Corel draw X8 vs Adobe Cloud Since New Software Updates

[altereddezignz]

As stated above i am curious about what is better to work with in the graphic design market now days. Both platforms have released very updated versions of thier software.

I ask this bc i am having issues with something when creating wraps for things. I was told i should be using Corel in the Sign industry b/c it was standard. As i have much respect to what this person is telling me i am just curious about other input.

I have been using Adobe products for some time and have never really used Corel. I am not against change at all just trying to figure out a direction to go here. Now the change over will be hard as we are a fully functioning shop so i cannot afford to simply stop one cold turkey and then start another one.

Some of the issues i am having to see if maybe someone with Corel skills can voice their input.

Back and forth moving files between AI and PS for effect and back to AI for contour cut then saving for print.'
Scaling of items to match in Ai and PS so that final file can be scaled by 1000% to make it full scale in Rip.
I have been using the bad wrap templates that are created at a small size but at 720 dpi so when scaled by 1000% in rip its at 72 dpi but full size.


I will say there is a particular gentleman that will read this and i have to give MAD props to this man. Without him i wouldn't even be close to where i am at this day in teh sign world. He has stopped what he was doing many times during his busy work schedule to help me out and even after hour.s he has spent time with me on the phone helping and talking to me..... So with that said thank you one of these days i hope to be able to help someone out as well..

This forum has allowed me to be in contact with many fine people that have helped me solve problems and issues that i was at a loss with. It has also allowed me to help a few here and there which makes me feel like i am giving back some and with the small amount of knowlege i have makes it feel not so one sided lol..

 

[ThatGuy]

I would not call corel standard. It is used by a lot of people, but for signs I would say Adobe is the standard. I would think flexi is used more than corel.

 

[bob]

I would not call corel standard. It is used by a lot of people, but for signs I would say Adobe is the standard. I would think flexi is used more than corel.

Nonsense. There is no standard, just whatever works for you. Many feel that Adobe is some sort of standard [as well as Apple tackle]. This because virtually every school still uses Adobe and Apple and never mentions that there are many other solutions, each one the equal to the Apple/Adobe combination.

This is because Adobe and Apple used to equip schools with their hardware and software for free. Don't know if they still do but they did and it got these institutions thoroughly addicted to their product. The result is the people attending these institutions think that Adobe is the thing to use. They do this because they never learned of the existence of anything else, let alone learn how to use anything else.

The same phenomenon is the 1990's when these same people were taught to write code in the obscene Pascal language. They went out in the world thinking that Pascal was the language they had to use. That is somehow superior to other, far more agile, languages. They never learned any other. Rather stupid because Pascal was designed by Niklaus Wirth to be a teaching aid, not an actual language. To that end it was created to be rather convoluted and clumsy. But when young Buffy and little Todd left academia and went out in the real world that's all they knew and that's all they could do. A shame, it set the art of programming back a few notches.

 

[myront]

I'd have to agree with Bob on this one. "There is no standard"
I personally love Corel and wouldn't use anything else. But in this business you better have both Adobe AND whatever. We receive files that will, oftentimes, have to be opened in Illy then saved as pdf. Sometimes pdf corel will have problems with but adobe won't. And so on

 

[altereddezignz]

I have adobe and access to Corel as well for file issues and so on. I have only ever used adobe and have tried using Corel only to be aggravated with steps it takes to do things that are simply in adobe. Now I imagine there are the same things that can be said about Corel bs adobe lol.

I am just being told to drop adobe and buy Corel and start learning that over bc it is the print world standard. Not saying it is better not worse as I do not have knowledge in Corel. Just having issues with things here and there and was curious. Thanks you all for your input.

 

[Johnny Best]

I have been an Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop guy for a long time. I cannot use Corel because I also am a Mac user. That being said, I also do not like the Cloud system that Adobe went to. So I am learning Affinity Photo and Designer. Steep learning curve because they have different features than the ones I use but think that the future will lean towards these new or similar products. I could be wrong but time will tell. On the bright side they are for both platforms and do not cost much and upgrades have been free and often. There are also a lot of videos on learning how to use them.

 

[altereddezignz]

I'm currently stuck in the adobe cloud deal for at least 8 months. So hard to pay for both at the same time when having to pay for one lol. I don't mind learning new things but in same boat. All I have ever used is adobe.

 

[phototec]

You mentioned both Graphic Design and then Sign Shop, well I have been involved in both worlds and they are not the same thing. As far as a standard your sign folks on here will tell you there is no standard they use whatever will work for them, however coming to the sign industry after working as a graphic designer for two large fortune 500 companies most of my career I can tell you that most professional graphic designers (not sign people) worldwide prefer Adobe Illustrator, InDesign and Photoshop.

Adobe actually invented the PostScript computer language for creating vector graphics, and then later invented PDF (Portable Document Format) used to present documents in a manner independent of application software, hardware, and operating systems. Each PDF file encapsulates a complete description of a fixed-layout flat document, including the text, fonts, graphics, and other information needed to display it.

Adobe changed the world as far as graphics are concerned, and their graphic applications are considered the STANDARD worldwide for true graphic design professionals, again not necessarily for those folks who have not been educated as a graphic designer, but who rather learned to make signs and work in the sign industry, they argue all the time and say there is no standard. Some say because Corel is cheaper and easier to learn which may be the case. But I have to tell you if you are not really a graphic designer who has to interface with process color printers (for catalogs, brochures, and direct sales collateral) and ad agencies and you're just making basic signs any design software will work well.

 

[Johnny Best]

Affinity Designer is $49.99 and Affinity Photo is also that price.

 

[kffernandez]

personally, i don't think anybody in the industry would criticize you for whatever vector / raster design software you choose. both have a well established user base, and have carved its place in the industry.

but one thing you will might actually need is the ability to open at least both corel and adobe files correctly. [which might be in the latest version]

kelly

 

[visual800]

Im an adobe guy but have corel just to open files. I have no desire to learn another program not do I have any desire to get on the cloud and pay subscription

 

[myront]

Things about illy.
1. Right at the start you have to choose a starting size. Doesn't matter in corel. Set it once to whatever size you want and you can set it to do that every time. One less step
2. You can't print or export a "single item". You have to copy it to a new page then export/print. Not so with Corel.
3. You will most certainly have to be taught to take advantage all illy has to offer. Corel can be easily self taught (if you quit thinking like adobe) Stroke? You mean outline! Fountain Fill! not "Gradient"!
4. Export a rectangle from illy with a "stroke" will actually make two separate shapes. Not corel, one shape with an outline just as I'd expect
5. Can't marquee select many shapes as anything the marquee crosses will be selected.
6. Can you even do macros in illy? In corel you can create macros to make up for just about any unique situation you need.
7. Can illy do dimension lines? Corel can and I have a macro that drops them in instantly.
8. layers are so overrated.
9. corel has a raster program just as adobe and you can quickly move between them for those special effects.
10. Scalling? In most situations you can work at full scale in corel.

Lake many have stated having both programs is a must in the sign business. We don't pay for a subscription to adobe. We have an older version for the sole purpose of converting files for use in corel.

It's not so much which program you use as it is more knowledge of the industry itself. How to set up files properly to be universal for all. How to install fonts. What file types are bad or good to use for a particular situation. Files for web use are not the same as files for print. What "cut ready" means. Color separations. Pantone colors, copyright issues. Vector vs. rastor.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

2. You can't print or export a "single item". You have to copy it to a new page then export/print. Not so with Corel.

I do believe in CC 2015 they added that direct functionality to it. However, I have used a different method. I doubt that you would like my alternative method, but there are alternatives to that one.

3. You will most certainly have to be taught to take advantage all illy has to offer. Corel can be easily self taught (if you quit thinking like adobe) Stroke? You mean outline! Fountain Fill! not "Gradient"!

I gave up on Corel. It comes bundled in with my digitizing software, but I don't even install it anymore after x5. I tried, but I just couldn't hack it. Even with a dummy book.

I'm being serious. I know a lot of people say that Corel is easier then Ai, but I just couldn't hack it at all.

4. Export a rectangle from illy with a "stroke" will actually make two separate shapes. Not corel, one shape with an outline just as I'd expect

Never had that issue, but I've always used offsets, not strokes.

5. Can't marquee select many shapes as anything the marquee crosses will be selected.

Yea, I don't care for that one in some instances. Most of the time it isn't an issue, but it's frustrating when it is one.

6. Can you even do macros in illy? In corel you can create macros to make up for just about any unique situation you need.

I love Actions.

7. Can illy do dimension lines? Corel can and I have a macro that drops them in instantly.

I dunno either, never had to deal with that.

8. layers are so overrated.

Not to me. I love my layers. One of the big complaints that I have with Inkscape is how it does it's layers.

10. Scalling? In most situations you can work at full scale in corel.

I'm always able to work in scale, but then again, I don't push the Ai limits either, so I reckon I cheat a bit on that one.

 

[Jim Hill]

If you want to compare Corel X-8 and AI just based on the cloud and costs issue Corel X-8 wins hands down in my opinion.

I use Corel X-8 and my son uses AI and is paying the cloud services ever month but that gets very costly over time. My upgrade to X-8 was $180.00 dollars!

I also just changed over to Windows 10 and while their New photo app is very good it is difficult to organize thousands of photo's from the past 15 years of doing graphics.

Jim

 

[WildWestDesigns]

If you want to compare Corel X-8 and AI just based on the cloud and costs issue Corel X-8 wins hands down in my opinion.

