[J-D Leon]

ok.
u can argue this for days.
but i personally think that corel does a better job to create a piece of software that is easy to use. atleast easier than adobe photoshop.

i took me almos an hour to figure out how to use illustrator to draw line that i want to see. but in corel draw, even at the first time. i know exactly what bttom i need to press to draw whatever i want to see.

how promisng... i dont understand why soo many people love adobe
the only one thing that i like adobe is that they can do the zoom in and zoom out faster than corel.

[Loki]

great - you found a tool you feel comfortable with! Now go and make some images and post them!

By the way - where is this Cananda you're from?

[ceenda]

Heh, Cananda... sounds like a James Bond baddie.

"You won't get away with this Cananda!"

"I already have, Mr Bond..." [cue evil laugh]

On an odd note, Corel Photopaint is actually okay. Used to have CorelDraw 7.0 and the PhotoPaint suite has alot of useful stuff. IIRC, it even had a lookup table so that you could do anti-aliasing in 256 colours.

[eyewoo]

I always thought CorelDRAW! was a more robust program than Illustrator, but they had a couple of serious problems at the start. First, Adobe had the market share and print houses. Coupled with the fact that Corel never released an early version of CorelDRAW that wasn't so bug ridden that it was almost impossible to use. After version 3 or 4, I would never buy a new version number until the next number came out. I think they decided it was policy to use the general buying public for beta... very frustrating... I stopped upgrading at version 8. Not sure how they're doing now.

[It's Highpowered BABY]

While it is true you can debate this till the end of time, there is a reason you'll see Photoshop and Illustrator in studios around the world. The Adobe programs just offer so much more. The way I see it, you like it, USE IT!! However, if you plan on working at a studio (or switching from your current position) plan on getting used to Photoshop and/or Illustrator.

[balistic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by It's Highpowered BABY:
The Adobe programs just offer so much more.

---

Way to make a trollish, unsubstantiated claim in your first post.

Adobe is the industry standard, but they have seldom been an industry leader. They stick to what's safe, to known features, while other packages like Photopaint and Satori and Painter push for innovation.

The nature of being a "standard" is that you have to distance yourself from the current state of the art.

[JFreak]

Personally, I find Adobe much easier to use because of the workflow, and shortcuts mostly. I don't know why, but I've never been a big fan of Photopaint. Then again I've only used PS 6 and Illustrator 10 and an older version of Corel (7 and 8). However, I do like Draw!. And adding OCR-Trace to the Package makes so much sense, Something that Adobe should be doing.
When I do "bitmap" work I use Photoshop or Gimp for Windows, and Illustrator for vector

[Gort]

Ah - did anyone ever use Xara? I tooled with it back in 97 - 98, and it was way ahead of Illustrator then (layer mask transparencies, transparent handlers for vector objects, extensive vector shape library). I don't know why Corel ever shelved it - all water under the bridge though.

Whatever makes you happy and you groove with - that's the standard for production.

[Tron]

quote

Quote:

Ah - did anyone ever use Xara? I tooled with it back in 97 - 98, and it was way ahead of Illustrator then (layer mask transparencies, transparent handlers for vector objects, extensive vector shape library)

Tom Carter you are right! when illustrator was at stage 7 (or later i think), i had to do some work with xara becaus illustrator was to able to do it (transparent handlers for vector objects)
and
xara is as fast as hell.

________
Tron

[HawkOne]

Awww .... isn't that cute ... It's Highpowered BABY ... has started to throw his lip around without checking who he's talking to or what he's talking about.

I will take and shove a ton of info down your throat now, hope it doesn't hurt.

I tried hard to dig up a feature history of the features of both Draw and Illustrator and PhotoPAINT and Photoshop, I saw it online somewhere a while ago but cannot seem to find it again, but nevermind, I�ll just make some subjective observations instead then ...

CorelDraws price is around 420$ (380$ at Amazon)
(Includes Corel Photo-Paint and Corel R.A.V.E etc.)

With Corel you also get all this stuff ...
� Microsoft� Visual Basic� for Applications 6.2
� Canto� Cumulus� Desktop LE 5.0 (Digital Asset Management)
� Corel TEXTURE� 10 (creating CG textures)
� Corel CAPTURE� 10 (versatile screen captures also record uncompressed movies)
� Adobe� Photoshop�-compatible plug-in filters, including Digimarc� Digital Watermarking and Human Software Squizz!�
� 25,000 professional clipart images and symbols, as well as the fonts, photos, photo objects, fills and frames.

I've heard that version 10 has slimmed down a bit from version 9 which was 3 packed CDs. but still included is a whole bunch of Fonts and high-res photos. (Oh and clip art to, but who other than aunt Bessie uses them, rite ... heheh ...)

To match this with Adobe products you will have to separate with
� 397$ for Illustrator 10 (CorelDraw 10)
� 609$ for Photoshop 7 (PhotoPaint 10)
� 70$ Adobe Type Manager 4.6 (Bitstream� Font Navigator)
� 135$ Adobe Streamline 4 (CorelTrace 10)
� 10,049$ Adobe Font folio 9 MLP (Corel Font Library)
� 445$ Adobe Live Motion 2 (Corel R.A.V.E.)
� 499$ Pagemaker 7 (For many of the desktop publishing and page setting features as already included in CorelDraw)

Since the CorelDraw Suite includes some unique tools that Adobe does not sell, I�ll leave this �informal price comparison� here, but you get the picture, I hope ...

Go ahead, add it all up ...

(Cut from CNET review)
For experienced and expert CorelDRAW users, version 10 provides true power with huge advantages over applications such as Illustrator (unless you enjoy repetitive tasks). CorelDRAW 10 is a clean release and has been improved with power users in mind. PhotoPAINT 10 at least equals Photoshop in its capabilities (for a fraction of the price). And, CorelRAVE is at least as powerful as Flash 5 for 95 percent of current web animation uses.

Being easy to use or not, is that really a question worth asking about a professional application? MS Paint is easier to use than Photoshop, what useful conclusion could you derive from that ? ... Surely it is the same as the Mac vs. Windows debate, where the Apple addicts saying that the Mac interface is just so much easier and intuitive.

(also cut from CNET review...)
Criticism about the program's difficulty is irrelevant. It's a professional graphic program stupid. What did you expect??? Adobe is just as difficult on newbies. The only difference is people are told that it's the standard, so they swallow their grief and adapt.

Why does this happen, surely any analytical soul would be most familiar with what he/she spends the most time on right ... ? So, it is the same with our graphics apps, you are likely to stick with the one you are introduced to because it means you will have to study less, unless you want to be adventurous and learn multiple packages. CorelDraw even lets you customize your interface to mimic other packages if you should so desire, but if you took a brief look at the program without bothering to learn something new, you probably missed it.

And the part about Adobe being more powerful and richly featured; nonsense again, especially regarding CorelDraw. For longtime users of the CorelDraw packages, they have seen again and again that both Adobe Illustrator and Macromedia Freehand have been playing catch-up with Corels innovation, vector transparency being the one that comes to mind first, Corel invented it, and it was in version 6 of CorelDraw ... when did it appear in Adobes products ...??

It has been said many times before, as have many of the things I mentioned above, but it is a FACT that Corel continues to throw "Everything AND the kitchen sink." into their packages and therefore continue to provide the best value for money compared to any other software. I�m a gadget addict, and the more features the better, as long as I can turn off and hide those I don�t need to use. As many others here at Sijun, I also use high-end 3D software (Mirai/XSI in my case), which is so vastly more complicated than any image editor or vector software ever will be, the complaints people make about the complexity of using image editing packages seems like childplay in comparison and this whole UI complexity issue becomes rather pathetic. (IMHO)

CorelDRAW remains unchallenged on top of the vectorworld in most aspects, and both Illustrator and Freehand are trailing behind as far as I'm concerned ... Maybe DRAW, R.A.V.E and PhotoPaint may not have all the best things of other packages, since there will always be differences just as for any piece of software, however it also has its own unique strong points, but it doesn't even have to when Corels complete package cost less than any of the single alternatives available.



Read what the users have to say ...
CorelDraw 10.0 - Software Reviews - CNET.com

then read Corels own propaganda comparison ...
(Draw 10 launched when Illustrator was in version 9)
Top 10 Reasons to Buy CorelDRAW� 10 Graphics Suite

then read Adobes propaganda comparison ...
Adobe Illustrator vs. CorelDRAW�

[ May 31, 2002: Message edited by: HawkOne ]

[elam]

Just so you know, Adobe does sell bundled packages with Photoshop, Illustrator, and/or GoLive, Livemotion, and their other products anywhere from $600 to $1200.

I'm no Adobe or Corel fanatic by any means, but there's no doubt that Corel is the better value, if not the better product.

I became curious and downloaded the Linux version *again*, which Corel gives out for free at their website, and it runs much better than I remembered. Program kicks ass.


Which makes me wonder why Corel acquired Painter....

[ May 31, 2002: Message edited by: elam ]

[HawkOne]

Yep elam, I knew that (if you were adressing me that is), but I just figured I'd try to match product for product just for comparison. Still none of Adobes bundles includes nowhere near as much extras.

I agree about the coolness of having a professional image-editing package on Linux, I guess that makes it easier for Corel to support both MacOS and Linux.

