My first thought is to reduce your "Threshold" settings. In CS 3 you have it at 128 but in CS6 you have 198. This might be forcing the trace to catch too much detail and thereby tracing all the pixels from the image.
You should also try reducing the Paths and Corners settings a bit see if that helps
And maybe you should try the Create "strokes" option too. I can't help much as I don't have a copy of CS 6 yet but those are my best guesses
Give it a try and good luck
A couple possibilities....
1) What orginal are you using? How does it differ from the jpgs posted here (since I used the jpgs above as originals)?
2) Perhaps trashing Illustrator prefernces and trying again might help.
Well, I think I figured it out... The originals I have always used are the native Photoshop .eps files created by our artists. When I converted the files to .jpg and tried it, the results were exactly like the ones you got. So, not sure why CS6 doesn't like .eps files for Image Trace, but now I know...
Thanks so much for all of your help! Although it's an extra step to convert everything to .jpg, it's better than having to use two versions of Illustrator to get my work done!
I've never understood why some people use Photoshop EPS files. It made sense in 1988, but it hasn't for over a decade.
Glad you got it sorted!
I am having a similar problem. Part of what I do uses Photoshop at a 1x1 pixel level. I also need to drop this in to Illustrator, Live Trace it, and then add various colors to it. Any thoughts on how I can acheive that level of corners?
SHow us some examples.
You just have to play with the settings. They are different and don't behave like the ones in Live Trace did, but with some fiddling, it's possible to get results that are close to what we had before. I was able to get this result using your top image:
These are the settings I used:
See if these settings give you the results you are looking for.
Image trace is not particularly well at tracing black and white (1 bit) images. It' s way better with anti-aliased grayscale images.
Yes, the setting name is a user preference. This is exactly what happened to me in terms of my results not matching what the other people were getting (see all original posts). The issue for me turned out to be file type. I got the results shown above by using the downloaded .png image of your file from this site. Is the image you are placing in Illustrator a .png or a .jpg? If you are using a .psd file, that may be the reason. Otherwise, I have no idea.
I am perflexed. I have tried jpg, png, bmp (typically used for very specific reasons) and nothing.
Thank you for trying.
Sorry I'm not more help. That is the extent of my knowledge. But I would be curious if you get the same results by downloading your own image from the post and using that with the settings I tried.
AIMSEdu, Interestingly enough when I downloaded the file from this post; 1. It was much larger than the original 2. The Image Trace worked PERFECTLY!!!
Now, how I replicate that same scenario 20 times a day will be interesting
Thanks again for your help!!!
I was very dissapointed to find out that CS6 is much inferior to CS5 or earlier versions when tracing black and white line drawings or comic art. By the way many users are of the same opinion. Here is a review of CS6 vs CS5 tracing results:
And here is my own experience. Whatever settings I try in CS6 the result is just terrible. This one is the best I could get. Details are lost. Lines are very thick.
In comparison, here is how wonderfully the same work is done by CS5, not to mention that I didn't even have to tackle with any settings at all. Just clicked the button Live Trace and got saticfactory results with the default preset.
These are original unreduced files:
P.S. It is sometimes possible to get good results in CS6, if you take the big drawing apart into small separate drawings. However it means a lot of additional work: tens of extra hours in a year in fact. Which, of coarse, undoubtfully means that CS6 is a step backwards if compared with CS5.
Besides some big complex drawings with many details can not be devided into a smaller ones. And if you don't have an earlier version of the program, in this case there is no way to get a quality trace at all!
This example, provided by unimpersonated, illustrates the deficiencies of CS6's tracing functionality perfectly.
I compared the results between CS6 and CS5 using the original raster jpg posted above. It's night and day. Right out of the box with default settings, CS5 made an incredibly accurate representation. The same results were impossible to acheive with CS6 no matter how much tweaking was involved. Even cutting the original .jpg into smaller segments could not approach the accuracy attained in CS5.
I have to agree, this appears to be quite a step backwards for the tracing function in AI.
Just wanted to add my complete agreement. I have been tracing black and white images since the times of Adobe Streamline and with CS6 there are possibly the worst ever results.
Please Adobe please, take notice and do something about it. CS5 was excellent at it - just put that bit of code back.
We all seem to be having very similar issues. From this post I have disocvered that if the image that you are choosing to trace is saved as a PNG (larger than normal), PLACED into Illustrator CS6, then traced using CS6, the outcome is much better.
I am only speaking of Black & White traces. I have not tried this in color. It hasn't been a concern of mine yet.
I am in TOTAL & COMPLETE agreement with MaxCalo!!!
I downloaded and tried Illustrator CC (the newest version). Unfortunately Adobe ignored the problem. Illustrator CC still has the same deficiencies as CS6 in tracing black&white line art. Even CorelDraw does the job much better. However the best tracing software so far is Illustrator SC5. So I'll stay with CS5, hoping that the problem will be solved in future.
How can I get a perfect tracing?
When you do it manually.
But why didn't you buy the vector version of the image? Looks like there should be one.
I can't even FIND where to do the manual settings for the live trace. I have been pulling my hair out with this!
I think I found it... it's just weird. CS 6. It isn't as friendly as the older ones.
Sent from my LG Mobile
I think that I found it. I'm using CS6 and it isn't as friendly as the older versions were.
Sent from my LG Mobile
Thank god somebody else has this problem. I had CS3 on my last computer, now that computer is dead and I got CS6 through school. Everything that I do depends on live tracing and I just can not...get the same results....
The way i used to live trace in CS3 was by using a photograph (.jpg) and live tracing it grayscale ...in about 20 layers
When I do the same in CS6 I just get horrible layer division and the image is very bulky.
Is there a solution this problem?
Ive been using my friends CS3 for awhile when I get the chance but now her computer is broken.
Is there eve a way to get your hands on CS3 anymore? Ive tried to trace things manually in CS6, the only way I get close to detailed results is if i trace the image in like 180 layers.. and even then the quality is not at nice.
Please let me know.
Does anyone at Adobe take note of these user experiences? This thread goes back to August 2012 and the underlying issue has emphatically still not been addressed.
I recently subscribed to Creative Cloud services, which involved a leap from Illustrator CS3 to the latest version. Along with many others, I am heavily dependent on the Live Trace feature, for converting black and white bitmap line illustrations, and its current iteration, Image Trace, produces very significantly inferior results. I have been obliged to regularly revert to Illustrator CS3, which still runs – after a fashion – under the Mac El Capitan OS, solely for its Live Trace facility.
Is there any way Live Trace could be reinstated in the next Illustrator upgrade? It seems to be widely agreed that Image Trace has been a step backwards in terms of performance. Failing that, how about a standalone app based on the original Streamline, which did the job of bitmap-to-vector conversion as efficiently and accurately as any subsequent iteration.
I would love to see this problem sorted out.
Just a me too post really but I've been a fan of livetrace for my lineart since CS3 and I'm running a whole other Mac just to be able to continue to use it's live trace facility!!
CHOICE has been lost in the new Image Trace offered by CC and this needs to be resolved. I know what I'm doing here re: resolution, settings, etc and all comparisons fail to achieve the same elegant and precise results offered by CS3.
1 person found this helpful
I've just upgraded to CC from CS3 and am regretting it.
I trace my line art and got great results in the earlier version but now after hours of playing I still can't get anything that comes close. The new trace is clunky and inaccurate with loads of artefacts and cropping.
I screen print and registration is key, the new CC version even offsets the trace which makes it useless to me... WHY?
I'm now on the lookout for a specialised tool for turning line art into vector art like CS3 used to.
Can we have an answer please Adobe?
Can we have an answer please Adobe?
This is a user forum. The people here are 95% users answering questions of other users.
In case you want to try and improve your results please post examples. In case your want to post a feature request or bug, please do that here:
If you have a problem with Adobe software, you're not going to head over to Feature Requests, you're going to come here.
If Adobe aren't monitoring these Forums and making notes with enough regularity to pick up the most common gripes then that is a serious issue. One that does not reflect well on Adobe.
We should continue to vent here, where at least our fellow professionals will empathise.
It's great that the community is so mutually supportive but, let's face it, Adobe have a habit of overlooking long-standing bugs.
We struggle with these multiple issues everyday, for years.
So, like a big company that makes you wait for half an hour in a call queue before you get to speak to a human- Adobe guarantees an annoyed attitude from it's customers right from the start.
Adobe take note, your customers are paying you to find and deal with the bugs.
They're assistance may be appreciated, but it should not to be expected.
I may add another drop to the feature request ocean, if I can find time later.
Or I may just come back here and vent, either way, Adobe should be listening- HERE.
Wow! Never had a post rejected by moderators before!
Especially odd when it contained no swearing, was factually accurate and responded directly a previous comment in the thread.
I guess Adobe do listen here, and respond very quickly- in some circumstances.
Now I'm off to keep up on that thread on pesky drag handles (that started back in 2013).
Best of luck jkraft
btw: I just discovered Astute Graphics plugins, they seem to resolve a lot of our issues and enhance Illustrator in many excellent ways, though they ain't cheap!
1 person found this helpful
Yeah, I've been using Illustrator since 1995, to convert my finely-drawn line art to vectors.
But CS6 won't do it, and Adobe has made it clear enough that it doesn't care.
Fortunately, ADC has come out with a new version of Canvas for Mac, Canvas Draw, which has a great auto trace tool that works like Adobe's used to.
Thanks for the heads-up on this development – very interesting. I'll check out Canvas Draw. I'm extremely worried that with some future Mac OS update, I'll lose the facility to run Illustrator CS3, which I still have to on a regular basis purely for the Live Trace feature.
I'm still convinced there would be an enthusiastic market for a standalone bitmap-to-vector auto-trace app similar to the old Streamline, if only there was a developer out there inclined to produce one!
Most annoying of all to me is that Adobe won't let me run CS2 now that I have CS6, so I can't use the Adobe Illustrator autotrace tool that I paid for years ago.
Anyone know a work-around?