SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 81
  1. #51
    SitePoint Member theNixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use both programs quite often.
    I use Fireworks a lot if what I'm building will be used in Flash. The two programs work really well together.
    Most of the things you intitially draw in Fireworks are in a vector format (unless you apply filters). So, you can simply copy and paste that into Flash and you can still make edits to the original piece. It's saved me alot of time in the past.

    I know you can draw in vector in Photoshop but I hate it. Never seems to work how I think it should. So I avoid it. I usally use Freehand or Firworks for all my vector work.

    I usually use Photoshop when my graphics are a bit more graphic intense. Or, if I'm doing actual image manipulation. I rarely use Fireworks for stuff like that.

    If I'm doing web work I use the two hand in hand though. If I design something in Photoshop I always open it up in Fireworks to optimize and cut up my page. I never really got into using ImageReady.

    I like Fireworks bath imaging process better too. But, Photoshops droplet is awesome.

    When it comes down to it all.. My final outcome determines what program I use.

    I hope that helps somebody.

  2. #52
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    The Frozen Waste of Canada
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've used the following:

    Photoshop (5, 6, and 7)
    Fireworks (MX, and MX 2004)
    GiMP (1.3, 2)
    PaintShopPro (6)


    Of those products, I've preferred Photoshop and GiMP.

    When learning Image Manipulation, used Photoshop.
    Got annoyed at Windows BSOD, upgraded to 2000.
    Got annoyed at Windows 2000, just because it's labelled Windows.
    Installed Linux, continued to use Photoshop under WINE.
    Decided that if I want to learn Linux, I need to learn GiMP, Vi, eMacs.
    (now I'm back with Win2K since I accidently messed up my GTK+)

    Now I prefer GiMP. It's less friendly than Photoshop, but the shear number of plugins (@ no cost) makes it better.


    That being said, I do code in Java for fun. It took me a day to figure out GiMP, all things taken into account.

    So, if you've got a day for fun, try GiMP... it's not going to force you to use it (unlike Photoshop CS EULA). And just think! Your boss can get a 700$ bonus!



    So, in sumation, Fireworks IS a good program, Photoshop is more powerful (but also a little tougher).

    If your considerring the two there is going to be a learning curve anyways. If you're willing to sacrifice usability for power, why not go all the way? A powerful unusable program. Pair it with a weak, usable program and you should be set.

  3. #53
    The Mind's I ® silver trophy Dark Tranquility's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    KSA - UAE
    Posts
    9,458
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ORBiTrus
    I've used the following:

    Photoshop (5, 6, and 7)
    Fireworks (MX, and MX 2004)
    GiMP (1.3, 2)
    PaintShopPro (6)


    Of those products, I've preferred Photoshop and GiMP.

    When learning Image Manipulation, used Photoshop.
    Got annoyed at Windows BSOD, upgraded to 2000.
    Got annoyed at Windows 2000, just because it's labelled Windows.
    Installed Linux, continued to use Photoshop under WINE.
    Decided that if I want to learn Linux, I need to learn GiMP, Vi, eMacs.
    (now I'm back with Win2K since I accidently messed up my GTK+)

    Now I prefer GiMP. It's less friendly than Photoshop, but the shear number of plugins (@ no cost) makes it better.


    That being said, I do code in Java for fun. It took me a day to figure out GiMP, all things taken into account.

    So, if you've got a day for fun, try GiMP... it's not going to force you to use it (unlike Photoshop CS EULA). And just think! Your boss can get a 700$ bonus!



    So, in sumation, Fireworks IS a good program, Photoshop is more powerful (but also a little tougher).

    If your considerring the two there is going to be a learning curve anyways. If you're willing to sacrifice usability for power, why not go all the way? A powerful unusable program. Pair it with a weak, usable program and you should be set.
    yeah I am planning to test GIMP !! I heard it was a great free one I'll try it asap !!

  4. #54
    SitePoint Guru toasti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Grahamstown
    Posts
    634
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Fireworks is better suited to webdesign work cause you can do cool things like making drop-down menus etc. which (as far as i know) you cant do with Photoshop. But i think Photoshop produces higher quality pictures...

  5. #55
    Non-Member Egor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    7,305
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by toasti
    Fireworks is better suited to webdesign work cause you can do cool things like making drop-down menus etc. which (as far as i know) you cant do with Photoshop. But i think Photoshop produces higher quality pictures...
    Those drop down menus can be done in Dream Weaver also.

