Though I suspect something else is decoding your data for you (a char* in C is usually best represented as bytes, especially if it is binary data):

The latin1 codec can round trip every byte. You can verify this with the following short program:

>>> s = ''.join(chr(i) for i in range(0x100))
>>> s
'\x00\x01\x02\x03\x04\x05\x06\x07\x08\t\n\x0b\x0c\r\x0e\x0f\x10\x11\x12\x13\x14\x15\x16\x17\x18\x19\x1a\x1b\x1c\x1d\x1e\x1f !"#$%&\'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~\x7f\x80\x81\x82\x83\x84\x85\x86\x87\x88\x89\x8a\x8b\x8c\x8d\x8e\x8f\x90\x91\x92\x93\x94\x95\x96\x97\x98\x99\x9a\x9b\x9c\x9d\x9e\x9f\xa0¡¢£¤¥¦§¨ª«¬\xad¯°±²³´µ¶·¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏÐÑÒÓÔÕÖ×ØÙÚÛÜÝÞßàáâãäåæçèéêëìíîïðñòóôõö÷øùúûüýþÿ'
>>> s2 = s.encode('latin1').decode('latin1')
>>> s2 == s
True
>>> sb = bytes(range(0x100))
>>> sb
b'\x00\x01\x02\x03\x04\x05\x06\x07\x08\t\n\x0b\x0c\r\x0e\x0f\x10\x11\x12\x13\x14\x15\x16\x17\x18\x19\x1a\x1b\x1c\x1d\x1e\x1f !"#$%&\'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~\x7f\x80\x81\x82\x83\x84\x85\x86\x87\x88\x89\x8a\x8b\x8c\x8d\x8e\x8f\x90\x91\x92\x93\x94\x95\x96\x97\x98\x99\x9a\x9b\x9c\x9d\x9e\x9f\xa0\xa1\xa2\xa3\xa4\xa5\xa6\xa7\xa8\xa9\xaa\xab\xac\xad\xae\xaf\xb0\xb1\xb2\xb3\xb4\xb5\xb6\xb7\xb8\xb9\xba\xbb\xbc\xbd\xbe\xbf\xc0\xc1\xc2\xc3\xc4\xc5\xc6\xc7\xc8\xc9\xca\xcb\xcc\xcd\xce\xcf\xd0\xd1\xd2\xd3\xd4\xd5\xd6\xd7\xd8\xd9\xda\xdb\xdc\xdd\xde\xdf\xe0\xe1\xe2\xe3\xe4\xe5\xe6\xe7\xe8\xe9\xea\xeb\xec\xed\xee\xef\xf0\xf1\xf2\xf3\xf4\xf5\xf6\xf7\xf8\xf9\xfa\xfb\xfc\xfd\xfe\xff'
>>> sb == s.encode('latin1')
True

Decode the bytes object to produce a string:

>>> b"abcde".decode("utf-8")
'abcde'

The above example assumes that the bytes object is in UTF-8, because it is a common encoding. However, you should use the encoding your data is actually in!

You cannot convert a string into bytes or bytes into string without taking an encoding into account. The whole point about the bytes type is an encoding-independent sequence of bytes, while str is a sequence of Unicode code points which by design have no unique byte representation.

So when you want to convert one into the other, you must tell explicitly what encoding you want to use to perform this conversion. When converting into bytes, you have to say how to represent each character as a byte sequence; and when you convert from bytes, you have to say what method to use to map those bytes into characters.

If you don’t specify the encoding, then UTF-8 is the default, which is a sane default since UTF-8 is ubiquitous, but it's also just one of many valid encodings.

If you take your original string, '\xc4\xb7\x86\x17\xcd', take a look at what Unicode code points these characters represent. \xc4 for example is the LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A WITH DIAERESIS, i.e. Ä. That character happens to be encoded in UTF-8 as 0xC3 0x84 which explains why that’s what you get when you encode it into bytes. But it also has an encoding of 0x00C4 in UTF-16 for example.

