I don't think the EPS file I just made is Vector

[gohan2091]

Hi, I am experienced in Photoshop but not very experienced in vector images. I use Photoshop CS4 and trying to learn logo design. Below is a PSD file of a shape I made using the pen tool (file is virus free)

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/stephanie.mirza/Letter A.zip

It's suppose to ressemble the letter A but I am having problems. When I save the file as an EPS and open the EPS in Photoshop, I don't see a rasterise settings box pop up like I assume all EPS vector files would have. You know what I mean? the box where you can set the resolution so the vector is as large as you desire? Here is a screenshot:

Even though I clearly see the path of the shape I made in the path tab of my PSD file, when I save as EPS and open the EPS file up, it acts like it's already a rasterised image. Please try and duplicate my problem by downloading my PSD file, opening it in Photoshop and saving it as an EPS file. Now open that EPS file and see if that rasterise settings box come up.

 

[iDad]

it is rasterized , but it you create a smart object you should be all set

 

[2pixels]

Photoshop is a not a true vector application, stick to Illustrator for this kind of work, you'll thank me in the long run.

 

[gohan2091]

it is rasterized , but it you create a smart object you should be all set

How is it rasterised then? What did I do that was wrong? Here is what I did:

1. Create the object with the pen tool

2. Ctrl click the path to make a selection, then painted in the different areas with a paint brush

3. Save file as EPS

Saving as a smart object would allow me to shrink the image, then restore it up to 100% without losing quality, however, what if I wanted the image 200% the original size? A smart object would not help here and quality will start to be reduced right?

Photoshop is a not a true vector application, stick to Illustrator for this kind of work, you'll thank me in the long run.

I've never used Illustrator, and don't actually have that application. All I want to do is make basic vector logos, so wouldn't Photoshop be enough for that?

 

[2pixels]

2. Ctrl click the path to make a selection, then painted in the different areas with a paint brush

Why would you do that? By doing that you're throwing away the benefits of a path.
Instead you should have clicked on the "Create a new fill or adj. layer" at the bottom of the layers palette and have used the path as a vector path for each part.
I'll post a screenshot for ya, hold on...

 

[2pixels]

This what I mean:



Btw, you can still transform the logo by selecting both layers first.

 

[iDad]

As a smart object it should be fine I just did it

 

[gohan2091]

Why would you do that? By doing that you're throwing away the benefits of a path.
Instead you should have clicked on the "Create a new fill or adj. layer" at the bottom of the layers palette and have used the path as a vector path for each part.
I'll post a screenshot for ya, hold on...

I don't understand how you create a new fill or adj layer. Also, in your screenshot, you seem to have my shape split into two separate layers. One layer has the blue part, the other the grey part. When I open my file up, I only have one layer and one path:

As a smart object it should be fine I just did it

Making the shape a smart layer and then increasing it's size to say 1000% causes the quality to reduce. Here is the shape increased by 1000%:

NOTE: Image above zoomed in to 100% original size.

 

[iDad]

you use CS4 right? Just refine the edge?As 2 p said, illustrator is best, for that increase without extra work

 

[gohan2091]

you use CS4 right? Just refine the edge?As 2 p said, illustrator is best, for that increase without extra work

Using refine edge is a very novice way of doing it but I just tried it, and the lines aren't as crisp and sharp as I would like. For such a simple object, I want this to be true vector, within Photoshop. I don't want to mess around with refine edge everything I want to use the image.

 

[gohan2091]

Not when you use my method.

I don't understand your method and how you separated my image into 2 different sections is beyond me.

 

[2pixels]

Making the shape a smart layer and then increasing it's size to say 1000% causes the quality to reduce.

Not when you use my method.

I don't understand how you create a new fill or adj layer. Also, in your screenshot, you seem to have my shape split into two separate layers. One layer has the blue part, the other the grey part.

You're asking too much if I also need to explain to you the use of basic Photoshop tools (costs way too much time), I'm only here to help with issues that go beyond that.

 

[2pixels]

Now you're trying to build a house without knowing how to use a hammer and nails.

 

[gohan2091]

Not when you use my method.

You're asking too much if I also need to explain to you the use of basic Photoshop tools (costs way too much time), I'm only here to help with issues that go beyond that.

I don't understand why you spend your time helping me then quit at the end, what is the use of that? I've been using Photoshop for over half a decade but vector shapes are new to me. I know how to split a shape into separate layers but what I fear is losing that vector ability... the ability to enlarge a shape beyond it's original 100% size, yet keep the quality is the same.

I know how to apply a fill layer to the entire shape, but what I don't know is how to select just the grey area and have that area use it's own fill layer.

 

[2pixels]

It's funny how you blame me for your lazyiness to learn the basic tools.

