Painter 11-Thanks Corel...

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  03 March 2009
Originally Posted by Tim3308: Like Simon, I do 100% of my painting in Painter —yet I am stunned what I see coming out of hardcore PS illustrators -- I just about literally don't know how they do it.


Me too. I used PS for several days and I literally couldn't get it to paint a single "painterly" stroke. I could get it to produce something that looked like varnish but blend and bleed? Forget about it.

Yesterday I did spend a while on Adobe's site and I didn't find one single reference to using PS to paint. Not one. I don't particularly like PS to be honest but Adobe certainly seem to know who they're targetting - and it isn't us painters.


And regarding the white banding, oddly enough it's still there for some brushes (e.g. acrylics) and not for others (e.g. artists' oils)


Originally Posted by John Keates: I can't bring myself to upgrade until that is fixed or there is a "summon beautiful woman" button!


Don't say that or v12 will have a function that imports a random photo of a woman, applies a filter and plays a loud TA-DA!
 
  03 March 2009
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc:
About that Beta: I went to sign up for it a couple of months ago. However, I was unable to because Corel’s website refused to recognize Firefox or Safari as a valid browser, and went so far as to “suggest” I use Internet Explorer 4 - 6(!). Simply: I said forget about it. BTW: It was only recently that their main website was half usable.



Ah! that may well explain why my application was not accepted. I used Safari as the browser, so the form was probably never sent/recieved

David
__________________
Jitterbrush.com
 
  03 March 2009
Check out the Photoshop brushes on Alex Dukal's blog. I have not tried them myself, as being a Painter hobbyist, I don't have Photoshop.

David
__________________
Jitterbrush.com
 
  03 March 2009
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by Tim3308:
I have a dumb question like, can you work on different " papers" in PS? Do they have brushes that pick up this texture (it seems to me the certain brushes impart the texture only, not related to the canvas paper, right)? Does PS have adjustable color variability on strokes like P? I am told the adjustment on brush tools is very limited compared to P, true?
Does PS CS4 have a leap in the brush engine over CS3 (my current version).

Is there a book one can recommend to an experienced user of P and PS (but not in painting in PS)? Example the Painter "Wow" series really do shine in getting "devil in the details" hints to self motivated Painter uses into messing and tweaking w/stuff they might not be ware of in Painter.

T


Regarding the first question just check the texture settings in the brush properties and choose any texture/patterns that u like. As well as the color dynamics. Other dynamics and all the stuff u can think of is in there.

The app ships with tons of presets for those and u can make ur own as well download them from the web. I think if u are the experimenting type u will find painting in photoshop a lot breezier than painter and I can tell u that I have used both as pro software. Once u get around the fact that u won't get automatic blending in photoshop but for all intents and purposes THAT is the only real limitation ( I am not talking oils/water colors of painter here. IMHO they are a joke for print res work anyway).

Everywhere else photoshop ( especially the latest monster : CS4 64bit ) just plain rocks if u have a beefy system to run it. I can work on 25+ layers for an image @ 9225x4650 pixels and it runs like the wind.

maybe u can think of painter engine vs photoshop engine as oils vs acrylics ( one takes a long time to dry and u can have colors blending while the other tends to dry off very very fast )

For the second question, I would recommend trying out some massive black dvds if u want to look but its a no brainer once u understand the brush engine in photoshop. After that Imagination is the limit.
Honest.

Just by looking at the range and style of work done in photoshop amazes me at the veritality of this medium and ingenuity of the people who use it for digital painting.
 
  03 March 2009
Unhappy

Originally Posted by BaronImpossible: Me too. I used PS for several days and I literally couldn't get it to paint a single "painterly" stroke.


Uhh, gulp.

Quote: but blend and bleed? Forget about it.


Really. Again, really? Wow. If I can NOT do that -- total deal breaker.I smudge/blend the crap outta my work as I go along. I HAVE to have that. When I painted w/ traditional media, I used my fingers in oils (and obviously pastels) as much as the brush! It is my whole background.



Quote: Yesterday I did spend a while on Adobe's site and I didn't find one single reference to using PS to paint. Not one. I don't particularly like PS to be honest but Adobe certainly seem to know who they're targetting - and it isn't us painters.


A tad ironic, wouldn't you say?


Quote: And regarding the white banding, oddly enough it's still there for some brushes (e.g. acrylics) and not for others (e.g. artists' oils)


Interesting. But I'm not even gonna experiment w/ it , as there are so many other problems w/ 11, I really don't care.

Thank you, Simon.

T
 
  03 March 2009
Quote: [QUOTE=ubermensch76]Regarding the first question just check the texture settings in the brush properties and choose any texture/patterns that u like. As well as the color dynamics. Other dynamics and all the stuff u can think of is in there.


Okay, Checked it out. I see. Nice textures in there. Told you I was green.

Quote: The app ships with tons of presets for those and u can make ur own as well download them from the web. I think if u are the experimenting type


I am. Bought Painter (ver 7) and my first Power Mac (OS X.1 had just hit), after watching a close friend mess w/ Painter. I was 85% ignorant on a computer. Lied to the art director that I had been digital for 6 months (in that day, art directors were still leery of illustrators being digital --I swear). Took large gulps of obsessive compulsive disorder and after 3 days produced my first digital book cover. I'd call that "experimenting"! My buddy said my knowledge passed him after a week.

Quote: u will find painting in photoshop a lot breezier than painter and I can tell u that I have used both as pro software. Once u get around the fact that u won't get automatic blending in photoshop but for all intents and purposes THAT is the only real limitation ( I am not talking oils/water colors of painter here.


Unfortunately, Uber, I am talking about that type of media. If Simon is dead on about no bleed and blend, that is a PS deal killer. That sucks, to be blunt.

Quote: IMHO they are a joke for print res work anyway).


I strongly disagree. Example: The red dragon on my site here on CG, (way more stuff on my own site timjessell.com, was done for a large west coast outfit, that produces a tone of fantasy/sci fi art. The main art director is a killer illustrator in his own right. When he saw my hi rez large file (which does translate to print),he surmised my art was traditional--I took that as huge compliment. I fooled 'em again. Up close my work has "covered" and not covered canvas texture (like real paintings), and impasto highlights. Like I said, I fool 'em. I work "tradigitally". While I'm knocked out by the work I see done in PS, I guess some of my goals are not in the PS world?

Quote: Everywhere else photoshop ( especially the latest monster : CS4 64bit ) just plain rocks if u have a beefy system to run it. I can work on 25+ layers for an image @ 9225x4650 pixels and it runs like the wind.


Ha, you are a PC guy. While I know the Mac is a better format (please no argument there, accept it ), it was quite the news in the Mac community when PS CS4 version for Mac stayed at 32 bit -- but, it really only applies to MEGA huge files. But yes, I have no doubt you are screaming through files (Painter is "childish" in speed aspects and plenty of top hardware wasted on my Mac Pro)... and is a teasing attraction for Painter folks to PS.

Quote: maybe u can think of painter engine vs photoshop engine as oils vs acrylics ( one takes a long time to dry and u can have colors blending while the other tends to dry off very very fast )


I can see that, good analogy.

Quote: For the second question, I would recommend trying out some massive black dvds if u want to look but its a no brainer once u understand the brush engine in photoshop. After that Imagination is the limit.
Honest.


Okay, so there's no defacto book you would send a guy like me too? Like if someone's pretty good in painter, invariabley he's sent to a Segmiller book at some point (or the Wow! series). As far as massive black goes -- if it's mostly Ryan Church type work, while glorius (but the detail in the work or lack there of, I realize it's on purpose) they are really sc-fi architectural renderings (w/ very dramatic lighting) -- it 100% doesn't send me, and not what I look for for personal inspiration. The ruff "concept" stuff is just not my scene (hardly knew that niche even existed, to be honest -- I'm a Society of Illustrators type guy. I've never played a networked video game in my life, w/ my dateless buddies after working hours ). Then again MB is so big they have everything, right?


Quote: Just by looking at the range and style of work done in photoshop amazes me at the veritality of this medium and ingenuity of the people who use it for digital painting.



I have mentioned this before: Here's how Painter vs. Photoshop was once explained to me in terms of producing illustrative work. Painter is about painting, PS is about knowing tricks. Those PS guys are real good and "tricksters" -- that's why I don't know what the world I'm looking at when I see their work -- what's painted, what's "tricks", ya know? It's not a criticism, but I wanna know how it's done, intuitively, if you will. Folks can be dumfounded by Painter's complex brush engine, but sheezzz, PS is a bottomless pit on what's in that program. Humbling.

But I remain very afraid, very skeptacle if I cannot bleed, smudge, and get gooey w/ PS

Also, are there improvements to the brush engine in CS4 vs CS3 version?

