Posted by dorayme on 04/01/07 22:20

In article <eup4sp$3fh$1@aioe.org>,
Bernhard Sturm <sturmnixspam@datacomm.ch> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
> > In article <Xns99049498ACC5Bjeremiahneredbojiasc@208.49.80.251>,
> > Neredbojias <invalid@example.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hmm, I'm not familiar with Illustrator. What does it do that Photoshop
> >> doesn't, or IOW, can you tell me how it's different?
> >
> > PS is (or has traditionally been) a bitmap graphic prgm. Whereas
> > AI is a vector one. Fireworks is a sort of in between thing.
>
> I wonder, why almost nobody is using Fireworks as this *is* the tool for
> webdesigners. PS is okay for print purposes, but does not offer the
> flexibility to combine vector with raster manipulation, whereas
> Illustrator, Freehand are vector only, and therefore not suitable for
> webdesign purposes.

PS has traditionally been better for photo manipulations. Yes, FW
has a lot of tools but it is not as easy for many things as PS
(the actual steps for many manipulations are awkward). FW is good
for moving bits around (esp. on the same layer!), sizing
elements, generally organising an image, especially a complex one
and above all fabulous in exporting smallish files (PS is
hopeless on this, even the awkward "web sister" program
ImageReady is not so impressive)

I say "traditionally" because things change as new versions come
out and companies buy up each other and their stocks, combine
technologies. e.g. I notice that PS in later incarnations has
support for moving things that are on different layers with the
mouse directly.

As for AI, it is useful in designing various elements for web
pages. For example, logos. It is simply a very powerful program
and has things that FW cannot match however it tries.

There is another reason some of us might be not _just_ be using
FW (or its website making equivalents). In my own case, I often
have to prepare material for printing as well.

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]