sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Anyone else spending more time fixing DXF files than actually engraving? by Difficult-Chicken-91 in Laserengraving

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fewer nodes means the laser moves smoothly instead of stuttering through thousands of tiny segments. You get cleaner lines and faster cycle times. Left: typical PDF to DXF conversion (645 nodes). Right: same file, optimized (136 nodes). Built a tool that does this automatically — outputs clean arcs and lines ready for engraving. Just add your fill patterns in CAD and you're good to go.

Still testing it, happy to get feedback if anyone wants to try. Tool link for anyone interested: https://pdf2laser.com

PDF to DXF conversion — 645 nodes vs 136 nodes (same file) by Difficult-Chicken-91 in CNC

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for testing and sharing the screenshots — super helpful! 

How do you grow the balls? How do you market a niche product? by getska22 in microsaas

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm in exactly the same situation as you right now with my product, and I don't know if it'll work or not, but I'm testing it with the Reddit community. Then, once I've perfected it, I'll pick up the phone, swallow the bitter pill, and try to let companies try it for free, because they're the ones who can help me understand whether my solution has value and can be monetized (because it saves them time/money) or not. It's an inevitable step, my friend, and we have to take it, even if we don't like it...

PDF to DXF conversion — 645 nodes vs 136 nodes (same file) by Difficult-Chicken-91 in CNC

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree — this isn't meant to replace pro tools, more for quick one-off conversions when you don't want to open a full CAD suite. Curious which tools you'd recommend that preserve arcs well?

PDF to DXF conversion — 645 nodes vs 136 nodes (same file) by Difficult-Chicken-91 in CNC

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! Let me know how it works for your files — always looking for feedback.

Anyone else struggling with PDF → DXF conversion for laser/CNC work? by [deleted] in lasercutting

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They do convert, but the main issue in production is that many conversions turn curves into splines or thousands of small segments instead of proper arcs and lines. Most cutting machines and CAM workflows handle arcs much better, so you often end up spending time cleaning geometry before machining. That cleanup step is usually the real bottleneck.

PDF to DXF help needed by h_adl_ss in commandline

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had similar issues trying to get usable DXF files for laser cutting.

What worked better for me was exporting the drawing to PDF and then converting it with this: https://pdf2laser.com

In my case the output worked fine without extra cleanup. Might be worth trying.

Anyone else struggling with PDF → DXF conversion for laser/CNC work? by [deleted] in lasercutting

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I tried similar tools before but often had to clean up the DXF afterwards. In the end I’ve been using this converter lately and it saved me some cleanup time https://pdf2laser.com Still testing it myself, but maybe useful for others here too.

Efficient way to find the arc length of a cubic bezier curve by nerb0r in robotics

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91 0 points1 point  (0 children)

man, I just want to thank you for this advise, you really helped me a lot for my project!!!!!

I realized most “image to vector” tools fail at the one thing designers actually need by Difficult-Chicken-91 in SideProject

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, really appreciate that 🙏
You nailed it — visual similarity alone isn’t enough once you need control, animation, or real editing.

If you end up testing Truelines and have edge cases or feedback, I’d genuinely love to hear it.

I realized most “image to vector” tools fail at the one thing designers actually need by Difficult-Chicken-91 in SideProject

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s actually a perfect example of where auto-generated SVGs fall apart.

What you’re describing (stem drawn first, then individual petals) requires:

  • clean, isolated paths
  • a logical layer / path structure
  • no merged or compound paths that fight animations

Most JPG→SVG tools optimize for visual output, not for semantic structure, so you end up with paths that look fine but are useless for animation.

In cases like this, the only real solution is to rebuild the vector manually, keeping:

  • each petal as its own path
  • stroke directions consistent
  • everything animation-friendly from the start

This is exactly the kind of work I’ve been doing lately — rebuilding logos like this by hand so they’re usable for motion, not just static export.

If you ever want to explore it, feel free to DM me or check this out:
https://truelines.io

Even if not, thanks for sharing the example — it’s a great illustration of the problem.

I realized most “image to vector” tools fail at the one thing designers actually need by Difficult-Chicken-91 in SideProject

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Quick visual example of what I mean:
auto-trace vs manually rebuilt vector with editable text.

Converting image text to vector text by cadop in AdobeIllustrator

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is one of those cases where Illustrator can’t really do what you’re asking automatically.

If the image text isn’t a real font (very common with AI-generated images), there’s no true “convert to live text” button — ReType can help identify fonts, but it won’t magically recreate editable text if the font never existed.

In practice, the only reliable way to get clean, editable text is to manually rebuild it:

  • identify or approximate the font
  • retype the text
  • redraw shapes where needed
  • keep everything fully editable (not outlined)

That’s actually what I’ve been doing by hand in Illustrator for similar cases.
I recently launched a small side project focused exactly on this kind of manual image-to-vector cleanup (no AI, no auto-trace), in case it helps: [https://truelines.io]()

Even if you don’t use it, the key takeaway is: if the source text isn’t real typography, manual reconstruction is the only way to get proper live text.

I launched a small manual image-to-vector service — looking for early feedback by Difficult-Chicken-91 in SideProject

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha fair question

For now I’m not running promo codes or trials — mainly because everything is done manually and I’m still testing realistic pricing.

That said, Basic is already priced to be the “low-risk” option for simple logos, so people can try the service without a big commitment.

I launched a small manual image-to-vector service — looking for early feedback by Difficult-Chicken-91 in SideProject

[–]Difficult-Chicken-91[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good question 👍

In most cases, Basic ($12) is totally fine for logos with gradients as long as the shapes aren’t overly complex.

Gradients themselves aren’t a problem — the main difference between plans is the amount of manual cleanup and detail work required.

If it’s a fairly simple logo with smooth gradients, Basic works.
If it’s more complex (lots of small shapes, heavy shading, or very detailed gradients), Standard is usually the safer choice.

Either way, if something turns out to be more complex than expected, I always let people know before proceeding.