That was the main reason why I stopped upgraded Adobe was due to the subscription only schedule. Of course, it was made even easier as well knowing that I didn't want to upgrade to Win 10 (even though it would only be a VM and never on bare metal) and only upgrade if absolutely necessary to Win 10. But I would still use a VM for the older programs (shoot, I'm still running Win 98 programs).

Not necessarily cost in of itself though (while cost is a factor, it is compared more to ROI in relation to cost and not necessarily the cost by itself). I just didn't want to have to make a monthly (or yearly) payment for as long as I wanted to use it. It was more of the thought of always having that extra payment and that it would have to have an internet connection to "make sure" that payment was received. I just don't like business computers online.

 

[Rigoav]

Vectorial drawing is the same in all programs, It doesn't matter if is Ilustrator, Corel Draw, Inkscape, Xara, Karbon, etc.

Here the question is:

Am I capable with that software?

Does it fill my needs?

Some years ago a lot people claimed that they couldn't live without Freehand, but they do now.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Some years ago a lot people claimed that they couldn't live without Freehand, but they do now.

But not without their grouching though.

While I never used Freehand, I do have some programs that are "outdated", but I still use (gotta love VMs).

 

[GaSouthpaw]

The "which one is better" question is moot in the sign business because both programs have areas where they are superior to the other.
If you're a graphic designer, Adobe is your industry standard. Most graphic designers use Adobe's products. And many graphic designers' sign designs are unworkable because they have no clue how signs are made and what is and isn't feasible (sort of like how I don't design rocket engines because I wouldn't know where to start).
If you're sign designer (not the same thing as a graphic designer, though we can do many of the same things), there really is no standard- as a number of others have pointed out. It all depends on which program you can use the most efficiently to accomplish what you want.
Adobe might be the "preferred" program suite if all you're doing is making print files, but there are plenty of instances where Corel (or Flexi, or SignLab, or whatever) is just better for making production files without having to export, scale, or otherwise add another step to production.
My .02.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Adobe might be the "preferred" program suite if all you're doing is making print files, but there are plenty of instances where Corel (or Flexi, or SignLab, or whatever) is just better for making production files without having to export, scale, or otherwise add another step to production.
My .02.

I think it's more of a reflection of the knowledge base of the user and not quite as much of a limitation (or in some instances, a perceived limitation) of what platform (Ai v DRAW v Inkscape v Zara v whatever else is out there) that they are using.

I can get an immaculate vector file from either an Ai or DRAW (or whatever program you wish to talk about) user and it's not finished for production. Typically, because they don't know what is involved with production. They don't know what will or won't translate. Regardless of the program that they are using.

For how I do things, I can get by with raster files (just so long as the quality is there), because I do the same thing on those file types as I do on vector files. But it doesn't matter how much quality is in the file itself, if the design doesn't take production concerns into play, it's still not production ready.

 

[GaSouthpaw]

I think it's more of a reflection of the knowledge base of the user and not quite as much of a limitation (or in some instances, a perceived limitation) of what platform (Ai v DRAW v Inkscape v Zara v whatever else is out there) that they are using.

I can get an immaculate vector file from either an Ai or DRAW (or whatever program you wish to talk about) user and it's not finished for production. Typically, because they don't know what is involved with production. They don't know what will or won't translate. Regardless of the program that they are using.

For how I do things, I can get by with raster files (just so long as the quality is there), because I do the same thing on those file types as I do on vector files. But it doesn't matter how much quality is in the file itself, if the design doesn't take production concerns into play, it's still not production ready.

While I agree with your statement regarding "they", that's the user- not the program. And, respectfully, that part of my answer addresses the OP's question in regards to designing for signs- not graphic design (where Adobe is standard whether we like their "pay us every month" model or not) and not embroidery, which I have no experience with.
For instance, while raster files might be fine for you- if fabricated signage is needed (channel letters, monuments, stud-mounted letters, sandblasted, neon, or just cut vinyl)- they're worthless. But I can absolutely create a production-ready, vector file for that sort of use (as in, another sign shop would only have to open it and run the file/files) from the programs I mentioned. Again, for signs (though raster files might be okay for print-only items- if the quality is there, and I might use Photoshop for that instance, depending on what I was going for as a final "look"- and even then, I know how to make them production-ready).
For customers who want to do their own art- be very specific about what works and what doesn't(re formats, colors, fonts, patterns, etc), then leave it to them. If anything has to be fixed, altered, etc- the customer is charged accordingly. And their people either learn to do it the way it's required, or the customer keeps getting charged for artwork.
I would still say it comes down to which one the designer in question is most proficient in (and sometimes what their employer, if there is one, dictates they use) when creating items that are "production ready." For the sign business. And a sign designer who can't make production-ready files isn't really worth keeping around.
Again, my .02.