you need both, no way around it. You could get by with just PS, but Illustrator is a great program.
I go back and forth between them, sometimes importaing the PS image into Il and sometimes bringin in Il files into PS - just depends on what I am doing.
I was able to buy the complete CS 2 from my school for $230. If you need student copies, check with your school's IT department, but if it is for professional work, shell out the cash and allow your client base to pay for it-because it should.
So do the trial download of both programs, and learn a bit more about what you need so you know what to buy. You'll probably end up buying both eventually, but you might be able to get by on one while you save up for the other.
bigness- Europe and America aren't *that* different. My guess is that this guy needs it for professional reasons. Or they don't have many friends at their university, who could have clued them in to this circumstance.
If you are a student, make friends with people who have software, and ask them how they got it. If you have not gotten what bigness and I are hinting at, I'm sure they will explain it to you.
I used to fly the jolly roger, but I'm really glad I spent the money on legit stuff for school. It's nice to get auto-updates and patches that are usually unavailable to software booty. You typically have a lot few conflicts and stability issues. I know people will try to install bootleg stuff and then something real and it messes stuff up, sometimes to the point that they need to redo their computers.
rationalist,he's a student, that's why i was askin. you obviously havent followed the soulikeit quest for a higher level Architectural knowledge on archinect.
Photoshop = pixel based image editing program ( use for editing photographs, renderings, etc )
Illustrator = vector based graphics program ( use for drawing and creating graphics )
Its so obvious when you see boards that people tried to use photoshop to draw lines and such in, they just arent as crisp as you get with vector based graphics done in Illustrator.
Bottom line, use photoshop to edit pixel based images, use illustrator to draw.
Harold- Presentation boards can be done in either. Indesign is good if you have all your graphics ready and just are laying them out on the page and also if there are multiple pages you can see them side by side rather then in different files as they would be in Illustrator. However, if your boards are going to contain some kind of graphics other than images that you are linking to, it is most likely easier to do in Illustrator, even though Indesign has vector based graphics as well.
I'm always amazed that some people don't know the fundamental difference between photoshop and illustrator.
I'm pretty well versed in both, but I can't, for the life of me, get into using InDesign. I really tried, knowing that it is for laying out, but I ended up doing my portfolio without it.
Am I missing something about InDesign? Can anyone tell me something really useful that might inspire me to use it more? I hate it when the screen doesn't look anything like what prints. Anyway, I digress...
can u come up with a simple presentation style newsletter type format with photoshop or illustrator. i know u can do it with photoshop. wat about illustrator?
You can do page layout in Illustrator, but there will be drawbacks. I have found raster images imported into an Illustrator document never quite print out as well as coming straight from Photoshop. Photoshop, on the other hand, doesn't handle text as well as Illustrator.
ClemsonDnB was right on the money about these tools, although I believe InDesign is far better for page layout. There are specific things they do well and they each have their drawbacks because of this.
In spite of what GtHtAu. says, InDesign is the tool to use here. It takes layered PD images nicely, Illustrator files retain their crisp lines, and it accepts just about any format you can throw at it. And it's pretty easy to learn the basics of.
"I hate it when the screen doesn't look anything like what prints." If you aren't in the text tool of InDesign, hit the w key and voila- InDesign has a preview mode. The buttons for this are at the bottom of the toolbar as well.
Look into education pricing of the Adobe Creative Suite. If you only have money for just one, I would make it Photoshop.
I find that maintaining autocad level lineweight quality extremely difficult in EITHER program, especially photoshop.. I've been in a few different offices that print autocad drawings to .pdf so they can render elevations, but the lineweights are VERY muddy..... yet trying to render elevations in AutoCad is incredibly archaic...
Typically, I have PS, Illustrator and InDesign open (plus cad and a 3D program). I use PS for Raster work (renderings enhancement typically), Illustrator for Vector line work (reworking cad files, diagrams) and Indesign to put it all together. I really prefer the control I have over text in Indesign and multiple pages and spread work. I don't understand why the keyboard commands are not the same in all the programs (the place command for example) or that some of the UI stuff is not consistent, but in general I have found myself pretty adept with this workflow. I also work on a dual monitor set up which helps with the palettes, but the one thing to remember is that you have to minimize the programs otherwise you get a layering of palettes which can get confusing if you have 3 character palettes on top of each other.
... it's the "reworking" of the CAD files in Illustrator that I have a problem with. If I've taken the time to draw with the proper lineweights in CAD, I shouldn't have to redo that in another program... I want to take my CAD file and add photoshop level color rendering to it, but that seems to be impossible without sacrificing the lineweights....
I guess this is why I'd be an advocate for the ability to render in AutoCAD, as this is where you have the most control of the line weights..