T

Last edited by Tim3308 : 03 March 2009 at 10:08 PM.
 
  03 March 2009
Originally Posted by ubermensch76: http://pelicanosypescados.blogspot....oshop-free.html

try this !


Thanks Uber, downloaded (though was not easy w/ his weird links) it and installed it, played a few minutes w/ them. Good stuff, and very nice resource (Lord knows PS casts a much wider net on the web than Painter) but they seem like varied chalks in painter w/85% less user "controlled". Is that fair?
 
  03 March 2009
Looks like my prediction is about to come true--Adobe is on the move now:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthr...864#post5713864

Regarding painting in Photoshop--I actually mastered PS before I got started in Painter and it took a bit of hardcore adjusting for me to start to get comfortable in Painter, but to date I still feel much more comfortable in PS. As already mentioned, the ONLY thing I miss in PS is the lack of wet-on-wet styled blending/bleed, but other than that, I really have no complaints in general--except maybe I'd like a Painter styled color picker in PS, or the perspective tool.

If you guys take a look at my portfolio--can you tell which ones are done 100% in Painter, Photoshop, or mixture of both?

Back in the day when Craig Mullins (www.goodbrush.com) talked about his take on the difference between painting in PS and Painter, he said that PS required one to think along the lines of gouache, the way that Syd Mead uses it. I would add to that and say you have to think of PS as a dry media--it doesn' "blend" technically, but you don't need to blend anything if you know how to control the opacity of your brushstrokes with pen pressure. And you CAN do blending successfully in PS if you know how to customize the Smudge tool according to your own preference. Some people will uncheck the Spacing for a faster response, and some people will use speckled brushes for a more organic look. Take a look at this thread for Linda Bergkvists' very helpful tips:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=253711

The trick in using Photoshop brushes is to play around with the various settings like scattering, dual brush, texture, brush shapes, opacity/size control with pen pressure...etc. But the truth is, even with just the default hard-edged round brush, you can do amazing things--that's why Craig often did--just the default round brush.
 
  03 March 2009
Originally Posted by Lunatique: Looks like my prediction is about to come true--Adobe is on the move now:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthr...864#post5713864

Quote: Hi, I'm the creator of MoXi. I think I should surface and give you some update.

Thanks to joeparis for mentioning MoXi. Yes, Adobe licensed MoXi in 2006. I can't tell what they are doing with it, though.

I now work for Microsoft in Redmond, WA. I'm still working on digital painting thingy, but I'm afraid I can't tell much here. All I can say is that if things go well, you will have a very good upgrade on what would be available as painting software. I can assure you that technologically there's no problem. It's all just business decision.



Cheers,
Nelson Chu

Dear Gawd, please don't let it be Microsoft, for the sake of all that is holy. I couldn't think of a worse company for this guy to schlep for, other than HIS paycheck (yes, Mac guy talking here)

Never heard of MoXi (wow fantastic water color stuff), now I know why. Robert, I've heard rumors/wishes of Adobe swallowing up a great brush engine (even Apple) from now Corel or to directly compete --wouldn't they call it "Paintershop"(?(Edit:that's dumb, it would be "Artshop"?) since I first learned how to log onto the web. The nugget above sure puts another log on the fire. I'm surprised Adobe hasn't ran down Painter 5 years ago, aren't you?




Quote: Regarding painting in Photoshop--I actually mastered PS before I got started in Painter and it took a bit of hardcore adjusting for me to start to get comfortable in Painter, but to date I still feel much more comfortable in PS.


"Your roots call you home", eh Robert (beautiful work, btw!)?

As my story said, I started painting w/ Painter(7) first (admittedly on good advice being a non digital guy at that point) -- so I dig my talons in a little harder on things I don't want to give up from painter.

an earlier quote from you (your site) rings true to me, looking at both apps:

Quote: I could never go back to using just Photoshop ever again. Painting in Painter is really a joy compared to Photoshop. This is especially true for people that have worked with traditional tools and missed them when painting in Photoshop.




Quote: As already mentioned, the ONLY thing I miss in PS is the lack of wet-on-wet styled blending/bleed,


Ha! Said "talons"


Quote: but other than that, I really have no complaints in general--except maybe I'd like a Painter styled color picker in PS, or the perspective tool.


Here, here, the PS color picker stinks. The one that pops up is kinda nice, but the one that stays on screen, well looks like for a photo editing program.

Quote: If you guys take a look at my portfolio--can you tell which ones are done 100% in Painter, Photoshop, or mixture of both?


No fair, your a very "smooth as baby's butt" style painter -- hiding your tracks well in PS or P.

Quote: Back in the day when Craig Mullins (www.goodbrush.com) talked about his take on the difference between painting in PS and Painter, he said that PS required one to think along the lines of gouache, the way that Syd Mead uses it
.

Roger, and why I would never pick gouache over oils -- considering they don't have to dry digitally!

Quote: I would add to that and say you have to think of PS as a dry media--it doesn' "blend" technically, but you don't need to blend anything if you know how to control the opacity of your brushstrokes with pen pressure. And you CAN do blending successfully in PS if you know how to customize the Smudge tool according to your own preference. Some people will uncheck the Spacing for a faster response, and some people will use speckled brushes for a more organic look. Take a look at this thread for Linda Bergkvists' very helpful tips:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=253711


Informative. Not sure how much I understood, but informative.

Quote: The trick in using Photoshop brushes is to play around with the various settings like scattering, dual brush, texture, brush shapes, opacity/size control with pen pressure...etc. But the truth is, even with just the default hard-edged round brush, you can do amazing things--that's why Craig often did--just the default round brush.


Not surprised. Those guys could paint w/hot colored waxed dripped all over, and pull it off w/ their "comp" styles (that's what their stuff looks like close in, especially Mullins). It's hard to find almost digital scribbles like he and Church do yet amazingly(!) pull together an image so well? Just looking at all those "concept" pieces gets old for me fast (space ships/weird architecture, very rough character paintings, landscape work thrown in) but hey that's their bag, and how they feed the bulldog. I'm old school -- I'd rather see Gary Kelley, Braldt Bralds, Brad Holland, Carter Goodrich, N.C. Wyeth, David Grove, Thomas Balckshear, Greg Couch, Frazetta, John Rush, Michael Deas, Daniel Craig (now a photoshop painter -- still can't believe how he does it -- I just flat out don't see it in PS. Like Simon, I don't get it) --- good old straight out of the halls of the society of illustrators stuff/subject matter pulled off in Photoshop. I know all of them could likely get going in Painter faster, again considering your quote above.

Last edited by Tim3308 : 03 March 2009 at 06:33 AM.
 
  03 March 2009
I have a traditional Fine arts background . My area of specialization for the final year was portraiture and abstract. I picked up digital painting about 3 years ago when finally I picked up the wacom and now a cintiq running on a mac pro 2008 ( so Tim3308 u know now that I am not anti mac but for photoshop 64 I have to run vista which is a great OS all things said and done but anyways that is not the point here.

When I was asked to produce full color artwork I picked painter as my app of choice and the rest of the studio was using Photoshop considering that its natural media emulation would suit my traditional media sensibility. Be that as it may I soon found agonizing slow down in updates, brush lags etc ( mind u I am proficient in cg stuff and no sluch in getting aroud limitations ) and THAT is the killer for any creaitve process.

Some guys picked up painter after looking me using it. Having learnt a serious lesson , for the next project I used a hybrid painter/PS workflow by which time I realized photoshop is no slouch in that dept. Blending stuf I can do with out. There are ways to get that effect in photoshop ( my fav method is picking up nearby colors and painting them in ) .

Finally for my current one its all photoshop 64 once I got comfortable with the software for digital painting and knowing I can open a triple page spread ( graphic novel lingo ) and work on it with almost no performance hit it was the deal breaker for me and no I don't miss the blending feature much now.

Having said that I do wish there is a massive overhaul of the painter software and it should take its rightful place under the sun as the 'uber' app for traditional media work in the digital realm which it still does but its barely hanging in there.

*****Just as a small experiment try using the color dynamics settings and set the foreground/background jitter to pen pressure mode, use some brush that mimics the traditional media , maybe turn on texture and maybe pick some texture that looks like a canvas surface, set it to subtract mode and check 'texture each tip. on and u will find that it does a nice little ' TRICK' ,so to speak, of blending between the two colors.
 
  03 March 2009
Another program (university concept) called IMPaSTo with a true grain/oil interaction
see their video (31MB)

But again, nothing we can try

About perspective, the best tools I have ever tried are inside the latest Manga Studio EX 4 allowing brush strokes constrained to perspective system (1 point, 2 points or 3 points) and there are also symmetry rulers, radial line rulers and concentric circle rulers. No need to see any grid, every brush strokes you start are constrained to the selected ruler (same concept when you start a brush stroke with shift key pressed)....smart system far better than the next Sketchbook pro that just try to emulate traditional tools. But it is a comic book program and not a painting program.....

