnt till 7 was i able to afford a flatbed scanner. $300 wasa great deal and SCUSSI. the pre-input to USB....
one of the best trace was a program called STREAMLINE 4.0 it can still be d/l for free. i like it for its ability to clean up before trace...
INKSCAPE has pretty decent trace......
i had a hand scanner on the old 386DX, would do a 4" wide scan)))))wasnt till 7 was i able to afford a flatbed scanner. $300 wasa great deal and SCUSSI. the pre-input to USB....
one of the best trace was a program called STREAMLINE 4.0 it can still be d/l for free. i like it for its ability to clean up before trace...
INKSCAPE has pretty decent trace......
Johnny Best
Active Member
Hard at work with the TV monitor and working on coreldrawATTACH=CONFIG]118321[/ATTACH]
Attachments
Morph1
Print all
Sorry friend but I can assure you that you can not produce a precise symmetrical auto trace vector path from an insufficient image, does not matter what computer or trace tool you are using..
It just isn't happening, been there done that many times..., we usually redraw poor quality logos produced by sloppy designers or amateurs, I see it every day, I spent fair amount of time using vector software, see you are talking 386 DX 40 lol ok , well try commodore 64 and art studio, if you wanna go that far back...
As I replied to Bob, auto trace would work for just a large format digital print viewable from a distance not from a hand reach, it's an interior sign that calls for precision and esthetics, I can't supply my client with garbage contour it would be visible as black on white. Regardless ,
I enjoyed redrawing this logo as I will use it for future projects and I will feel confident that my client will be 100% satisfied, if you think this process is painful, do not draw anything just use clip art.
bob
It's better to have two hands than one glove.
Are you always this silly or do you have to work at it?
That butt ugly logo you were try to show off has two distinct parts. As I said the entire logo in this image is indeterminate. Since you seem to either be deliberately obtuse or ignorant, indeterminate means that no one now how actually knows what it looks like. Including you. You assume that parts of it might be symmetrical. I'd probably assume the same but regardless of how many people make that assumption it remains an assumption.
The interesting part is the bottom with the standard UNICEF or whatever globe. Here damn near everyone on the planet knows what that looks like or think they know what it should look like. That being the case, tracing this part either by your asinine method or tracing algorithm most likely won't produce a usable image. It would be far better recreating it from geometric objects or simply finding that image somewhere. They're all over, take a step and you'll trip over one
Not so the top portion. Since probably only a handful of people know what it's supposed actually to look like, any decent tracing algorithm should produce a usable image. No need to be overly anal and loose any sleep over a trivial lack of symmetry. Make the bottom right and no one will pay a whole hell of a lot of attention to the top part, hideous thing that it is. Or perhaps that hideousness will cause peope to stare at it in morbid fascination. Who knows.
Thus endeth the lesson. Pay it no heed and run off and work a lot harder than you have to.
Johnny Best
Active Member
bob, why do you get this Sheldonesque attitude towards obtuse and silly people. Are you trying to make us feel inferior, because you are doing a good job of it. Your use of words and your writings are beyond reproach and I have always enjoyed reading them.
But, Morph1 is proud of his work ethics and made a video to show his skills in CorelDraw, and there are hundreds of these on Youtube for people to learn from. So I applaud his sharing of his skills and it gives us a little insight to his art talents. I am a Mac user and Illustrator guy but I watched the video, but hey, I watch Josh Randall every day that has about the same redundancy.
But, Morph1 is proud of his work ethics and made a video to show his skills in CorelDraw, and there are hundreds of these on Youtube for people to learn from. So I applaud his sharing of his skills and it gives us a little insight to his art talents. I am a Mac user and Illustrator guy but I watched the video, but hey, I watch Josh Randall every day that has about the same redundancy.
bob
It's better to have two hands than one glove.
Because I want to and I can. The only reasons to do anything. All else is rationalization.
This morph1 specimen puts me in mind of the sort that, if you told it that elephant tusks and piano keys were both ivory it would just naturally assume that elephant tusks were made from piano keys. Moreover being prolific and being any good at something are two very different and totally unrelated things.
CanuckSigns
Active Member
Thanks for the video, it was very educational as a Corel user!
Ignore Bob, he gets his kicks by using a thesaurus to feel superior to others, however in 7 years on this forum, I've never seen him post a single example of his own work.
Ignore Bob, he gets his kicks by using a thesaurus to feel superior to others, however in 7 years on this forum, I've never seen him post a single example of his own work.