As for how to solve this properly so you get the desired output, there is no clear correct answer. The solution that Kasramvd mentioned is also somewhat imperfect. If you read about the raw_unicode_escape codec in the documentation:

raw_unicode_escape

Latin-1 encoding with \uXXXX and \UXXXXXXXX for other code points. Existing backslashes are not escaped in any way. It is used in the Python pickle protocol.

So this is just a Latin-1 encoding which has a built-in fallback for characters outside of it. I would consider this fallback somewhat harmful for your purpose. For Unicode characters that cannot be represented as a \xXX sequence, this might be problematic:

>>> chr(256).encode('raw_unicode_escape')
b'\\u0100'

So the code point 256 is explicitly outside of Latin-1 which causes the raw_unicode_escape encoding to instead return the encoded bytes for the string '\\u0100', turning that one character into 6 bytes which have little to do with the original character (since it’s an escape sequence).

So if you wanted to use Latin-1 here, I would suggest you to use that one explictly, without having that escape sequence fallback from raw_unicode_escape. This will simply cause an exception when trying to convert code points outside of the Latin-1 area:

>>> '\xc4\xb7\x86\x17\xcd'.encode('latin1')
b'\xc4\xb7\x86\x17\xcd'
>>> chr(256).encode('latin1')
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<pyshell#28>", line 1, in <module>
    chr(256).encode('latin1')
UnicodeEncodeError: 'latin-1' codec can't encode character '\u0100' in position 0: ordinal not in range(256)

Of course, whether or not code points outside of the Latin-1 area can cause problems for you depends on where that string actually comes from. But if you can make guarantees that the input will only contain valid Latin-1 characters, then chances are that you don't really need to be working with a string there in the first place. Since you are actually dealing with some kind of bytes, you should look whether you cannot simply retrieve those values as bytes in the first place. That way you won’t introduce two levels of encoding there where you can corrupt data by misinterpreting the input.

img.decode("utf-8")

You can decode the variable with the above. Then convert it to base64.

"<img src='data:image/png;base64,{}'/>".format( base64.b64encode(img.decode("utf-8")) )

UPDATED:

What you really want is this:

raw_img = repr(img)
"<img src='data:image/png;base64,{}'/>".format( base64.b64encode(raw_img) )

If you look at the docs for bytes, it points you to bytearray:

bytearray([source[, encoding[, errors]]])

Return a new array of bytes. The bytearray type is a mutable sequence of integers in the range 0 <= x < 256. It has most of the usual methods of mutable sequences, described in Mutable Sequence Types, as well as most methods that the bytes type has, see Bytes and Byte Array Methods.

The optional source parameter can be used to initialize the array in a few different ways:

If it is a string, you must also give the encoding (and optionally, errors) parameters; bytearray() then converts the string to bytes using str.encode().

If it is an integer, the array will have that size and will be initialized with null bytes.

If it is an object conforming to the buffer interface, a read-only buffer of the object will be used to initialize the bytes array.

If it is an iterable, it must be an iterable of integers in the range 0 <= x < 256, which are used as the initial contents of the array.

Without an argument, an array of size 0 is created.

So bytes can do much more than just encode a string. It's Pythonic that it would allow you to call the constructor with any type of source parameter that makes sense.

For encoding a string, I think that some_string.encode(encoding) is more Pythonic than using the constructor, because it is the most self documenting -- "take this string and encode it with this encoding" is clearer than bytes(some_string, encoding) -- there is no explicit verb when you use the constructor.

I checked the Python source. If you pass a unicode string to bytes using CPython, it calls PyUnicode_AsEncodedString, which is the implementation of encode; so you're just skipping a level of indirection if you call encode yourself.

Also, see Serdalis' comment -- unicode_string.encode(encoding) is also more Pythonic because its inverse is byte_string.decode(encoding) and symmetry is nice.