Original question
Is there any automated or semi-automated way of tracing outermost outline or whole path of letters in TikZ?
That I would be able (e.g. by using positioned nodes) to draw a letter using a letters, like shown below in my ascii-art (agreed, not really an art in this case):
aaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaa
aa aa
aa
aaaaaaaa aa
aaaaaaaaaaaa
aa aaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaa aa
Comment
Martin's note made me certain what I already suspected, that within PGF/TikZ I am unable to trace any glyph from any font. IOW getting outline of glyph in a format supported by TikZ is a separate issue, rather not TeX-related, but worth being mentioned here.
Preliminary
Obtaining glyph outline
Let me summarize already mentioned techniques toward getting it to TikZ:
- Inkscape + inkscape2tikz extension for exporting glyph to TikZ commands (provided by Azoun)
- FontForge for exporting to SVG (provided by Andrew)
Obtaining glyph "filling"
It's something I wasn't asking at all, but it's other interesting idea that was brought up in answers:
Revised question
Mentioned earlier tracing is now part of preliminary process, as glyph outline (which can be any other path, but I'll stick with this particular example) is assumed to be known, so question should be rephrased.
What are the techniques available in TikZ to outline (fill) glyph outline with text [like one letter]?
Support for diversification of outline/fill style depending on "density" and in-path "neighborhood" (e.g. style changing in case of serifs, bent parts, etc. would be a nice feature.
I'm mostly interested in TikZ, but if you want to share non-TikZ solutions, do it immediately!
Supplementary question
If you know or just came up with not described yet method of obtaining glyph outline (or "filling") and you think it's interesting or simply worth to be mentioned, tell us about it.
Afterword, i.e. paragraph about myself
Maybe I should add that I'm really new to PGF/TikZ. Even though I was using LaTeX for about ~8 years already (with various frequency, so I am far from being an expert), I never really get to TikZ. Back in the old days I did some work with PSTricks, but frankly speaking I forgot all of that since then. I saw TikZ examples a few years ago and was amazed how PGF/TikZ can provide nice abstractions for performing different drawing tasks. Lately I had to touch TikZ and meanwhile I started to think about using it in less common way, i.e. for creating some "artistic" drawings instead of plain diagrams, sketches and whatever it is used usually. PGF/TikZ manual is great, no question, but you must know what to look for and even if you know that, your wording maybe not exactly the same as used in the documentation, which makes finding sometimes hard (it's true especially for non-native English speaker, as in my case). You may say: just browse it! Sure, but ~700 pages is pretty much, so it's rather not something you will read and understand well even within month (correct me if I am wrong). Sorry for too long OT paragraph, but it should clear some things, because it's not like I am unwilling to look to manual myself, just sometimes it's far more productive to ask experts, because they have invaluable things that cannot be found in manual - experience and better intuition!








Your question has nothing to do with TikZthough, because after revising it (which I did ~1 hour before your comment) main part is clearly on topic and supplement part is well, just a supplement question that is not required to be answered. – przemoc Jun 25 '11 at 22:40?, but has some context within it is placed. Otherwise we would have just one not multi-line text input (like title) for each question. Somehow amazingly Jake and Andrew did not have any problems understanding it, so I think you're a bit picky here – przemoc Jun 26 '11 at 11:23convert+sedand Andrew for mentioningFontForge, but I'll never do such thing. Silly rigidness is the last thing that should be enforced in TeX.SE. – przemoc Jun 26 '11 at 15:12Support for diversification of outline/fill style depending on "density" and in-path "neighborhood" (e.g. style changing in case of serifs, bent parts, etc. as we're considering glyph outline as a basis) would be a nice feature.as it aims at unexpressed before desire to have some nice control of how outlining/filling is performed. It's not that I am strongly against creating new question. It's just that I feel I am somehow misunderstood here and would like to clear it, not just reverse the question. OTOH it is much better phrased now, maybe only IMO. – przemoc Jun 26 '11 at 18:36