One of the problems is that Autodesk is maintains a tight hold on its file formats. DXF is a dog of a format, and they won't let anyone get a good look at the DWG protocols, so any program that can read them has basically had to reverse engineer them. As my kindergarten teacher used to say, "Doesn't play well with others".
I'm also not happy with Adobe tinkering with the TIF format to allow layers, but that's a rant for another time.
what i do is export the CAD files as eps format and then open it in photoshop for touch-up or rendering. most of the time my lineweights are decent just a little faint but some 'multiply' or adjusting brightness/contrast should do the trick.
plan to try and open the eps files to illustrator in the future..
yup, TIFF files with layers sucks. Can't tell you how many times I look at the size and wonder if I forgot to compress it or flatten it (due to the bloated size). It was a stupid idea. PSD=layers TIFF=flat.
curtclay - you have to create the boundaries for the fill in illustrator anyhow, so you might was well use that time to create the line weights. You'd think Autodesk would offer some kind of export option, or maybe even a plugin to make it cleaner, though. DWG's are just a nightmare outside of Acad.
I am using both because both are very important. Illustrator is best for the vector graphic and Photoshop is also very useful for designing. I was found a good website which offer the good vector illustrations so you can also check here. Download Free Compass Vector
Mar 24, 13 5:47 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
graphic design -------- photoshop or Illustrator
which side are you on?
and how fast do u take to learn to use the program
You do anything serious, you have both programs open and place the PS images in the Illustrator document.
If I had to choose though, I would say PS is more basic.
I need both ... the vector quality in Illustrator is a major +
both are easy to learn tho ...
but tough to master !!
you probably need both as they do totally different things. otherwise it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges.
what doberman said...
what you can do with one is limited witout the other
you need both, no way around it. You could get by with just PS, but Illustrator is a great program.
I go back and forth between them, sometimes importaing the PS image into Il and sometimes bringin in Il files into PS - just depends on what I am doing.
illustrator and photo shop will cost me a good 1 K?
anyone know how i can get cheaper copies?
mmm ... dont know how you can get cheaper ones .. maybe there'll be someone selling it at a bargain corner around your n'hood..
the other option ... ( which you don't wanna try) is - pirated
both are needed. definitely
I was able to buy the complete CS 2 from my school for $230. If you need student copies, check with your school's IT department, but if it is for professional work, shell out the cash and allow your client base to pay for it-because it should.
^^ that seems to be a good idea..
if you need it for a limited time, do the adobe trial download. it lasts for 30 days and is a full version.
So do the trial download of both programs, and learn a bit more about what you need so you know what to buy. You'll probably end up buying both eventually, but you might be able to get by on one while you save up for the other.
is it a custom in the states for students to buy the software they need for university?
cuz, you know, in europe...
You can get their packages/suites for pretty good deals. Look over their site, it certainly saves a ton if you buy them all at once.
bigness- Europe and America aren't *that* different. My guess is that this guy needs it for professional reasons. Or they don't have many friends at their university, who could have clued them in to this circumstance.
Both, 100%. Like everyone is saying. If you are a student, look into academic rates. Got CS1 from academicsuperstore last year for $380.
If you are a student, make friends with people who have software, and ask them how they got it. If you have not gotten what bigness and I are hinting at, I'm sure they will explain it to you.
I used to fly the jolly roger, but I'm really glad I spent the money on legit stuff for school. It's nice to get auto-updates and patches that are usually unavailable to software booty. You typically have a lot few conflicts and stability issues. I know people will try to install bootleg stuff and then something real and it messes stuff up, sometimes to the point that they need to redo their computers.
Toothbrush or dental floss?
Which side are you on?
rationalist,he's a student, that's why i was askin. you obviously havent followed the soulikeit quest for a higher level Architectural knowledge on archinect.
me.
photoshop = image editing
illustrator = presentation board compositing
What do they do in Europe? Is software subsidised by the government just like everything else? sometimes I wish I lived in socialist utopia ...
socialist utopia = oxymoron
No, it's just that in Europe (and in America too), students don't bother with things like paying...
Well, you already get cheap tuition, why not free software too!
yeah, we also get free beers and ho's.
765...grudge against your european cousins?
BTW, what is better for presentationboards......illustrator or indesign?
Photoshop = pixel based image editing program ( use for editing photographs, renderings, etc )
Illustrator = vector based graphics program ( use for drawing and creating graphics )
Its so obvious when you see boards that people tried to use photoshop to draw lines and such in, they just arent as crisp as you get with vector based graphics done in Illustrator.
Bottom line, use photoshop to edit pixel based images, use illustrator to draw.