Corel is kinda like Toyota, they just can't change the minds of consumers about Toyota being a cheap ordinary Japanese car, so in order to compete with the likes of BMW and Mercedes they introduced Lexus, which is essentially a souped up disguised Toyota, and it was a hit, they are looking to do it again with another brand called Scion for a different target audience. Honda did it too with their Accura brand, and Nissan is currently introducing their new Infiniti brand.

Maybe that is what Corel needs to do with their software to get a solid footing and gain respect and get included in the mainstream professional designer/illustrators preferred toolkit, double the price, and get a new logo and brand name. (like their Procreate and coming DeepWhite)

I hope not, but ... who knows ...

[ May 31, 2002: Message edited by: HawkOne ]

[Vhy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by balistic:
[QB]Photoshop in no way "offers more" brush control than Photopaint. Adobe only recently added tilt support, and even with PS7's new brush engine, its still unable to allow much in the way of wet-in-wet painting.
[QB]

---

Does photopaint allow brushes to use additive blending?

[It's Highpowered BABY]

balistic, when you said I made a "trollish, unsubstantiated claim in your first post" tells me you really know nothing about this kind of stuff. I have used Corel products, I have used Adobe products. My studio uses Adobe products, not Corel Porducts. 99% of the studios that do anything from Pre-Press to features effects, use Adobe products. Why because they offer so much more. Before you talk, maybe you should do some research first. Most of what I do in a day is easier, faster, and just all around better looking when done on Adobe products. Adobe products are also the industry standard. Like I said before, whatever you feel comfrotable with, use!!! If you can use one, it won't take long to learn the other. So why don't you go back under your bed and keep on doodling with your crayons!!

[pixelsoldier]

Check out balistic's art. He uses Photopaint. He can produce some incredible work with that software. His work alone stands to disprove your claims.

You should really get a feel for what people around here are capable of before you start running your mouth like a self-proclaimed big shot. You show me something you've created with any piece of Adobe software that comes close to balistic's stuff, and I'll consider your opinion valuable.

[balistic]

"So why don't you go back under your bed and keep on doodling with your crayons!!"

I think I'll stick to my swank leather recliner and a copy of Photopaint 10, thanks.

"Before you talk, maybe you should do some research first."

Like working on three games, an animated TV series, pre-production on two feature films, and numerous pieces of broadcast animation and printed illustration? That kind of research? I have used Photoshop, Painter, and Photopaint in a production environment, and I've tested numerous other image editing packages. Photoshop in no way "offers more" brush control than Photopaint. Adobe only recently added tilt support, and even with PS7's new brush engine, its still unable to allow much in the way of wet-in-wet painting.

There are people who work it really well, but they nearly all end up using gouche-style washes, which isn't always how I want to approach a piece.

"Why because they offer so much more."

Why did you make the exact same contention TWICE in a row without even attempting to back it up? Or maybe you are, but you're just being really feeble about it.

Maybe Illustrator is better than Draw in vector graphics in some way, I have no idea . . . but you just made the contention, twice, that using any Adobe product will automatically improve one's work.

"Most of what I do in a day is easier, faster, and just all around better looking when done on Adobe products."

Either you work for Adobe, or you are the saddest case of terminal viral marketing I have ever seen.

Adobe makes fine software, but they are seldom ground-breakers these days. As I wrote before, its the nature of being a standard.

*edit: I always feel like a tool when posting my art to prove a point. I've removed the piece. He can just look at my website if he wants.*

[ May 31, 2002: Message edited by: balistic ]

[merlyns]

well I like corel too but I still prefer adobe photoshop or painter.

david

[balistic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vhy:
Does photopaint allow brushes to use additive blending?

---

Yes, you can make a brush that is additive, multiplicative, subtractive, soft light, hard light, negative, or one that only affects saturation or hue . . . . essentially, you can use any of the blending modes that you'd use on a layer in realtime with a brush. There are about 25 different blending modes you can use when painting.

[bearsclover]

I have always been curious about Corel's line of products. I have Photopaint 9 on my PC, but never could get the hang of it. (I guess I needed to get out the manual, huh?) I have heard that CorelDraw is actually very good, but it just doesn't get the attention it deserves. Still, I use Photoshop and Illustrator, just for myself. I like them fine. (I LOVE them, really. Maybe I'd love CorelDraw too, but I can't afford both!)

One thing brought up here I have to disagree with - showing off your artwork as evidence of a software's superiority. It doesn't really prove that. What it proves is that you are a good artist, and you love the software you are using. The truly fabulous artist (and balistic seems to be fabulous! ) will create something great with whatever software they enjoy using.

They will make good stuff with MS Paint, Paint Shop Pro, or whatever. A good artist will do more with MS Paint than a bad artist will do with Photoshop. (Sure, a good artist will technically be able to do more with Photoshop or Photopaint than they will with MS Paint, but you get my point here, I assume!)