ImagesMagUK_June_2021

started asking, ‘Do I really need to draw this again?’ Although tracing can be time- consuming, it is debatable whether modifying imported shapes from print art saves any time. While all digitising software suites can import vectors, art produced for print is not readily rendered as embroidery simply by assigning stitches to each element. Direct from vector: pros and cons Using imported print vector shapes does mean you won’t have to draw everything from scratch. Unfortunately, that may be the only argument for conversion, and there are solid reasons why those shapes may not best serve embroidery. Firstly, print designers aren’t thinking about the shapes embroidery requires; their vectors are layered to produce the proper look for print. Imagine that the border on the logo in a print file may be a larger filled shape behind the entire logo, not a defined ‘ribbon’ of colour above the background layer that translates simply to the column of satin stitches usually used to border a filled area. Techniques that work with the nature of thread and stitches won’t be represented: serifs on type won’t be split from a glyph’s stem, colours won’t be sequenced together in the object tree, nor will elements be efficiently connected. Most elements are flat, complex shapes, meaning digitisers will be forced to split print vector shapes to create proper embroidery objects. Secondly, push-and-pull distortion won’t be accounted for. Although you can compensate in digitising software, blanket pull compensation on both sides of an item may interfere with the shape or other elements in the design, depending on sequence and placement. The best embroidered designs have overlaps and compensation drawn into specific areas where shapes overlap or outlines land in order to keep them sized and registered correctly. Lastly, without extensive editing, digitisers can’t add depth to a piece or use more than one stitch type in a continuous area of colour. To create a ‘carved’ version of a silhouette, digitisers must draw the objects denoting shapes within the boundaries of the imported shape. ‘Converters’ find themselves tempted to use unidirectional fill for these single-object silhouettes, seeing as it requires no rework or drawing. Their designs suffer, becoming flat and often inefficient due to the excess The side-to-side inputs of this satin column create not only the outline shapes, but the initial perpendicular stitch angles needed to create a radially turning satin stitch, and leave the ends as open, flat lines to denote the first and final stitch angles Whether starting from vector or tracing raster art, it’s simple to split serifs and create attractive satin-stitch text styles. Direct conversion can’t create these shapes without splitting a larger shape or requiring a redraw Designs like this show the artistic failings of vector conversion: without redrawing, this sort of flawed, flat conversion, complete with missing elements and no pull compensation, can be the result. For those who redraw, it’s easier to split the design into discrete shapes, although it may take the temporary addition of guidelines using simple stitch tools KB TIPS & TECHNIQUES www.images-magazine.com 66 images JUNE 2021