Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Breukelen, Netherlands
    Posts
    81
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Why Photoshop instead of painter

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    121
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    It's good to use both. I prefer Painter for its superior brush engine and ease of use. However, there are certain features about Photoshop that Painter doesn't have.

    First, there's the brushes. Although Painter is great for mimicking natural media, Photoshop just gives you the meat and potatoes when it comes to creating custom brushes. The process is similar in Painter, but it just seems easier to alter the brush to your liking in Photoshop. Also, the brushes are more versatile. Since they're all dab-based, there is less lagging. You can also set them to whatever blending mode you want; whereas with Painter, the only way to achieve Colour Dodge is to use the Glow brush. Also, you can use the brush presets with any tool you want, including the Eraser, the Smudge tool, and the Art History Brush.

    There's also Photoshop's ability to work with layers and photos. Because Photoshop is primarily a photo-enhancing/image editing program, it has invaluable image altering tools, techniques and filters that Painter isn't quite up to par with. The layer pallette is more user friendly; there are more things you can do with blending modes, layer styles, adjustment layers, masks, etc. You can crop/extend the canvas without having to flatten the image.

    It's all a matter of choice, but it also depends on what exactly you're trying to do. If you're comfortable working in the CG environment, and just want to produce a good looking illustration, by all means use Photoshop. However, if you want something that's powerful, easy to use, and accurately simulates the look and feel of natural drawing and painting media, use Painter. Remember that software programs are just tools, and they can't make up for lack of talent. Just pick the one you're more comfortable with, and practice until your fingers bleed.

    And when you're done, practice some more.

    Last edited by lordofthebling; April 20th, 2007 at 06:26 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NYC
    Posts
    223
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
    I like photoshop better. It just seems more intuitive for me. But then again I've been a PS user for years and a Painter user for about 2, so....
    I feel that photoshop is more versatile as an overall program. Furthermore if you want a "natural" look you can create a brush to look like it. Also, it depends on how you work. Some artists can make an image from PS appear to be from Painter and vice versa.
    Just play around with both and see what works best for you.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    100
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    I use Photoshop because I used it for years... then I got my Wacom tablet and tried my hand at digital painting in Painter. I couldn't get used to it and the tutorials I did told me to "just paint this colour here" but failed to mention which of the many brushes to use... so they didn't help much. I gave up after a while and tried digital painting in Photoshop and found it much easier... so that where I am now. Doing my first few paintings in Photoshop.

    †- Leukeh -†
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #5
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    30
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
    I am quite new to both programs as I've drawn traditionally my whole life, so I think I can give a quite unbiased opinion on the subject.
    In my short experience, it seems to me that the first consideration is the price of either program. You can buy Painter for about half the price of Photoshop, so if you are not a Professional making a living on this, Painter might be the first option in your mind. However, in the same line of thought, Painter is INCREDIBLY more complicated to learn to use on your own than Photoshop, so those who are not pros, might not have enough incentive to do the time and research it takes to learn to use Painter.
    As far as their capabilities, the latest versions: PS CS5 and Painter 12, both have made good efforts to offer what the competing software does. CS5 for instance, now has a new set of more "Natural" feeling brushes, and Painter 12 has added a few features that resemble PS's picture and Image editing capabilities.
    I believe the old conception that Painter is for 'Traditional' looking results and PS is for digital looking results, pretty much no longer applies.
    I for instance, I LOVE the work of Ryan Church. He uses Painter alsmost exclusively, and only has PS open on the side in order to add photo textures to his Painter work.
    A quick glance at the work on his site should be enough to see how life-like and creamy the texture of the colors look. Almost like real paint.
    Of course I immediately atributed this to the use of Painter, because the work of hard core PS users like Feng Zhu, always looked to me a bit shinnier and 'electric'. sort of like
    comparing the color palettes and use of color between the paintings of Leonardo vs that of Michaelangelo.
    Of course, this whole false idea of mine was shattered to pieces when I started following the work of Darren Quach, for both videogames and films, and saw the exact same behaviour of the 'Paint' on his Photoshop work, as I've always seen in Ryan's Painter work!
    What all this boiled down to for me, is that you can get pretty much the EXACT SAME Results from both Programs. The only thing to decide for me, was which of the two felt more comfortable FOR ME to use. In my personal opinion, Photoshop is A LOT easier to master than Painter, and the Photo and image editing extras help me work a lot faster than I would be able to in Painter. I've also read all over the internet from most professionals, that Painter can be very unstable, and you have to be saving your work often for fear of having it crash or freeze on you, and losing hours of work. Although I did not experience any such crashes while testing Painter, the general consensus is that Photoshop is a much more stable platform.
    Perhaps I will eventually buy Painter as well, but for now, I'm very satisfied with Photoshop.

    Last edited by Holydivered7; June 27th, 2012 at 03:30 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,047
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 195 Times in 158 Posts
    why are resurrecting a 5 y.o. thread by posting obvious and dated stuff
    cs5 is two years old jsyk, there's cs6 out with numerous incredible improvements that painter needs ASAP
    while painter's "picture and editing capabilities" are still rudimentary, they can't even get layer masks work without lag.
    their selection tools are still damaging images beyond repair. it's 2012.

    on the fourth day of glitchmas my painter™ gave to me
    four random crashes, three broken brushes, two system hangups & one corrupted workspace
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    176
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts
    I don't understand the point of Painter over PS, really. Real, physical paint still exists - why wouldn't you use that if you wanted to use natural media so badly? PS makes up for any shortfall in 'naturalness' a thousandfold with less lag and better everything else compared to Painter.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,047
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 195 Times in 158 Posts
    ^ because physical paint isn't always convenient.
    less lag = agreed 100 %; better everything - not exactly.
    painter needs to get its stuff together, but some of its features are really neat. very artist friendly.
    intuos intergration is better too (though ps is catching up rapidly).

    on the fourth day of glitchmas my painter™ gave to me
    four random crashes, three broken brushes, two system hangups & one corrupted workspace
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    616
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 162 Times in 127 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FoxinShocks View Post
    I don't understand the point of Painter over PS, really. Real, physical paint still exists - why wouldn't you use that if you wanted to use natural media so badly? PS makes up for any shortfall in 'naturalness' a thousandfold with less lag and better everything else compared to Painter.
    Jot down all the reasons why you use Photoshop rather than pencil/paint and paper to create an image. Compare it to mine and you will probably see an exact match - except I use Painter. Creating a "natural" look has little to do with it, the brushes are just better for me.

    (But I also use Photoshop for functions that are better than Painter's).

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to joeparis For This Useful Post:


  12. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    I'm using Photoshop because it's much faster and it's always being improved (compare it to Painter). It's just more convenient and has so many little/big plugins/filters for artist that make it a real tool (like Lucisart (provides an artistic postprocessing to art), Magicpicker (professional color wheel), Mixcolors (very convenient color mixing), or even Vertus (lets you combine details in image)). It saves so much effort and lets concentrate on making the picture instead of searching the right tool or fighting with the result.

    Painter just misses these things. I actually started with using Painter (and Creature House Expression, which is dead now what a pity) and it gave me a true 'natural' look. But when I learnt Photoshop (with tutorials and such) I realized I can do anything I did in Painter - I can do it in Photoshop with more fun. Wacom integration became much faster in the latest CS6.

    So my choice is convenience + more features

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,047
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 195 Times in 158 Posts
    ^ adobe's 3rd party extension support is impressive, but hey, you can write your own xml menus with painter 12! isn't that like exciting and shit?

    on the fourth day of glitchmas my painter™ gave to me
    four random crashes, three broken brushes, two system hangups & one corrupted workspace
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  14. #12
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    355
    Thanks
    266
    Thanked 127 Times in 95 Posts
    I find Photoshop a lot more user-friendly.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  15. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Why Photoshop instead of painter

    I can do anything I did in Painter - I can do it in Photoshop with more fun. Wac-om integration became much faster in the latest CS6.in painting there is very hurdles that we can see.but in Photoshop we can modified all pictures as we want.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 1

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside
Register

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook