[Asurfael]

Painter simulates natural medias, so if you want to draw a painting on your computer that looks like watercolour it's easier than on photoshop. Although you can simulate watercolour in photoshop too, you just need to experiment with the painting style.

In other words, if you want your drawings to look like paintings made with traditional mediums, painter is probably better. On the other hand, photoshop's more versatile and offers customizations that can do the same. It's just harder to get it to look like watercolour, for example. In addition, photoshop has a lot of photo manipulation tools and so forth.

Shortening: Painter simulates natural media, photoshop's more versatile. It's up to you whether you decide to use.

Just my opinion though.

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: Asurfael ]

[roundeye]

people who use painter are generally what we call "bottoms", and the people who use PS are generally refered to as 'tops".

hope this answers your question.

[faB]

The popular view is that Painter is for 'painterly' things. The problem is that often it is said in a condescendent tone by 3d artists who dont have a serious artistic formation and who disregard Painter as a toy to make splashes of colour but npot serious to make fine detailed work.

EDIT: this is illustrated very well by the incredibly ignorant post of mr 'roundeye' above.

The truth is that both programs are overly excellent and both excel in different areas, which is GREAT. More tools for the artists.

EDIT2: I checked roundeye's gallery and I assume everything is done with Photoshop then. It's pretty good. I think the point is you can do these in Painter, and the reverse is also true a lot of Painter stuff could be done in PS, but the process to create the pictures would differ.

In the end, if you had to choose just one package, Photoshop is more versatile.

I reckon that I would like myself to use just one package, for simplicity's sake and be really proficient with just PS, but when I started I thought it was difficult to get 'substance' and create something expressive in Photoshop. Using Painter gave me a lot of ideas that I could try in Photoshop with blends and layers.

The pics on my lil' homepage were done in Painter Classic, I dont think they look painterly. And I've tons more stuff to discover in Painter.

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: faB ]

[Jelo]

Not to mentions PS incredibly fast smudge tool.. koff!...koff! (no smudge is not lame it's some thing real artist do in the real world to ) Painter simply rocks when it comes to smear pixels around. And it has much better brush stroke smothing.

[eyewoo]

Oh well... gotta say it. I'm with roundeye's comment...

...and I may as well push my mantra. If you want to simulate traditional media, why not use traditional media instead. If you want to explore the true essence of digital painting and manipulation, then use Photoshop.

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: eyewoo ]

[jr]

roundeye is right, there are two types of people in this world, winners and painter users. winners or photoshop users, perfer it's versatility. painter is a pretty neat program and you can use it like real paints.

[iByrn]

Bah. I know of several pro artists (a couple were concept artists for Attack of the Clones) who use both Painter and PS. You can't just lump people into "winners" and "Painter users".

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: iByrn ]

[Sharper-Image]

I agree with iByrn. There are pros and cons to each piece of software.

Yes, roundeye is incredible. As are many other Photoshop-only artist. But just for piece of mind, some great Painter artists include: Jason Manley, Andrew Jones, Don Seegmiller, and I believe Craig is going through the motions of learning Painter as well.

It has a lot to offer, just as Photoshop does.

Lastly, I'm so sick of the Photoshop Vs. Painter threads!*$&*%$&*#&

Edit: I find it hilarious how "faB" started out trying to belittle roundeye until he saw his work and completely recoiled. Haha.

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: Tree Merchant ]

[keyth]

i like painter.

[Mag82]

Hi guys!
I stumbles across more than just a few comments regarding painter... I won Photoshop and barely got familiar with the basic functions along with a pad. So what's the big difference that makes some ppl use Painter instead of/in addition to Photoshop?

[Pat]

I've used Painter for a considerable amount of time and I laugh at the notion that Painter "simulates" natural media. That's always been it's strongest selling point --but that's certainly not it's strength as a painting program. In reality, Painter is a poor substitute for the natural behavior of analog painting materials. A careful inventory of its "natural media" effects finds them often times limited, frustratingly un-natural and painfully slow. Whoever heard of a yellow wax crayon that, when you layer enough strokes on the canvas, makes a black mark? Ready to write off Painter yet? Don't.

What Painter does have is the most amazing and versatile brush engine ever designed. Period. To hell with the notion that it simulates natural media. It can simulate almost any type of mark-making stroke you could conceptualize, the majority of them quite unnatural. Think about what this means to a digital artist. That's where the real meat of Painter is. Photoshop is a different paradigm entirely. Instead of leveraging the power of an amazing brush engine, it shifts those responsibilities to its unparalleled layer and layer mask abilities. A careful understanding of either program --and a little patience-- can get you anywhere you want to go.

So don't be fooled. Painter is every bit the equal of Photoshop -it's just far more arcane and poorly documented. If you're trying to learn Painter, just keep in mind my Painter theorem: For each and every perceived shortcoming in Painter there is an equal and opposite advantage which is not generally apparent.

Lastly, if there is such a thing as "the true essence of digital painting" it's what happens in your head --not what the program does for you.

-Pat

[ July 30, 2002: Message edited by: Pat ]

[FSME]

I try to get used to Painter but it's kinda hard seeing through all those options you have. I also miss the selecting tools A LOT. This is where you can't beat Photoshop: the masking and selecting tools are just invaluable!

[DeathJester]

Use whatever you feel comfortable with.

I use both. Im "middle"

[Lunatique]

I tried painter on and off for about a year, but never REALLY learned it. I thought it was unecessarily complex, with a horrible UI.

One day, I made myself sit down and REALLY learn Painter.

Well, since that day, I've not stopped using it. I use it at a 50/50 ratio to Photoshop. It's the perfect combination for me. Both programs have tools that the other don't have.

Listen to Pat. He's one of the few Painter guru's around here. Jin is another one. *Waits for Jin to appear from thin air*

[Mag82]

hey thanks you guys!
Since I wanna use legal software (which is VERY expensive, especially for students not being involved in a class) I actually wanted to learn about the stuff those last few posts offered.

Gosh, some of you kinda sound like children: "m ytoy is better than yours"...
I wasn't aiming at that.

So am I right in saying that it's just a matter of handling the two programs? I just switched from Paint Shop Pro to Photoshop and kinda had an "interface shock" where I didn't know how to move pasted stuff, for example, and how to use some other functions. So... working with Painter is gonna be different AGAIN, right?

[Indian_Prophet]

Mag
Once you sift threw the childish comments go and re-read Pat's post if you haven't already. Both of these apps have there pros and cons but both are very useful to express your existing talent. Be prepared to spend some time with painter's interface for it has many options with tiny little drop down menus in which each of those have another 10 tweaking options, a bit more complicated than PS. I would say that 50% of painters options are mostly just toys which you may or may not use. One day if/when you can afford it, if you're serious about digital art, you'll want both of these programs but because PS is much more versatile in functions you'll want to start out with it versus painter. No doubt there, expecially there are other projects you want to do like web page design and so forth.
What Pat says is right on the mark and very much relays in essence what it is to use painter.
"For each and every perceived shortcoming in Painter there is an equal and opposite advantage which is not generally apparent."

Funny stuff Pat.


Peace