Harold- Presentation boards can be done in either. Indesign is good if you have all your graphics ready and just are laying them out on the page and also if there are multiple pages you can see them side by side rather then in different files as they would be in Illustrator. However, if your boards are going to contain some kind of graphics other than images that you are linking to, it is most likely easier to do in Illustrator, even though Indesign has vector based graphics as well.
I'm always amazed that some people don't know the fundamental difference between photoshop and illustrator.
I'm pretty well versed in both, but I can't, for the life of me, get into using InDesign. I really tried, knowing that it is for laying out, but I ended up doing my portfolio without it.
Am I missing something about InDesign? Can anyone tell me something really useful that might inspire me to use it more? I hate it when the screen doesn't look anything like what prints. Anyway, I digress...
just want to clear some doubts..........
can u come up with a simple presentation style newsletter type format with photoshop or illustrator. i know u can do it with photoshop. wat about illustrator?
You can do page layout in Illustrator, but there will be drawbacks. I have found raster images imported into an Illustrator document never quite print out as well as coming straight from Photoshop. Photoshop, on the other hand, doesn't handle text as well as Illustrator.
ClemsonDnB was right on the money about these tools, although I believe InDesign is far better for page layout. There are specific things they do well and they each have their drawbacks because of this.
In spite of what GtHtAu. says, InDesign is the tool to use here. It takes layered PD images nicely, Illustrator files retain their crisp lines, and it accepts just about any format you can throw at it. And it's pretty easy to learn the basics of.
"I hate it when the screen doesn't look anything like what prints." If you aren't in the text tool of InDesign, hit the w key and voila- InDesign has a preview mode. The buttons for this are at the bottom of the toolbar as well.
Look into education pricing of the Adobe Creative Suite. If you only have money for just one, I would make it Photoshop.
I find that maintaining autocad level lineweight quality extremely difficult in EITHER program, especially photoshop.. I've been in a few different offices that print autocad drawings to .pdf so they can render elevations, but the lineweights are VERY muddy..... yet trying to render elevations in AutoCad is incredibly archaic...
I don't know what the answer is yet...
you end up tracing the elevations in Illustrator again anyhow, so it really works out ok as far as line weights go (at least in my experience)
Typically, I have PS, Illustrator and InDesign open (plus cad and a 3D program). I use PS for Raster work (renderings enhancement typically), Illustrator for Vector line work (reworking cad files, diagrams) and Indesign to put it all together. I really prefer the control I have over text in Indesign and multiple pages and spread work. I don't understand why the keyboard commands are not the same in all the programs (the place command for example) or that some of the UI stuff is not consistent, but in general I have found myself pretty adept with this workflow. I also work on a dual monitor set up which helps with the palettes, but the one thing to remember is that you have to minimize the programs otherwise you get a layering of palettes which can get confusing if you have 3 character palettes on top of each other.
... it's the "reworking" of the CAD files in Illustrator that I have a problem with. If I've taken the time to draw with the proper lineweights in CAD, I shouldn't have to redo that in another program... I want to take my CAD file and add photoshop level color rendering to it, but that seems to be impossible without sacrificing the lineweights....
I guess this is why I'd be an advocate for the ability to render in AutoCAD, as this is where you have the most control of the line weights..
One of the problems is that Autodesk is maintains a tight hold on its file formats. DXF is a dog of a format, and they won't let anyone get a good look at the DWG protocols, so any program that can read them has basically had to reverse engineer them. As my kindergarten teacher used to say, "Doesn't play well with others".
I'm also not happy with Adobe tinkering with the TIF format to allow layers, but that's a rant for another time.
what i do is export the CAD files as eps format and then open it in photoshop for touch-up or rendering. most of the time my lineweights are decent just a little faint but some 'multiply' or adjusting brightness/contrast should do the trick.
plan to try and open the eps files to illustrator in the future..
yup, TIFF files with layers sucks. Can't tell you how many times I look at the size and wonder if I forgot to compress it or flatten it (due to the bloated size). It was a stupid idea. PSD=layers TIFF=flat.
curtclay - you have to create the boundaries for the fill in illustrator anyhow, so you might was well use that time to create the line weights. You'd think Autodesk would offer some kind of export option, or maybe even a plugin to make it cleaner, though. DWG's are just a nightmare outside of Acad.
Trace: In AutoCAD, why not print out what you want as a PDF file and convert it to a jpg, then play with it in Photoshop from there?
recovering,
lineweight redux is what happens when you print dwg to pdf... the quality of the line work just plain sucks...
Illustrator is used more by graphic design offices.
InDesign/Quark are ideal for multi-page presentations (books, magazines, portfolios).
What does Illustrator do that InDesign/Quark can not?
I am using both because both are very important. Illustrator is best for the vector graphic and Photoshop is also very useful for designing. I was found a good website which offer the good vector illustrations so you can also check here. Download Free Compass Vector
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.