So your pal who is helping you to build that house and who does know the basics, has to teach you first how to use that hammer and nail? Like I said... you're funny hehe

 

[gohan2091]

It's funny how you blame me for your lazyiness to learn the basic tools.

So your pal who is helping you to build that house and who does know the basics, has to teach you first how to use that hammer and nail? Like I said... you're funny hehe

I'm sorry you feel that way about me, but I am no noob and came here for help, not to be insulted. I know how to create a new fill layer for the two separate parts by remaking the whole image which I have now just done, what I don't know is how you did this with my existing image which already had both parts in one whole path (not two separate ones)

As I said, I have now redrawn the shape, but for the middle section (grey), I made that part on an entirely new path. Because of this, I have now successfully achieved what I wanted. I think what I did wrong was to fill the area with the paint brush, rather than your method which is a fill layer. When I save the image now as an EPS, I get the rasterised box come up so all is good.

Thanks for your help, even if I had to figure out what you meant.

 

[2pixels]

I'm sorry you feel that way about me, but I am no noob and came here for help, not to be insulted.

I never insulted you, all I said was that you were lazy and I still stand 100% behind that comment. If you don't know how to work with paths, then you simply refused to put any serious effort into it, in other words: "laziness". For you then to come here to DEMAND that I explain to you how to use the basics, when I already took my time to write two posts and prepare a screenshot for you is too foolish for words.

Your problem is that you refuse to accept the fact that I don't want to explain basics. What kind of obligation do I have towards you? Do you pay me for the time I use to help you? Maybe if you would have posted tens of thousands of times on forums like these over the last 10 years like have, you would understand that I'm getting tired of explaining basic things like paths and mask over and over again....sigh (and I’m not the only one in the similar situation who thinks like this.)

Btw, the refusal to spoon-feed you encouraged you to actually find the solution on your own, which you did and that's the second reason why I avoid answering basic questions.

After all these years with Photoshop I've learn done thing; you enter the stage of "expertice" once you stop asking to be spoon-fed, because it encourages you to study, experiment, think and use your imagination, you’ll thank me in the long run.

Anyway, that's all I had to add.

 

[gohan2091]

I never insulted you, all I said was that you were lazy and I still stand 100% behind that comment. If you don't know how to work with paths, then you simply refused to put any serious effort into it, in other words: "laziness". For you then to come here to DEMAND that I explain to you how to use the basics, when I already took my time to write two posts and prepare a screenshot for you is too foolish for words.

Your problem is that you refuse to accept the fact that I don't want to explain basics. What kind of obligation do I have towards you? Do you pay me for the time I use to help you? Maybe if you would have posted tens of thousands of times on forums like these over the last 10 years like have, you would understand that I'm getting tired of explaining basic things like paths and mask over and over again....sigh (and I’m not the only one in the similar situation who thinks like this.)

Btw, the refusal to spoon-feed you encouraged you to actually find the solution on your own, which you did and that's the second reason why I avoid answering basic questions.

After all these years with Photoshop I've learn done thing; you enter the stage of "expertice" once you stop asking to be spoon-fed, because it encourages you to study, experiment, think and use your imagination, you’ll thank me in the long run.

Anyway, that's all I had to add.

I understand what you are saying but my solution was to scrap what I already made and start over. Is this the sort of action that you would support? I could not understand how I would separate my path into two separate paths without remaking the whole thing. It's a good job my design wasn't a complex one, as I would have not been prepared to recreate it all and would still be here asking how you did it. So how exactly did you do it? How did you turn my single path into two separate paths? Did you not use my path and created your own using the pen tool? If you did not do this, then I have not learnt how to do that yet.

I understand the feeling of explaining time after time basic things to newcomers, but I am not a newbie. I was able to explain Photoshop in good detail, I knew all the correct terms and I used the pen tool which is something most newbies would not dare touch. Anyway, job done now but I have question to do with the pen tool which I will post in the next 5 minutes. Feel free to help me there if you feel like it. Thanks for your time and efforts, honestly... I really appreciate it.

 

[KRF]

It's funny how you blame me for your lazyiness to learn the basic tools.

So your pal who is helping you to build that house and who does know the basics, has to teach you first how to use that hammer and nail? Like I said... you're funny hehe

I really think you need to take a step back, how did you learn to use Photoshop, BY ASKING, so please stop saying that your only here to help past the basics, if that's all your here for then why comment on any of the threads you have done, and why not wait until something past the basics pop's up, then comment all you want to.

As this is something that you want to do if you feel helping people out with the basics is to time consuming for you then it's best not to.

On the other hand, you could do somthing like this:

Hi I have just looked on youtube and found this video showing you how to use paths, I hope this help's if not try looking through the rest to get a better understanding or how to use them.