__________________


Last edited by Hecartha : 03 March 2009 at 08:07 AM.
 
  03 March 2009
Regarding Blending Brushes in Photoshop: There is a way to create such a brush. The technique is described in Don Seegmiller's "Digital Character Design and Painting: The Photoshop CS Edition". It just needs some simple steps to set up:

- create a small image, something like 50x50, leave or make it completely white
- select all and save as pattern
- create a new image and paint in the edges you want to blend
- take the healing brush and set it to pattern(instead of sampled)
- paint along the edges to blend



Check it out and see if you like it. Obviously this is still far from painters capabilities, just thought it should be mentioned.
 
  03 March 2009
Disappointed.

I've been using painter since version 3.5 (on a PC the whole time) and I've rattled along with some fun additions like the mosaic (only used it professionally twice), the water tools, again for only a couple of my projects. While fun features like that may spark an initial sale, and are fun to play with, those features won't be keeping people with the software.

Fast, efficient and solid programs keep people returning. Even programs that aren't as full-featured as everyone wants. I've dealt with problems like banding and others IE: rngs around the airbrush at low opacity, banding, which was thought to have been squashed with a checkbox "fix" in painter ~5 or so— something like 1998. To name a couple. Those problems (or the code that caused them) have been there so long, they are probably a ghost in the machine by now.

I've really enjoyed buying multiple versions of this software. Even seeing its growth. And over the years I have contributed in part to, or worked with, over $3200 worth of Painter. But I feel like I was more productive in version 5 than in my current version of X.

Also, I've brought at least 3 people over to the Painter side of the fence (before v6), because of the ease-of-use, and the program's flow. (I LOVE PAGE ROTATION, and I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned earlier.) Features like page rotation are unmatchable with PS, and that alone brought a couple of people to Painter.

After reading what's posted here, though, I'm sorely disappointed. I'm starting to see a Lightwave phenom here. (Those working with 3d, you know. Luxology picked up a lot of steam after LW dropped it's ball.)

I haven't used Painter in over a month, since X.1.1.1.1..1.1.1.. crashed the last time I used it.

Fed up with dealing with it and waiting for problems to be repaired, I was hoping for an upgrade that solved the crashes I had been having. But it doesn't look like spending more time or money with the software would yield any better results.

I've taken more than my due time filling out surveys and things for Painter, and all that, too. I will no longer recommend the software to anyone since I have lost so much time with it.

However, I may continue to do some work in it, since I can use the brush and eraser without a problem. But I'm fast seeing other solutions for that too. I just Love the feel of the media in painter. I work in the inking tools a lot, with custom brushes. The other guys just don't match it.

Whatever. More than enough people have hated on Painter. What happened to the things that I thought would take off with Painter?

The vector tools got no help in versions 6 through 10. WT---h? Fractal Design had Expressions. That program had transparency with vectors before Illustrator did, but couldn't export it's files correctly to Illustrator format. It was great other than that. (It was bought by the big MS. See Silverlight, and Expression Studio, maybe)

I was hoping that flavor of vector technology would still be behind Painter (just take a look at an exported script; those numbers translate almost directly into vector code.) I was hoping that since Corel with Corel Draw as a base could breathe some life into the vector portion of Painter, maybe a combo is coming? Maybe one that provides the photoshop/illustrator mash-up that everybody wants?

Finally, I want to preview my .rif files outside of Painter.

Where's that plug-in, so I can organize my old files?
__________________
-pixel_streamer

Last edited by pixel_streamer : 03 March 2009 at 10:19 AM. Reason: incomplete sentence :)
 
  03 March 2009
Originally Posted by Tim3308: No fair, your a very "smooth as baby's butt" style painter -- hiding your tracks well in PS or P.


Not really--I paint in both styles. Take a look at the close-up crops of these:
http://lunatique.cgsociety.org/gallery/186343/
http://lunatique.cgsociety.org/gallery/124550/

But obviously, those are Painter brushwork. Photoshop brushes tend to leave a more digital mark behind, as you are essentially painting with a "stamp." You'd have to try and conceal the repetitive nature of the stamp in Photoshop.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.