Photoshop and Photopaint basically equal?

[signguy 55]

Friend of mine and I have a slight disagreement.

Are the latest versions of Photoshop and CorelPhotopaint capable of doing the same things? He says no, go to any online jobs openings in graphic design and everything requires experience in Photoshop.

I say that's because kids take graphics courses at various colleges or tech schools and Adobe products are all that's available, so that's what they are experienced in, and the ones who have the jobs posted know of no other software that does basically the same thing. I say Photopaint is equal or at least close to Photoshop.

Any thoughts on this? Thanks!
(If this has been asked and answered in this forum before I apologize)

 

[dj_elite]

Personally I have used both Corel and Photoshop. I have no idea why anyone would use Corel. Photoshop in my personal opinion is 1000x better.

 

[signguy 55]

Personally I have used both Corel and Photoshop. I have no idea why anyone would use Corel. Photoshop in my personal opinion is 1000x better.

Can you explain why? If it's 1000x time better what is the difference?

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Corel Painter (which I don't think was originally a Corel product) I think is the only program that would give Photoshop a run for it's money. Although it really depends on what you are doing with the programs in the end. Although I must say, I don't have any experience with Photopaint, just Photoshop and Painter.

 

[SignManiac]

Only as good as the person pushing the pixels around. You can't buy talent, at any price. Owning and using Adobe products does not guarantee your work will be any good or not.

 

[SightLine]

I've not tried any Corel products in years but for our shop I'd put it like this. We deal with major ad agencies, corporate clients, fed - state - local government agencies daily. They all frequently send us files in native file formats and 99.999% of the time it's an Illustrator, Photoshop, or In Design file. I think in the past 5 years I can recall less than 5 Corel native files.

I fully believe Corel has come a long ways in their features and probably is very close to their Adobe counterparts in features but the simple fact of the matter is that not many big shops or agencies are using Corel. I even know a few who use it personally but I'm not buying a half dozen licenses for it until we start getting 25% of files submitted in that format.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

They all frequently send us files in native file formats and 99.999% of the time it's an Illustrator, Photoshop, or In Design file.

Are you sure that the Ai files didn't come from Corel? I have gotten quite a few Ai files that were created in Corel and just exported as Ai to send to me. That was before I had to add Corel into my "toolbox".

 

[bob]

...
I say that's because kids take graphics courses at various colleges or tech schools and Adobe products are all that's available, so that's what they are experienced in, and the ones who have the jobs posted know of no other software that does basically the same thing. I say Photopaint is equal or at least close to Photoshop...

You are correct. Kids coming out of school have only been exposed to certain tools, Adobe being one of those, and thus tend to think that these are the only tools.

When you know nothing a little bit can look very much like everything.

The Corel and the Adobe products are, for the most part, functionally equivalent. Of course saying this is much like touting a Ford truck to a Chevy or Dodge truck aficionado. Regardless of prejudices, the products, both graphics packages and pickup trucks, are fungible.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Regardless of prejudices, the products, both graphics packages and pickup trucks, are fungible.

Not really on the trucks. A chevy 2500 isn't going to have the same functionality as a F-250 if you get into the nitty gritty of it with regard to things like front lockers, weight of trucks etc.

I would say that you are correct as to the graphics packages with regard to Draw versus Ai, but the analogy with regard to trucks isn't quite the same. There are some things that you can do and do safely with one brand versus another.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Personally I have used both Corel and Photoshop. I have no idea why anyone would use Corel. Photoshop in my personal opinion is 1000x better.

+1

 

[SignManiac]

Mac, PC, Corel, AI, Ford,Chevy, Coke, Pepsi, Night, Day.....blah, blah, blah,

 

[adaminjville]

In my experience...

Hello all...I am not a frequent contributor to general posts on here..but this one caught my eye. From a personal standpoint, I find Corel can do most anything that Adobe can do. The manner in which you do those things can vary wildly, but I personally like Corel better. Corel has come a long ways in the past several years and for my money, Adobe is wayyyyyy over priced. At the end of the day, it comes down to what you are familiar and comfortable with. If you learned graphics beginning with Adobe, then 99 out of 100 times you are going to prefer Adobe. Same for Corel. BUT..I can do as much with Corel Draw as 95% of users can do with Photoshop.

Have a great day.

 

[Jim Doggett]

Can you explain why? If it's 1000x time better what is the difference?

Rendering quality, ease-of-use (by a mile), layer effects, filters (included and available third-party), parsing of AI and PDF ... in short, the results are superior and it's faster / easier to do just about anything, in my experience ... having used both for over a decade.

But for vector, or combining PSD bitmaps with outline text/vectors, CorelDRAW, hands down. It smokes Illy, in my opinion.

 

[oldgoatroper]

Corel Painter (which I don't think was originally a Corel product) I think is the only program that would give Photoshop a run for it's money. Although it really depends on what you are doing with the programs in the end. Although I must say, I don't have any experience with Photopaint, just Photoshop and Painter.

Corel Painter is a completely different product than Corel PhotoPaint and would not give Photoshop a run for its money as it has a completely different function set which is a natural media simulation. Its really more of a painting program than an editor.

Corel PaintShop Pro (yet another bitmap editor) was formerly JASC PaintShop Pro which is a very good editor in its own right but has never had the ability to edit in CMYK (it may now, though, I'm not sure).

Corel Photopaint (the one included with CorelDraw) was for many years functionally equivalent to PhotoShop (and may still be) -- in fact, it received PC Mag's Editor's Choice a few times over Adobe's PhotoShop.

There's probably no good reason why most people who use CorelDraw should have to use PhotoShop when they already have PhotoPaint. Myself, I only use PhotoShop because I'm more used to it, not because I ever do anything in PhotoShop that could not be done in PhotoPaint.

 

[oldgoatroper]

Personally I have used both Corel and Photoshop. I have no idea why anyone would use Corel. Photoshop in my personal opinion is 1000x better.

1,000 times better? That's a pretty awesome claim. I bet if you could actually substantiate that claim, Adobe might pay you big bucks for your testimonial...

 

[bob]

Not really on the trucks. A chevy 2500 isn't going to have the same functionality as a F-250 if you get into the nitty gritty of it with regard to things like front lockers, weight of trucks etc...

Twaddle. Either will pull my gooseneck wherever I want to go. There is no place that one can go that the other cannot, there is no load that one can carry that the other cannot.

Think functionality, not how that functionality is achieved.

 

[Jim Doggett]

...for my money, Adobe is wayyyyyy over priced.

No doubt. Spendy as heck. But even an older, and more affordable copy, of Photoshop is the bomb for bitmap editing. In fact, I prefer older versions. I think Photoshop hit its head on the ceiling a few revs ago. They gotta keep developing it to sell upgrades; their business relies on it. But the newer Photoshop versions are over-burdened and not as as easy nor as intuitive, in my opinion. So cheaper can be better, even, I think.

Heck; even get a copy of Photoshop 7, for $50 or less online, and try it. It's simply an amazingly good product, and best in its class by a mile, I believe.

 

[CanuckSigns]

Photoshop has much better aftermarket suport such as plug-ins and many online tutorials, I use CorelDraw as my day to day design program and I love it, but photoshop is better supported.

But like Bob said, it comes down to the dummy with the mouse, not the program!

 

[oldgoatroper]

No doubt. Spendy as heck. But even an older, and more affordable copy, of Photoshop is the bomb for bitmap editing. In fact, I prefer older versions. I think Photoshop hit its head on the ceiling a few revs ago. They gotta keep developing it to sell upgrades; their business relies on it. But the newer Photoshop versions are over-burdened and not as as easy nor as intuitive, in my opinion. So cheaper can be better, even, I think.

Heck; even get a copy of Photoshop 7, for $50 or less online, and try it. It's simply an amazingly good product, and best in its class by a mile, I believe.

I agree with Jim about the code bloat in later versions. Photoshop 7 is what I use and, for the most part, is all I need. It does have little hiccups when rendering PDFs or EPSs that PhotoShop6 or CS versions don't, though.

 

[oldgoatroper]

Photoshop has much better aftermarket suport such as plug-ins and many online tutorials, I use CorelDraw as my day to day design program and I love it, but photoshop is better supported.
program!

I have a number of plugins and have not come across a single one that did not work equally well in PhotoShop and PhotoPaint.