Vector Art Optimization Challenge #1

Preamble
Howdy Folks! Welcome to the first in a series of vector art optimization challenges.These challenges are presented as bite-size exercises for community members to tackle. My hope is that we'll learn from each other in the process. All are encouraged to participate regardless of skill level.

Challenge Format
The format of this challenge is as follows:

A vector graphic is provided along with a value denoting the number points that make up the image. Your task, should you choose to accept it, is to optimize the graphic so as to reduce the number of points used (nodes and handles) while retaining image fidelity. You are free to use any techniques at your disposal but be aware of the following:

Guide lines

1. Submissions MUST be all-vector, no raster graphics should be used
2. Handle co-ordinates count as points
3. Nodes that make up clip paths and masks are counted as points
4. Gradient nodes also counted as points(each "stop" on the gradient path counts as a point)
5. ...we'll come up with more as we go along

And so without further ado....

CHALLENGE #1
Lets kick this off with an isometric tile, courtesy of Kenny.nl's open-source asset collection as seen below:



[Right-Click to save]

This image is comprised of 56 points. Can you do better?

Nice!

Filling up gaps from anti-aliasing is not a goal by the way?

Here goes my two cents:



35 nodes.

27 points.

Guide line append um - the nodes that make up clip paths and masks are also counted as points.

18 points.

Lazur URH wrote:

27 points.

Loaded the svg up in inkscape and found 63 points.

dimumurray wrote:Guide line append um - the nodes that make up clip paths and masks are also counted as points.

Hmm then recalculating...

or
should it be calculated with and without clippint paths?

Lazur URH wrote:

18 points.

Checked this one too (clip-path nodes counted) and got 45 nodes (not 18). Its an improvement though.

So with less clipping.

31 points.

Lazur URH wrote:So with less clipping.

31 points.

Tested and got 31 points. I'm impressed! I was hoping others would join in before making a submission of my own but I'll get started on mine and see how well I can do.

Thank's!

To be honest it isn't an exact match but "close enough"...

30 points.

29 points.

What about using clones?
Then it could all be reduced to 3 points only...

29 is my minimum, too. Time to check Lazur's solution

https://framadrive.org/index.php/s/JXiiq1NIZVWuo9P

Edit:
Shadow: 6
Grey area: 6
Bright grey: 6
Green: 5
Brown: 6

No clips, but a gradient.

Best I could do (so far) was 30 points:

- 6 nodes (hexagon) for clipping path
- 3 nodes (triangle) for grass/green area
- 3 nodes (triangle) for earth/brown area
- 6 nodes (2 separate triangles) for tinted overlays
- 6 nodes for beige/off-white border
- 6 nodes for dark gray tarmac

Hello
Without counting the nodes for the gradient (good idea Moini), I count 28 nodes in my proposal. I managed to use the central black shape and the beige shape as one putting the beige as stroke. With the nodes of the gradient, they will become 32.



I've also optimized the SVG, and erased some style code, so the size is around 1.1kb. The original has 1.6kb Too much fat kilobytes!

Nice idea with the stroke and the gradient!

With those I could reduce it to 17 points.

You people should add your names to the files you post !

16 points:

Revised the rules to take gradients into consideration.

dimumurray wrote:Revised the rules to take gradients into consideration.

Whaaat? nooo ... oh well 32 points then!... and what about cloning?

hulf2012 wrote:

dimumurray wrote:Revised the rules to take gradients into consideration.

Whaaat? nooo ... oh well 32 points then!... and what about cloning?

Forgot about that one. I guess to keep the playing field level, clones should be counted as duplicates of the original shape - so multiply the number of clones by the nodes in the template to get the count.

So many things to consider...I'll probably have to revise the rules several times to cover all contingencies. Still, its great seeing the different approaches and the trade-offs that arise with each one.

Oh...anyone with ideas for the next challenge?

But that's technically not a duplicant, only parent nodes/points are stored.
Would be better state as a rule not to use cloning at all, instead counting each clone's geometry a new one.