Need to convert to vector format.

Question

I have a document with pictures.  I need to convert it to vector format before sending to printer.  Not sure how to do it.  Using CS5.  Is converting to outlines the same? 

Answer 1

It must be difficult to convert from illustrator into a vector format since no one has a specific answer.
Soshagayle7,
There is no automagic "conversion" from a raster image to a vector graphic. The artwork represented by a raster image can be redrawn as vector artwork.
You can re-draw the artwork using the vector drawing tools in Illustrator or any similar program. You can even import the raster image and use it as a guide while "tracing" it with vector paths.
Or (and this is where the all-too-common misconception about "conversion" comes in)...
You can use the autotrace feature which exists in Illustrator or any similar program to try to automate the process of "tracing" the raster image with vector paths.
Either way, you end up with what would more accurately be called a "reinterpretation" of the subject, not a "conversion" of the raster image in the sense of "converting" one file format to another.
And that's the key. All that most current autotrace features (including the one in Illustrator) do is detect color differences between pixels of a raster image based upon a user-specified sensitivity setting, and then try to draw vector paths which follow along those detected differences. It's very much a garbage-in-garbage-out process.
And even when the "in" is not garbage, there is no real intelligence involved. The kind of autotrace algorithms in Illustrator and programs like it have no shape-recognition intelligence. For example, in the case of a human face, the autotrace feature doesn't know that the eyes' pupils are round; it just detects a region of similarly-colored pixels and tries to draw a path around them. Similarly, in the case of a geometric logo that obvously (to a human) is supposed to contain a perfect circle, the autotrace feature doesn't "see a circle"; it doesn't go and get the Ellipse tool and draw a circle that fits, as any human would do. Again, it just tries to follow around the regions of similarly-colored pixels.
But that sounds okay, right? Well think about it. Imagine turning the sensitivity of such an algorithm way up to the max. What's going to be the most accurate autotracing of a raster image? The mathematically "most accurate" result would be a perfect vector square for each and every pixel in the image. And the "vector advantage" of that would be absolutely nill. The resolution-independence reason for preferring vector paths would be rendered moot. Such a graphic would be entirely vector, but to absolutely no advantage regarding scaleability. (Thus my comment about the line drawn with a 1-pixel raster image.)
So the reason you haven't received an answer to the "how do I convert" question is because the same thing has been explained in this forum countless times, and to answer it correctly really requires a lengthy explanation (like this one) that tries to clear up the too-common misconception that autotracing is some kind of magic bullet for "converting" a raster image into a vector graphic in some kind of mathematically accurate way that then yields all the advantages of properly drawn vector graphics.
Autotracing is useful to those who understand when it's appropriate and why. But without seeing or at least knowing more about the actual raster image you are dealing with, advising whether it's appropriate in your case is nothing but a guess. Generally speaking, if the image in question is not already of high enough resolution at the size at which it will be printed, then it's probably also not of high enough resolution for good auto-tracing results. And if it is of sufficient resolution for the size at which it will be printed, then there's probably no reason it needs to be vector.
Bottom line: There's a good reason why vector graphics are preferred. But that means properly-drawn vector graphics. The best way to "convert" your raster image to a vector graphic is to re-draw it using the vector tools. The sometimes-acceptable but often sub-standard "cheat" for doing it is to import the graphic and apply the autotrace feature (called LiveTrace in Illustrator). It's use is explained in the online help.
Autotracing--the "conversoin" that such questions are almost always talking about--is not a lossless translation, like converting quarts to gallons or binary to hexidecimal. Entropy always rules. Anytime something is automatically "reprocessed" something is lost, not gained. You see that in everything from repainting a room over and over without removing the old paint, to taking photographs of photographs of photographs. Degradation occurs. You swap one kind of ugliness for another. That's autotracing when used inappropriately.
The drawing tools exist for a reason. If you really need vector paths, you should probably draw them.
JET