    If I had a choice between Fireworks or Phoshop, I would choose Photoshop. But it comes with a not so nice price tag.

  6. #56
    SitePoint Guru DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    809
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    But i think Photoshop produces higher quality pictures...
    how many times does it have to be said? There is NO difference between any of the major graphics programs in the quality of their output.

    Side by side comparison, all other factors being equal you COULD NOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE between a graphic made in PS from one made in FW

  7. #57
    Drupaler bronze trophy greg.harvey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    3,258
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's as maybe, but Fireworks seems to compress better to the same settings. Certainly with GIFs. Looks the same, but the file's smaller. I definitely agree with you that there is no quality advantage with Photoshop.

  8. #58
    SitePoint Addict Draco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Am I the only one here that uses Ulead Photo Impact ? I find PS too overloaded for the average layout / design.

    However, I'm not into photo manipulation, only web graphics..print etc.

  9. #59
    SitePoint Guru DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    809
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah Greg what I am saying is all factors being equal. Take comression out of the equation for instance amke the image a tiff, there is no difference.

    We are on the same page here.

    Of course if you want to buy me a pint or 2 of Guniess I am sure I can be presuaded to see it however you want!

  10. #60
    Yugo full of anvils bronze trophy hillsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    :noitacoL
    Posts
    1,859
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Tranquility
    yeah I am planning to test GIMP !! I heard it was a great free one I'll try it asap !!
    I think the new 2.x version of GIMP is definitely a contender. Still got quite a few quirks and missing a few features (e.g. vector functionality) but it's a vast improvement on the 1.x series of releases. And you can't argue with the price.
    that's me!
    Now A Pom. And a Plone Nut
    Broccoli Martinez Airpark

  11. #61
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    92
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco
    Am I the only one here that uses Ulead Photo Impact ? I find PS too overloaded for the average layout / design.
    However, I'm not into photo manipulation, only web graphics..print etc.
    PhotoImpact is a good program for both photos and graphics and it is a heck of a lot easier to use than Photoshop.

  12. #62
    SitePoint Member galoosh33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, I used to work with both (trial version of Fireworks) and I do think you should go for Photoshop, if you aren't using it yet. It has a lot more options (that's if you need them..) and I also found it very useful for things other than web design.
    Young Graphic Designer |
    Intros, Logos & Banners
    |
    Gal Yona- Flash designs

  13. #63
    SitePoint Wizard DougBTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Bath, UK
    Posts
    2,498
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DCS
    There is NO difference between any of the major graphics programs in the quality of their output.
    Depends how well you look.

    Attached is an example of an anti-aliasing bug in Fireworks MX. Each point should be the same, except rotated. The rotated ones are blockier than they should be.

    Photoshop is much better at drop shadows and so on, because it gives you much more control. This means that you can get better quality output from Photoshop than you can from Fireworks.

    Douglas
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Hello World

  14. #64
    SitePoint Guru DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    809
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    an anti-aliasing bug
    Your little experiment ignored this statement:
    Take comression out of the equation
    There is no such animal. This image is a palleted image with it's palette reduced to 16 colors. This reduces some of the colors used for smooth anti-aliasing.

  15. #65
    SitePoint Wizard DougBTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Bath, UK
    Posts
    2,498
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DCS
    There is no such animal. This image is a palleted image with it's palette reduced to 16 colors. This reduces some of the colors used for smooth anti-aliasing.
    It actually looks better saved to 16 colours than it did on screen.

    I've redone the image as a JPEG, which is saved at 100 quality, which is attached.

    You can do up the effect in FW MX yourself, just draw a very sharp point at an angle away from 90 degrees. This might be fixed in 2004, perhaps you can tell me?

    In real life I have only come across this problem on fine logo work, where I want a smoth point, and then it wacks a full solid colour pixel on the end of my cureve... very irritating.

    Later,
    Douglas
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Hello World

  16. #66
    SitePoint Guru DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    809
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Nature of the beast, hard to produce smoothe curves with square pixels

  17. #67
    SitePoint Zealot martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    London
    Posts
    138
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the fundimental difference is that photoshop is a bitmap app wereas FW is vector based like illustrator or Freehand. FW is good if you already have a lot of content in eps format and wish to keep logos etc in a fully editable state, rather than pixel data. If a layout/design requires editing then logos etc can be resized with no loss unlike Photoshop.

