Is the smudge tool really not good for artists?

[shonenjumpgirl]

I heard just recently that the smudge tool is just as bad as the burn and dodge tools. Is this true? Because I've seen a lot of artists (even professional ones) use the smudge tool. Also, if the smudge tool is a "crutch" tool, then what should I do to to make my art look just as good with out it?

[shannanigan]

Who said that... and if you get the results you want by using the Smudge tool... why would you care? Sounds like a like you've been subjected to pretentious art dribble... you gotta watch out. Its EVERYWHERE! :D

I think, as with Dodge and Burn, when used properly both functions are good. Its over using them for creating shortcuts that result in mediocre artwork that they become a problem.

[Elwell]

Like dodge and burn, the smudge too is fine for what it does, but what it does is not what most people think it does. It's not a particularly good blending tool, at least not without a lot of tweaking. The most common Photoshop blending technique is a combination of transparency and color picking.

[bhanu]

There is no such thing as good or bad.... everything has its place in the world. Use them in the most just way feasible to you.

[Dizon]

Not unless you actually know what you're doing.

[rattsang]

it is not the tools that make the artist but the artist that makes the tools.

dosent matter what tools you use but how you use them,
a example of bad use of the smudge tool is to use it as it comes- it needs to have the opacity to be turned way down at the very least. another bad use is smudging everything equally or smudging the shit out of an image,
all the tools are valid thats why they are there,
forget about tools for now learn good technique then all tools will automatically be useful to you.

[Stoat]

One or two pixels wide, it's great for rendering fur. As a general blending tool, it tends to look blurry and smeary. P'shop images too easily descend to soft and vague as it is.

So it's not so much a crutch as it just looks crap :)

[Psypomp]

I use the smudge tool (in PS) like Linda Bergkvist does-- the little three-dot triangle brush-- and it's great. I don't use the blur tool because it's not irregular enough, too smooth.

[riceface]

ppl use to say uhh dont use this dont use that, i say if photoshop has it u can use it, like everyone seems to be saying, its a "medium"

plus from what ive seen concept artist do anything but tradition when u see them work, they use every trick in the book

[Zirngibism]

I agree with what's been said so far, but I'd like to add that I've had good success with it if I turn the spacing WAY up and also dial up the scattering. This basically takes care of the lag problem, and lets you blend wide area at higher opacity without distorting your edges. Good for textured surfaces that way, too.

The smudge tool is way too smooth (and laggy) at low spacing, because PS makes the smudge effect by producing many copies at varying opacity beneath the brush.
I think Painter's brushes actually move the existing pixels around, making for a more natural and efficient effect. Wish PS did it.

Just watch using it because nothing in nature transitions from one color exactly to the other like in a graphics program gradient. I've noticed that the "transition point" at least looks more saturated than the colors its transitioning, and of a different, middle-hue on the color wheel.

Good luck :-}