Vector VS Rastor > For Dummies

I have been trying to explain the difference between Vector (line art) and Raster (bitmap) images to clients and others for years. The problem is this. Although the explanation is not overly complicated, people tend to go "glassy eyed" when I start rambling about pixels, file formats, continuous tone, etc. Whenever I try to find a "simple" explanation on the NET it is way to complicated for the average person (a.k.a. anyone who isn't a Graphic Designer or  working in a related discipline.)

Let's try to simplify this down to bare bones.

Vector Artwork (file formats include; .eps, .ai, .cdr, .swf, .cgm, .svg)

Let's pretend your vector artwork is a lasso (rope). You can make the loop very small... or you can make it very large... but at any size it maintains it's integrity and looks exactly the same.

Vector artwork is infinitely "scalable". Vector artwork is built on geometry.

Raster Artwork (file formats include; .psd, .jpeg, .gif, .tiff, .raw, .png, bmp, etc.)

This is a very dated example, but bear with me. Let's pretend your raster artwork is a wad of Silly Putty. You take your Silly Putty and apply it to a Sunday Comic Strip and you transfer your image onto it. Let's say that this image is the original image and it is a high resolution image. You could take this image and have it printed. This image is the highest quality and most reproducible.

Now let's take this Silly Putty image and stretch it out in every direction. You will notice that the image has degraded. The very same thing happens to a raster file when its resolution has been reduced, or it has been increased in size beyond the point which it can maintain its integrity at its original resolution.

Raster artwork is not infinitely "scaleable". Raster artwork is composed of fixed pixels and when scale or resolution is altered, the image can be compromised beyond a point that it can be reproduced cleanly.

In closing, a lot of people think because they can view an image on their monitor via the Internet it is  "good enough" to be reproduced. This is typically not true. Most images  you see online are 72 d.p.i. the highest needed to be displayed via a monitor. Far too small to reprint typically. Not to mention,  pulling images from the NET opens you up to copyright infringement.

One format is not better than the other. One or the other is used depending on the final product. It all comes down to using the right tools for the job and knowing your specifications for reproduction.