    However, I still prefer Photoshop, I think the anti-alising on type is still better than FW IMHO.
    Martin

  18. #68
    Non-Member Egor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    7,305
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    martin,

    In Photoshop you can make documents or layouts in vector by using auto shapes or the pen tool. I would not call Fireworks vector based. It is an image manipulation program just like PS. Macromedia has Freehand, which is specifically for vector.

  19. #69
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Gainesville, Florida
    Posts
    54
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DCS
    Mike you seem to have a little misunderstanding as well
    Nothing could be further from the truth.
    Corel Draw is a vector program. Fireworks is more of a hybrid doing both.

    CorelDraw could be compared with Adobe Illustrator as it is a vector program as well. These are both commonly refered to as Illustration programs. Freehand also falls into this category.

    Fireworks is quite "bitmap savy" an example being gaussian blur which works by smoothing and averaging pixel color values.

    But don't take my word for it, here's what Macromeida has to say:
    Get top-quality design results. Take creative control with vector and bitmap editing in an integrated environment.
    Sorry for the delayed reply.... been hard at work lately. I said Fireworks has bitmap mode... and I said its not as savy as photoshop. I also said it was comparable to freehand AS image ready is to photoshop. The key to understanding what I said is to understand that comparison. Furthermore, I said it would be more fair to compare Fireworks to Corel Draw than to photoshop.... I didn't say it was a direct comparison.

    symantics... lets not argue. Fireworks is first and foremost a vector editing app for web design. The facilities to do bitmaps is third nature just as vector editing tools in photoshop are third nature. I consider them, "Wouldn't this be nice if we could gain market share by adding this," features.

    Cheers

  20. #70
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Gainesville, Florida
    Posts
    54
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by toasti
    Fireworks is better suited to webdesign work cause you can do cool things like making drop-down menus etc. which (as far as i know) you cant do with Photoshop. But i think Photoshop produces higher quality pictures...
    I think what you mean is that you can manipulate images better thus increasing the quality of the image. The program in itself cannot render graphics better than fireworks. It can help the artists build a better work of art with the tools and plugins available to it.

  21. #71
    SitePoint Guru DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    809
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    mike, still comparing apples and oranges!

  22. #72
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, I just happened across this post so I thought I would throw my two cents in. Photoshop is crap. Fireworks for one is a MUCH easier program to use. It automates many things that you have to manually do in photoshop, it works in both vector AND rastor graphics, photoshop only rastor. Fireworks has a better and cleaner compression, fireworks can write javascript and html, and it can run almost ANY photoshop plugin plus its own extensions. IT was made for great compatibilty with freehand, flash, and dreamweaver. It combines Photoshop with Paintshop and Image ready and doesnt need the size of any of them. Its a one stop shop for web graphics. what could be better?

  23. #73
    Drupaler bronze trophy greg.harvey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    3,258
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    But how long will Fireworks exist for now that it belongs to Adobe...

  24. #74
    SitePoint Enthusiast Fortius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    62
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by greg.harvey
    But how long will Fireworks exist for now that it belongs to Adobe...
    Well IMHO not long. Adobe will want to push Photoshop the full lenght. The only issue that Fireworks is better then Photoshop is that its easier to learn in less time and its not as costly. It'll be interesting to see what happenes

  25. #75
    SitePoint Enthusiast az0000000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    45
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Exclamation Using Mask Pro 3.0 for Maintain Transparency Feature

    Quote Originally Posted by mikehowell
    The dream setup, no pun intended, is to do all editing in Photoshop for pictures then import it into fireworks via .psd and put size it to fit into the web layout. You do not need such a heavy program to do simple weblayout. However you need it to edit your images and photos to fit into a well layed out design. Photoshop has better image editing tools hands down, such as Extensis Mask pro and others.
    Hello,
    I am first time in this forum, so nice to meet everyone, and I hope to have nice creative time here.
    Sorry for saluting not in the proper forum place, but being in a bit rush I would like to directly proceed with my question.
    Do you mikehowell, or anyone else in this forum seriously use Mask Pro 3.0 from Extensis, which is currently under onOne Software?
    I am particularily interested in the Maintain Transparency feature listed here http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=4
    The Color Decontamination technology built-in to Mask Pro allows you to mask difficult subjects like glass, lace and smoke with ease. Simply choose colors to keep and colors to drop and Mask Pro does the rest.
    Recently I have followed the MP_Transparency.mov video tutorial for respective task and almost achieved what I need. But I have one question to those who used this tutorial, because onOne itlesf doesn’t have help forums.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •