hardnrg Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 it was CD cover art... i had to rasterize the text for what i was doing... i couldn't keep it in vector format... it was more than simple text and shadows... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sykocus Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 this disscusion has gone way past the scope of the original thread...most of the people are are going to be viewing graphics on their monitors so they don't need an image thats more the 72 dpi. also i would doubt if any one here has a printer that would allow them to discern the difference between a print at 180dpi and one at 300dpi on some sort of quality photo paper, let alone the ream of the office max special thats probably loaded up right now. and once again we are talking about the capiblities of each of these programs...not what file format is best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Goonie Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 dpi is a big issue with photoshop...maybe one day they will get it worked out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Yuck Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 I like fireworks, very nice how you can use their extension the same way you use a jpeg and a psd, you dont have to make them seperate. I have Fireworks MX as well as Dreamweaver MX, I really like them both. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sykocus Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 if i were to take an image from my camera convert it from RAW to TIFF, PSD and JPEG (16 bits per channel, 300dpi 3072px x 2048px) and post it up on the forums you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. if i sent them away to a color lab and had 8"x10" prints made, you probably wouldn't be able to tell a noticable difference in quality. back to the use of these programs, i don't think fireworks even allows saving files in difference color spaces (RGB, CMYK, Lab Color) or the use of ICC profiles which is crucial for photo editing and processing. fileworks wasn't made for this and thats my basic point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardnrg Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 dpi is a big issue with photoshop...maybe one day they will get it worked out haha, no it's not... i've printed stuff at A0 and dpi is more a limitation of getting the file to a print shop... PS owns Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClayMeow Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 I haven't finished reading thru the thread yet, but i'd just like to say that IMHO the top pic looks a hell of a lot better than the bottom one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Goonie Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 if you are proficient in fireworks and photoshop.....you would know what "owns." I own all Corel, Adobe, Macromedia products, Sony Vegas, Avid Xpress Pro, Camtasia Studio and I integrate all of them into projects for my company.........but I must say Adobe is WAY behind......Photoshop is their last leg standing if they want to stay in business they better come up with something new. Photoshop is getting blown away. It takes 20 steps to do something I can do in XXXX program in 1 or 2 steps. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammin Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 I haven't finished reading thru the thread yet, but i'd just like to say that IMHO the top pic looks a hell of a lot better than the bottom one. Thank you for being the first one to actually comment on the images instead of just ranting on about stuff which is a little irrellevant (of which I am also guilty I know). Any particualr reason you think the photoshop pic looks better? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardnrg Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 probably cos the fireworks one looks like it has either a translucent white layer over the picture... or the source image has a brightness adjusment on it... either way, the fireworks colour looks kinda "washed out" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClayMeow Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 probably cos the fireworks one looks like it has either a translucent white layer over the picture... or the source image has a brightness adjusment on it... either way, the fireworks colour looks kinda "washed out" yeah. the photoshop one just looks cleaner and clearer. It's tough comparing directly though. the grid you used in fireworks is smaller than photoshop...i like the larger box size on photoshop....don't know if it'd look the same in fireworks or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dignan Posted July 14, 2004 Posted July 14, 2004 Over the time of posting on these forums, several people have asked me about how I create sig images. These have either been to do with effects used.. or the clarity of the image. I know that alot of ppl here use photoshop to create their sig images, however I personally prefer to use fireworks (macromedia) as I think it provides a better solution for these kind of web based/restricted size images. Below is a comparison between images created with each application so that you can see the differences. I have tried to make the images as similar as possible.. but it is obviously difficult to get them identical. Both use a 72 pixels/inch resolution (pretty standard) Feel free to comment on the differences, and your personal preferences on which programs you yourself would use. Without the same sized fill pattern I find it hard to make a judgement on which one is better. For the most part a 4x4 fill looks nice, but with such a light background to begin with, it becomes distracting. This is noticable in the instensity of the eyes, its lost in the "fireworks display" . Also the edges of the text seem slightly blurred as the PS one has depth and better definition. The 1K difference might actually make a noticable difference though. In the end the fireworks one looks washed out to me, and the PS text and look is better over all. As for the rest of you, especially the Goonie. I know you may be a communications major and have worked with "them all", but there are some programs that click with people. PS is like that with me, I find I can make exactily what I set out to do in PS with a lot more confidence then I could with Fireworks, the gimp, etc. Things like video graphics which I did more then anything for the last year was almost completly done in PS. You listed Xpress Pro as a tool you use, have you used Elastic Gasket? Plug-ins like shine for after effects made useful inside Avid was a great help to me. Regardless if you think Adobe is on its last legs, then it can use one of mine, as far as I am concerned. You say adobe is behind, but when I found every time I needed something done I always used one of my adobe products. IMHO............... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts