# What software is best for designing teeshirts



## durakraft

I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks


----------



## SilverLimit

I'm a designer in the biz myself and I gotta tell ya, if you getting anything screen printed, Adobe Illustrator is always the best way to go. It'll run you a little high price-wise though. There's also the cheaper alternative Corel Draw, but Corel is to Illustrator what MS Paint is to Photoshop, so it's power is a little lacking.


----------



## superiorgraphix

Illustrator or PhotoShop, that's the way to go...http://www.superiorgraphix1.com


----------



## Chani

SilverLimit said:


> I'm a designer in the biz myself and I gotta tell ya, if you getting anything screen printed, Adobe Illustrator is always the best way to go. It'll run you a little high price-wise though. There's also the cheaper alternative Corel Draw, but Corel is to Illustrator what MS Paint is to Photoshop, so it's power is a little lacking.


That's not at all true. I've been using Illustrator, and after my Fiance moved up here I've been watching his workflow with CorelDRAW. Let me tell you, CD is EXTEMELY powerful software, and I'll be switching as soon as we can afford a new license.


----------



## astromark

I have to start by saying I have been in graphic design for a little over 10 years now. I have used many different programs, and I have to say that despite it's "prestigious" standing- Illustrator can't hold a candle to CorelDraw. I am currently using X3 and it is the easiest, most user- friendly software for any price. I'm still not sure why Illustrator gets the praise and CorelDraw gets put down. In My opinion, CorelDraw will always be better than Illustrator.

Photoshop is great software, though


----------



## Titere

Freehand! Althought no more upgrades...the death of a truly nice vector program has finally come


----------



## sunnydayz

I have to say that I like Corel draw the best, it is very easy to use. I have been using corel draw since it first came out, and the versions have gotten better and better. I also have adobe photoshop, and I use alot with doing cool things with photos, but as far as graphics I prefer the Corel Draw.

Bobbie


----------



## durakraft

Now do you design these yourself, or do you have photos that are on the cd that you mix and match, your designs are awesome.


----------



## sunnydayz

I have designed some by hand, some are a mix of clipart and my own stuff, and some are from a artist that I bought license of his art( the retro vintage stuff). that is what is nice with corel draw, no matter what experience you have, it is a easy program to use. I dont use the clipart from the cds so much, I pay for a subscription clipart online as they have more to choose from and better quality clipart than the Corel Draw clipart. That is one negative I can say about corel draw is that the clipart it comes with has not come a long way over the years. but the program itself has made leaps and bounds since its earlier versions.

Bobbie


----------



## clicksigns

CorelDraw for me is my best choice. http://www.youtube.com/coreldrawtips


----------



## oldkush

durakraft said:


> I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks


CorelDraw gets my vote. If you can afford the newest x3 version that's the one. If you are on a budget, then look at some of the older versions like v9.0 or v12.0 

Bob


----------



## oldkush

durakraft said:


> I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks


CorelDraw gets my vote. If you can afford the newest x3 version that's the one. If you are on a budget, then look at some of the older versions like v9.0 or v12.0 

Bob


----------



## monkeylantern

I would also strongly agree with the Adobe suite.


----------



## Bob-O

I like Adobe Illustrator myself.


----------



## Ripcord

I'll add another vote for Corel Draw. The X3 version is truly amazing!


----------



## gmille39

oldkush said:


> CorelDraw gets my vote. If you can afford the newest x3 version that's the one. If you are on a budget, then look at some of the older versions like v9.0 or v12.0
> 
> Bob


If you are a student or teacher, you can get that version for under a hundred bucks.


----------



## Chani

If you're NOT a student or teacher, you can STILL get a fully licensed, FULL commercial version of that program for under $100. You just need to look around a little.

We got it for just under $100, and yes, it's perfectly legal and unused.


----------



## tefjones

Gotta go with Illustrator when making more complex illustrations. I've never used CD but I have yet to see some complex artwork from that program. Illustrator on the other hand: A LOT of graphic designers choose that for that very reason. Its not the most user-friendly, but when you learn it, the results are astonishing. Go to my friend's page to see what I mean (all he uses are Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator CS2): Go Media - Rebuild the Aesthetic - Portfolio 2007. ALso, check out this YouTube video on the way a lot of us graphic designers use illustrator. It should show you why we use this so much: YouTube - Kris Barz -Vector Illustrations


----------



## clicksigns

CorelDraw is versatile. Try to view these videos.

YouTube - Using Envelope effect in CorelDraw X3
YouTube - Double Powerclip in CorelDraw X3
YouTube - Creating logo using CorelDRAw X3
YouTube - You Tube box in CorelDraw X3

Easy to use.


----------



## durakraft

Thank you so much that was very helpful. Now after you design, on coral draw do you heat press or silkscreen I started using heat press


----------



## gmille39

Chani said:


> If you're NOT a student or teacher, you can STILL get a fully licensed, FULL commercial version of that program for under $100. You just need to look around a little.
> 
> We got it for just under $100, and yes, it's perfectly legal and unused.


I got my through Amazon for $70.


----------



## durakraft

tefjones said:


> Gotta go with Illustrator when making more complex illustrations. I've never used CD but I have yet to see some complex artwork from that program. Illustrator on the other hand: A LOT of graphic designers choose that for that very reason. Its not the most user-friendly, but when you learn it, the results are astonishing. Go to my friend's page to see what I mean (all he uses are Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator CS2): Go Media - Rebuild the Aesthetic - Portfolio 2007. ALso, check out this YouTube video on the way a lot of us graphic designers use illustrator. It should show you why we use this so much: YouTube - Kris Barz -Vector Illustrations


This is wonderful. Thank you.


----------



## Chani

You can do the same things in just about any vector program. It just depends on how talented you are and what your style is.

This is sort of a pointless argument, tho. It's like a Mac vs PC debate. Most people have firm opinions and they will push those opinions to the end of the Earth.

Basically, you just need to pick one and go with it.

Again, personally I think CorelDRAW is easier and more intuitive, but that's just my personal opinion.


----------



## clicksigns

Chani said:


> You can do the same things in just about any vector program. It just depends on how talented you are and what your style is.
> 
> This is sort of a pointless argument, tho. It's like a Mac vs PC debate. Most people have firm opinions and they will push those opinions to the end of the Earth.
> 
> Basically, you just need to pick one and go with it.
> 
> Again, personally I think CorelDRAW is easier and more intuitive, but that's just my personal opinion.


I agree, maybe just download the free 30 day trial of Illustrator and CorelDraw. Then draw anything in both the software, then you be the judge. Graphics software are only tools like pen, paintbrush...., design has to come from you. After a week you would know which one you like.

Good Luck.


----------



## Rodney

tefjones said:


> Gotta go with Illustrator when making more complex illustrations. I've never used CD but I have yet to see some complex artwork from that program. Illustrator on the other hand: A LOT of graphic designers choose that for that very reason. Its not the most user-friendly, but when you learn it, the results are astonishing. Go to my friend's page to see what I mean (all he uses are Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator CS2): Go Media - Rebuild the Aesthetic - Portfolio 2007. ALso, check out this YouTube video on the way a lot of us graphic designers use illustrator. It should show you why we use this so much: YouTube - Kris Barz -Vector Illustrations


Take a look at any coreldraw site or gallery and you'll see all sorts of detailed designs done with that software.


----------



## CreativeLead

durakraft said:


> I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks


Our design company employs the screen printing method and our film provider requests vectorized images done in Illustrator.

From my limited experience, if you use Photoshop to create your design, you will have to pay to have it vectorized before it goes to screen print- and then you risk loss of your original design based on their vectorization skill.

Therefore, we use Photoshop strictly for producing mock-ups and outputting multi-page PDF's. Photoshop's use can also be extended to make ads and various promotional material. All final tshirt print designs are developed in Illustrator. 

The benefits of using Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop include being able to drag vectors from Illustrator straight into Photoshop for instant mock-up on a photograph of a model. 

No matter which program you choose, I strongly suggest you go about finding tutorial video's. I used to try books and got nowhere, personally. And get to work mastering the pen tool as soon as possible. I'm only now beginning to get the hang of it and already see the pay-off's. 

Summary:
Suggest Adobe *Illustrator to develop finalized designs, 
and *Photoshop if funds allow, to perform complimentary tasks.

Disclaimer:
I am relatively new. My methods are based on requirements provided by printers and clients.

Afterthought:
You guys really convinced me to give CORELDRAW a look.

Additional material:
Here is a link to my Illustrator de.icio.us page
SlyRaptor's bookmarks tagged with "illustrator" on del.icio.us
- some useful tutorials there. I must reiterate my preference for video tutorials. 
AT THE VERY LEAST, check out the Distressed Type, Custom Swoosh and GoMedia(which is plastered all over TSF).


----------



## SilverLimit

I admittedly don't know too much about Corel beyond what the other artists I work with have told me. I know it's learning curve isn't as steep, I do know that Illustrator can do more once you've figured it all out. I guess it all depends on what you do though, and if you can get what you need done with a cheaper alternative, it's all good.

Have any of you guys seen some of the Gradient Mesh tool works done in illustrator? It's totally sick:

Basang Panaginip: The World's Most Photorealistic Vector Art

Yukio Miyamoto | Master of Adobe Illustrator Gradient Mesh Tool


----------



## gmille39

I received a newsletter last week which had some tutorials for CorelDraw listed. You will find some good info and tutorial, both written and video, on AdvancedArtist.com. There are so many tools and shortcuts I was missing out on which are now saving me a lot of time. And time is money.


----------



## Darklight

Corel X3 is very versatile.....after several years with Illustrator, I put it down and havent used it since. X3 is a much more powerful program than the earlier versions, and is a little more user friendly with a customizable interface. JMO.


----------



## vctradingcubao

Corel Draw is a must. It's ideal/helpful for screen printing, embroidery, large format digital printing (banners), stickers with contour cut, cutter/plotters, laser engraving and cutting; the list goes on. If I am to choose only 1 from CorelDraw and Photoshop, then Corel Draw is the one.


----------



## smutek

here is another cool illustraotr video

YouTube - How I Do Stuff


----------



## durakraft

Wow you guys are awesome.........


----------



## kindred

I've used both and definitely prefer illustrator to Corel Draw. Am using CS 2 but I also highly recommend Corel TRACE if you do anything by hand and need to bring it in.


----------



## smutek

Why Corel TRACE over Cs2's live trace? just curious.


----------



## kindred

My version of trace is from 2004 and still beats the pants off of live trace. If you prepare the image at 300dpi and change to black and white you will get vector art closer to the original every time in my experience. try for yourself with demos to see what I mean. Incredible time saver if you have to reproduce logos or hand rendered art. Live trace has come a long way from streamline but still not good enough


----------



## smutek

Got ya, will try it out. Have you tried the live trace in CS3 yet? I'm running CS3 at home (not at work) so I have not used it extensively, but it seems a little better. If I remember correctly it actually deletes the white BG for you on a one color trace.


----------



## Fluid

X3 PowerTrace will do the same and will remove all the white in a trace if wanted.
No matter what, all trace progs will do a decent job yet will not touch tracing manually in the prog of choice


----------



## clicksigns

Ask a 10 year old child using both Illustrator and CorelDraw, CorelDraw will still be the choice. Now a days ease of use is important, because you do not feel like you are working but just having fun.


----------



## Fluid

Also Corel has all sorts of macros and short cut commands that can be modified or created to speed up your tasks. Multi page ability, in prog separations (must use PMS Spot Colors)
I can send you a good list of Corel related tutorials, add on sites, and general info sites if interested. Just pm as I dont want to start another useless battle between the progs. They are both good


----------



## kindred

I do my seps in photoshop in channels. illo has multi page and their macros are called actions. same thing.


as far as the ten year old child goes (i'd rather not have ten year olds doing my design work, might be quality issues) ease of use is primarily what prog you were trained on first. I was an adobe guy from school. Ease of use comparison here is trying to switch from one to the other. Corel was not easy to switch to coming from adobe. draw or their photo app is completely foreign from adobe. And I'm sure it's the other way around. It has been my experience that business owners generally buy corel when price is the most important factor in a graphics suite. And then learn that most of the world uses adobe as the standard. Meanwhile the artist tries to piece the incompatible stuff back together in corel. I guess there's a reason Corel Draw exports to Illustrator but Illo doesn't to Draw.

Corel definitely wins the value category. it's 400 vs 1200 for CS

Anyone want to start a MAC vs PC debate next?  Linux going once Red hat going twice


----------



## Fluid

They are just and means to an end. Its not the tool but the art that makes the artist 
No need to go that route and they all good platforms and have their own issues. Like a ford vs chevy


----------



## kindred

you're right Fluid.  Didn't mean to sound too aggro.


----------



## Fluid

No worries here


----------



## Shaliza

I use Illustrator. Love it.


----------



## mrdisp

For those on budget, what about Inkscape? I found it and seems okay although I am not really an artist at all and don't know what I am doing. I'm sure lacks CorelDraw or Illustrator ease and abilities but it also depends on what trying to do. Right? Has anybody used Inkscape and liked it? Thanks.


----------



## Chani

I've been an Illustrator user for several years (I'm not very good, but then again, I don't use it every day).

I've always wondered how to do certain things in Illustrator, but could never figure them out (even with it's help file (which I hate isn't a .chm file)).

Yesterday, after watching Mark do a bunch of work, I downloaded the 15 day trial of CorelDRAW X3.

WOW! I can do everything I always wanted to do in Illustrator! Well, except for one irritating thing, which is restricting vector handles with the shift key, which Illustrator DOES do. But otherwise I KNOW I'm switching to Corel now that I've played with it for a day. Yes, I made my decision that quick. It's an easy decision to make.

I'll keep my Illustrator license just in case I want to transfer a vector into photoshop, but you better bet I'll be creating that vector in Corel and importing it into Illustrator!


----------



## CreativeLead

Chani said:


> I've been an Illustrator user for several years (I'm not very good, but then again, I don't use it every day).
> 
> I've always wondered how to do certain things in Illustrator, but could never figure them out (even with it's help file (which I hate isn't a .chm file)).
> 
> Yesterday, after watching Mark do a bunch of work, I downloaded the 15 day trial of CorelDRAW X3.
> 
> WOW! I can do everything I always wanted to do in Illustrator! Well, except for one irritating thing, which is restricting vector handles with the shift key, which Illustrator DOES do. But otherwise I KNOW I'm switching to Corel now that I've played with it for a day. Yes, I made my decision that quick. It's an easy decision to make.
> 
> I'll keep my Illustrator license just in case I want to transfer a vector into photoshop, but you better bet I'll be creating that vector in Corel and importing it into Illustrator!


:begins chasing bandwagon:


----------



## dabearxx

Wouldn't that depend on what you're using it for?


----------



## Solmu

clicksigns said:


> Ask a 10 year old child using both Illustrator and CorelDraw, CorelDraw will still be the choice.


As an adult, I don't make purchasing decisions based on whether or not a ten year old could operate the piece of software or equipment in question. Fortunately for me there are many things I can easily do now I couldn't do when I was ten.


----------



## clicksigns

Solmu said:


> As an adult, I don't make purchasing decisions based on whether or not a ten year old could operate the piece of software or equipment in question. Fortunately for me there are many things I can easily do now I couldn't do when I was ten.



You would be surprised with the kids now a days...

But my real point is if it is easy for them, that justifies the ease of a software.


----------



## Solmu

clicksigns said:


> But my real point is if it is easy for them, that justifies the ease of a software.


I think it's a really stupid way to make a decision. Nothing has to be _that_ easy to use. You don't decide on a pair of shoes based on whether or not they fit someone else. You don't read _Babysitter's Club_ because that's what your niece likes to read. You don't buy a car because it has every feature your next door neighbour could want... and you don't buy a piece of software because _someone else_ can use it.

As smart as "kids today" are or are not, I would be worried for the adult who wasn't smarter than the average ten year old. Who needs something that "even a ten year old can use"? We need software that _we_ can use. The minimum threshold for "easy to use" is different for us than it is for a ten year old - most of us have been using computers for longer than they've _been alive_.

Ease of use is really overrated. Some of the most powerful tools in the world take training to use (and hey, some don't), the luxury of being an adult is that we can take that training and be better people for it.

If I get a slab of concrete dropped on me in an industrial accident then my carers might have to start asking "is it so easy a child could use it?", but until then it's not a concern for me personally - and I don't see why that shouldn't be the same for any other adult fortunate enough to retain full use of their faculties.


----------



## number13

I am new to the sublimation business. I started out on Hanes T-Shirt maker, I have Novelty 8 and Corel x3. I am still learning to use the Corel x3. For starters Hanes T-Shirt Deluxe or Hanes Sublimation Maker is really easy.


----------



## Indiana27

I totally agree with you on this.


----------



## Indiana27

Illustrator gets my vote. It's used universally. I've been a graphic designer for several years and started out using Freehand but later took a job where I had to switch over to Illustrator and I'm glad I did.


durakraft said:


> I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks


----------



## vctradingcubao

clicksigns said:


> But my real point is if it is easy for them, that justifies the ease of a software.


Yes, it's obvious to me that it was your point, and I agree with you that CorelDraw is much easier to learn and use than Adobe Illustrator, and lastly, I think ease of use is a major factor in choosing what software to use.


----------



## clicksigns

vctradingcubao said:


> Yes, it's obvious to me that it was your point, and I agree with you that CorelDraw is much easier to learn and use than Adobe Illustrator, and lastly, I think ease of use is a major factor in choosing what software to use.


Why should you use a software that is not easy to use? CorelDraw has a combination of ease of use and very powerful tool too.

My experience being an instructor is that my students would go for the software that they are comfortable with, and once they are comfortable, they learn fast.


----------



## vctradingcubao

Maybe some members did'nt like the notion that a 10 year old could learn and do what some adults could not. But that is actually a great pitch for Corel (CorelDraw, so easy a 10 year old could use it).


----------



## gmille39

kindred said:


> I do my seps in photoshop in channels. illo has multi page and their macros are called actions. same thing.
> 
> 
> as far as the ten year old child goes (i'd rather not have ten year olds doing my design work, might be quality issues) ease of use is primarily what prog you were trained on first. I was an adobe guy from school. Ease of use comparison here is trying to switch from one to the other. Corel was not easy to switch to coming from adobe. draw or their photo app is completely foreign from adobe. And I'm sure it's the other way around. It has been my experience that business owners generally buy corel when price is the most important factor in a graphics suite. And then learn that most of the world uses adobe as the standard. Meanwhile the artist tries to piece the incompatible stuff back together in corel. I guess there's a reason Corel Draw exports to Illustrator but Illo doesn't to Draw.
> 
> Corel definitely wins the value category. it's 400 vs 1200 for CS
> 
> Anyone want to start a MAC vs PC debate next?  Linux going once Red hat going twice


PEPSI VS COKE
CHEVY VS FORD
DEEP DISH/THIN CRUST
BOXERS/BRIEFS


----------



## Chani

PEPSI VS COKE - Mountain Dew!
CHEVY VS FORD - Jeep!
DEEP DISH/THIN CRUST - Stuffed Crust!
BOXERS/BRIEFS - Bikinis!


----------



## Chani

But really, I think this whole conversation would be more constructive if EVERYONE told us WHY you prefer one software package over another, and not just sling mud.

Personally, I prefer X3 for many reasons, but the primary one is that I can do more things in less time, such as double clicking on a segment to add or remove nodes (points for Illy users) and change the behavior of a node (or nodes) with one click instead of having to switch tools every time I want to add/remove/change and point.

Now, perhaps that's changed since CS1, but it was always a pain for me in CS1 and earlier.


----------



## smutek

I prefer a combination of illustrator and photoshop. I use Corel occasionally, but when I do my goal is generally to get away from it as quickly as possible. 

That is no knock against corel, it just does not feel natural to me.The main reason for that is because the adobe suite is what I learned on and what I have been using every day for the last six years. For vector drawing I feel much more comfortable and in control in illustrator. 

I'm sure Corel is very capable, its just that I have neither the time nor the inclination to learn any more about it than the little I use it for, and I've seen no compelling reason to convince me otherwise. 

If something does compel me to look a little deeper into Corel I have no problem doing so, and would have no problem saying "Corel does X, Y, and Z" better, but for now the adobe suite matched with my intuos 3 supports my work flow perfectly. There's no reason for me to use anything else.


----------



## Moo Spot Prints

kindred said:


> Corel definitely wins the value category. it's 400 vs 1200 for CS


That's $1200 for the ENTIRE CS suite. Illustrator by itself is $600. At $400 Corel is definitely worth looking into. A copy of CS2 might be had for less now that CS3 is out.



kindred said:


> Anyone want to start a MAC vs PC debate next?  Linux going once Red hat going twice



Too late. This actually *is* Mac/Pc debate. Via proxy anyway. Adobe was originally a mac product and Corel a PC one. The approach of each reflects their native platforms. It always has. If you think windows is intuitive, you probably find Draw a better/easier program. If you have half a brain, you'd know intuitively that Illustrator is the way to go... 

You can't go wrong either way. These two programs are in direct competition and have similar features. Fiddle with both and then pick one. Which one really doesn't matter.


----------



## Chani

I haven't shopped around for Illustrator CS3 or the CS3 suite, so I have no idea what prices are like for it, but if you look around, you can find the X3 suite for under $100 for a LEGAL COMMERCIAL version, which makes it all the more compelling.

After playing around for several days with CorelDRAW X3, I've got to say that I'm LOVING IT! I learned Illustrator in school and was always having troubles figuring out how to get it to do what I wanted. But I knew that it was the industry standard at the time, so I bought the CS1 suite. What's cool about Adobe's student licenses is that you can use them commercially once you graduate or leave school. They just don't seem to offer upgrades, so if you want to upgrade to a newer version you need to buy the whole package again.

The only thing I've used Illustrator for recently is reading dxf file dimensions because the dimensions don't show up when I import them into 3ds MAX to model them in 3d. That, and editing files that my Fiance did for me with CorelDRAW on my own computer (he's the vector designer between the two of us. I just do 3d and Photoshop.  ).

Speaking of Photoshop...it kicks butt over Corel's Photo-Paint. That I need to agree with. Photoshop IS more intuitive it seems, tho I've only opened Photo-Paint twice.

Oh, well. I have about 12 days left on my X3 trial, then I need to buy it. Hopefully the money we're expecting will come before my trial ends so I won't be without it.


----------



## Moo Spot Prints

clicksigns said:


> Why should you use a software that is not easy to use? CorelDraw has a combination of ease of use and very powerful tool too.


Corel seems to have a gentler learning curve (disclaimer: I have only briefly played with it). Illustrator seems more... well... cryptic? I'm not sure what the right word is. It makes you afraid to hit anything because you're not sure what's going on. The real power comes once you've hit the curve hard and have battled up it for a while. Things suddenly start making sense -- the little dots (open vs solid), the key modifiers (when to hit alt vs shift), the modes of the pen tool, etc. The subtle feedback actually makes for a better experience.

I am a programmer. I've written image processing software. I've written tons of applications with complicated user interfaces. Illustrator had *me* intimidated for a long, long time. After 6 months of using it regularly I am now finally starting to become proficient at it. Emphasis on the starting to. It hasn't been easy. If Corel had gotten me to this point in half the time, I would go back and jump ship in a heartbeat.


----------



## Chani

Moo Spot Prints said:


> Illustrator seems more... well... cryptic?


That's kinda how I feel, too. I don't like that there seem to be many functions that don't have buttons or menu items when you're just learning software, so unless you read the tutorials and help files, you don't even know they're there. Keyboard shortcuts are usually better in the long run, but I like playing with buttons (and assigning my own keyboard shortcuts to those buttons) when I'm just learning.

So far I haven't found any hidden functions in X3, tho I'm not saying they're not there. I've only been playing with is for three days. But all the important functions that I want DO have buttons or menu items.

I'm still learning, but I'd say that I've gotten farther with X3 than I ever did with Illustrator in those three days.

Again, my only peave with X3 is that you can't easily constrain vector handles to x, y, or 45's. Its dynamic guides are a little irritating. Oh, and one more thing. I'm used to being able to move items relatively within a 3d environment where as everything is absolute in X3 (not sure what it's like with Illustrator CS3).

The thing I do like about Illustrator (and hate at the same time) is the alignment tools. There are more options in Illustrator, tho I hate that all objects you're aligning move (if there's a way to prevent one or another from moving, please let me know!).


----------



## Chani

I take something back. There are just as many alignment options in X3 as there are in Illy CS.

Now in CS, if only I could figure out a way of keeping one of the objects I'm aligning to from moving!


----------



## Chani

Okay, after playing with Illustrator a little more tonite and looking in its help file I found how you're SUPPOSED to be able to align objects to other objects without moving one of them, but it's not working at all.

This is irritating.

I still prefer X3.


----------



## smutek

Chani said:


> What's cool about Adobe's student licenses is that you can use them commercially once you graduate or leave school. They just don't seem to offer upgrades, so if you want to upgrade to a newer version you need to buy the whole package again.



Once you leave school and switch to a commercial license you can upgrade at regular commerial upgrade rates. If you are still under the educational license you have to purchase the whole suite again, at educational rates that translates to about the same amount of money as a commercial upgrade.

($589 for CS3 Design Premium @ academic superstore vs. $599 for commercial upgrade to the same) 

http://www.adobe.com/education/purchasing/faq.html


----------



## clicksigns

Chani said:


> Okay, after playing with Illustrator a little more tonite and looking in its help file I found how you're SUPPOSED to be able to align objects to other objects without moving one of them, but it's not working at all.
> 
> This is irritating.
> 
> I still prefer X3.


Still all of this will be a matter of ease of use. And CorelDraw X3 is a lot cheaper, and most of the commercial printers have CorelDraw X3.

Good choice and you won't regret it.


----------



## Darklight

To me, the bottom line is productivity. How productive and how efficient can you be with any particular software? If your time is worth anything, then you should choose whatever you can achieve the desired result with, as quickly and easily as possible. Im sure the debate will remain 50/50, and that is to be expected. I have used both, and both are very good. I use X3 now because for me, It expedites my design process. Hundreds of others will feel that way about illustrartor as well. Its about personal comfort level, as both programs offer far more than the average user will need on a daily basis. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Fluid

> So far I haven't found any hidden functions in X3, tho I'm not saying they're not there. I've only been playing with is for three days. But all the important functions that I want DO have buttons or menu items.


There are a bunch. Look under customizations and see all the the goodies you can add to your workspace. I have maxed out my customizations for the most part and totally revamped the interface to my needs. Custom macros, custom toolbars and buttons, etc.


----------



## Moo Spot Prints

Chani said:


> so unless you read the tutorials and help files, you don't even know they're there.


Lol. That's exactly the problem. Tons of people pirate the software and never bother to RTFM. They then proceed to ***** about how hard it is to use. Well, DUH - It's a complicated piece of software!

Another (potentially huge) difference between the two is multiplatform consistency. Adobe makes their suite for Mac and Windows (and Linux too if I'm not mistaken). Corel is Windoze only.


----------



## Chani

I didn't get a manual with mine. I bought the student license so all of its documentation is online. No biggie.

I'm not knocking Illustrator users at all. If you learned on Illy and you're comfortable with it, that's all that matters. I learned on Illy, too, but I prefer X3 after only working with it for a few days.

BTW, After playing around with CS last night I found a few more things that I didn't know were there, which is cool, but I still find X3 more intuitive for me.


----------



## orangehead

I must agree with smutek in saying I prefer mixing the two Adobe programs: Illustrator and Photoshop!


----------



## Shaliza

I also love mixing Illustrator & PS. I've come up with some cool things that I like.

I agree with Moo Spot Prints though. No one is just going to wake up one day & know how to use Illustrator. That's why the manual/tutorials are there. You're supposed to read up if you don't get it.


----------



## gothicaleigh

I prefer the Adobe products (illustrator, photoshop)to Corel. But from the people whom I know using each it just seems that preference depends upon which you learned first. The results are too close to say which is actually "better" technically though.

Honestly, my most used program is Flexi 8. It's designed specifically for sign making and print&cut vinyl (which may not be of use to some of you, but there is nothing better for those using vinyl or print and cut transfers).

SA International - Software Solutions for Sign Making, Printing and Woodworking


----------



## Chani

From eveything Mark has told me, I'd need to agree that Flexi is the way to go for vinyl. Unfortunately it's $3,000-$3,500 (or more), so that's out of the question for us right now.


----------



## clicksigns

Chani said:


> From eveything Mark has told me, I'd need to agree that Flexi is the way to go for vinyl. Unfortunately it's $3,000-$3,500 (or more), so that's out of the question for us right now.


Flexi is not the only way. Believe it or not, I use coreldraw for cutting vinyl for 9 years now.


----------



## Chani

No, I'm not saying that it's the only way.  There are MANY shops using CorelDRAW out there (Corel is pushing DRAW HARD on the sign industry lately), and Mark is perfectly happy using Corel, but he's talked about some of the features in Flexi, and it sounds like a VERY powerful program.

Just like you can do great things with less powerful 3d applications, but I prefer to use 3d Studio MAX, another $3,500 program. I can work faster in it compared to less expensive programs. Now I just need to upgrade from the student license to the commercial license so I can start making some money with it!


----------



## vctradingcubao

Chani, I'd like to know what are these special functions/features of Flexi. Maybe auto-nesting, etc.?


----------



## Chani

Sorry, Byron, I never got an email for your response...

I'm not exactly sure what all the special functions are in Flexi, but there are a lot of shaping tools that sound pretty cool, tho X3 has made some pretty big leaps in that area, as far as I can tell.

One thing that sounds REALLY cool with Flexi, tho, is that you can modify text shapes while remaining in text mode. The benefit of this would be like if you wanted to reshape an S or G or whatever, but after you do, you realize that you mispelled (or your customer changes) whatever you're making. With Flexi, from what Mark has told me, you can just go in and add or remove letters as if it were unmodified text.

An update on my situation: After playing with X3 for about seven or eight days, I've fallen in love with it, so we bought it (again, but this time for me)! Hopefully it will arrive before my trial ends so I won't need to be without it for several days.

I'm really digging deep into X3 and all its functions, so I've even taught Mark a few things, and he's used CorelDRAW for YEARS! 

Every day I find something new and cool (and very useful). It was a $92 well spent. 

I just wish the version we bought (OEM DVD Case, not box) came with the quick reference card. Oh, well. That's not worth the extra $300 to buy it directly from Corel.


----------



## vctradingcubao

Chani said:


> One thing that sounds REALLY cool with Flexi, tho, is that you can modify text shapes while remaining in text mode. The benefit of this would be like if you wanted to reshape an S or G or whatever, but after you do, you realize that you mispelled (or your customer changes) whatever you're making. With Flexi, from what Mark has told me, you can just go in and add or remove letters as if it were unmodified text.


Sound like a real cool feature! Maybe it will be included in X4!


----------



## GoodArtwork

*Corel or Illustrator*

*I absolutely love Illustrator but I have people saying Corel is better. I really cannot see why.*


----------



## Chani

I'm not saying on e is better over the other for everyone, but for me, X3 is much easier to use and just as powerful as Illustrator.

I've given several reasons why I prefer CorelDRAW. Now I'd like to hear from others to find out *WHY* they prefer one software to another.

It would be especially helpful if people who have used BOTH programs to chime in...


----------



## Fluid

For me out of the box Corel was easier to learn without any help or training.


----------



## clicksigns

Fluid said:


> For me out of the box Corel was easier to learn without any help or training.


I agree with Richard, I use both software and I always come back to CorelDraw and sometimes if a friend wants an file from me in Illustrator, what I do is I do everything in CorelDraw then save it as Illustrator file. I give it to him and would say "Illustrator can do a good job" but the truth is it was done in CorelDraw.


----------



## Buechee

superiorgraphix said:


> Illustrator or PhotoShop, that's the way to go...


Both of these. I use them both and if you can get a copy of the two, you'll be okay. They are high, so go to the Adobe site and see if you can get them in a combo pack and sabe $$$.


----------



## clicksigns

Coreldraw X3 is way cheaper than the Adobe combo. If you buy the CorelDraw X3 suite, it comes with CorelPhoto Paint (Photoshop version of Corel) Here is the list that is included:


CorelDRAW® X3
*NEW!* Corel® PowerTRACE X3
Corel® PHOTO-PAINT® X3
Corel CAPTURE™ X3


----------



## Chani

If you go to ebay, you can find the CorelDRAW X3 Suite for less than $100. You don't get the templates or books like you would if you ordered directly through Corel, but you can always buy those seperately if you really need them and still come out ahead. 

You just need to read the fine print on ebay or you'll end up with a pre-registered copy or student license.

We ordered it from one seller on ebay and Mark installed and registered it with no problem. We went back to the same seller for mine, and I'm just waiting for my copy to arrive.


----------



## gmille39

*Re: Corel or Illustrator*



GoodArtwork said:


> *I absolutely love Illustrator but I have people saying Corel is better. I really cannot see why.*


 
Coke/ Pepsi
Chevy/ Ford
Blondes /Brunettes

It's whatever works for you. I've made a lot of money using Corel and I'm sure I could make a lot of money using Illustrator. Whether one is better than the other is irrelevant.


----------



## Chani

That's very true, but the original poster wanted to know what program was better for them, so I'm trying to get people to say *WHY* they like one software package over the next.

I'm also curious why some people prefer Illustrator. I've used both, and CorelDRAW just seems easier and just as powerful (and much less expensive).

I'll still use Photoshop and Illustrator for raster files and web graphics respectively, but I prefer to design in Corel.


----------



## baumwolle

Chani said:


> I'm also curious why some people prefer Illustrator.


I prefer it because I also use Photoshop and InDesign. Once you learn the principles of one program, picking up the others is much easier. Once you learn to think in Adobe it's hard to switch to another language.

Plus, I do love the way that the programs are integrated. The workflow was more clunky when I used Freehand for a vector program.


----------



## gmille39

I've never used Illustrator so I can't comment on the software. I bought Corel X3 basically because I was looking for a program and it was one I saw a lot of advertising on. I knew about Illustrator but the price really made me shy away since I was just starting out with my business. I bought Corel for around $80 and have since bought a ton of training from a couple sources including tutorials from Richard. I won't say it's easy to use, but with a little playing around and going through tutorials and my training DVD's it seems easy to learn. For six months I've been able to do enough to make good money with it. Now I'm taking it to the next level to do more detailed designs.


----------



## vctradingcubao

Maybe it's more exciting if somebody will start a poll, CorelDraw vs. Illustrator!


----------



## Wags

It depends on which program you learn and use the most in my opinion. I have used Corel (earlier versions on PC), then on Macs I've used Illustrator, Freehand, PhotoShop, Quark, Pagemaker, InDesign and others. My point is whatever program you choose you will learn to make it work for you. I used Illustrator 95% of the time and Freehand maybe 5%. Therefore I like Illustrator better since I am more familiar with its layout and features. That does not mean Freehand is less of a program, just not as easy to jump into and remember where everything is located. 

A good vector program is a great help in design but it seems these days most applications are trying to be all things for all people. Some are more successful than others. If you can find a friend that has the programs you are thinking of using ask if you can test drive them on his computer. This might give you an idea of ease of use and menu layout. Good luck with your choice.


----------



## queenVee

sunnydayz said:


> I have designed some by hand, some are a mix of clipart and my own stuff, and some are from a artist that I bought license of his art( the retro vintage stuff). that is what is nice with corel draw, no matter what experience you have, it is a easy program to use. I dont use the clipart from the cds so much, I pay for a subscription clipart online as they have more to choose from and better quality clipart than the Corel Draw clipart. That is one negative I can say about corel draw is that the clipart it comes with has not come a long way over the years. but the program itself has made leaps and bounds since its earlier versions.
> 
> Bobbie


Hi Bobbie,
Have you tried the "smart designer" guess you can use this program with corel drawl.. I checked out Tools for screenprinting, sign making, laser engraving, embroidery, promotional products and talked to a rep who showed me a demo. seemed like something I can learn and use ... the package he put together was expensive. but it looked user friendly.. I worry because I have no clue on graphics. I bearly can get around on the computer lol!!! what kind of advice to you think on that smart designer program with corel draw for someone like me??


----------



## Gunslinger

Vee,

Smart Designer is a great add-on for Corel X3, simplifies a ton of stuff and we haven't used 90% of the things you can do with it. Our rep was Mike Frazier, and he has remained very helpful (even willing to talk us through a design) ever since our purchase. Every bit of it has an included training manual that will guide you through everything. I highly recommend it.


----------



## sunnydayz

I have never used smart designer, but I know alot of others here have. I just use either illustrator or corel draw.


----------



## Artwear By Alida

durakraft said:


> I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks


I have heard Rapid Weaver is good, similiar to Illustrator....good price.

Then there is free open source software. Inkscape is good.

Depends on what sort of computer you have for open source software.


----------



## Gunslinger

True enough, Alida ... I have Inkscape here, but couldn't install it without overwriting files that might effect other programs on Vista.


----------



## Artwear By Alida

Gunslinger said:


> True enough, Alida ... I have Inkscape here, but couldn't install it without overwriting files that might effect other programs on Vista.


Yes, when I decided to try the t-shirt e-commerce biz, I went around to alot of shops and they all were using Macs. I switched and will never go back to Windows. I like all the open source software which is free or you can donate.

Rapid Weaver is on sale right now at the Apple Store online.
I think you can use that on Vista perhaps if you have bootcamp.

That's great software and CHEAP!

Also, I read on another forum that CompUSA is going out of business so this week go check one out to see if the sales have started yet. Lots of cool computers and software at cheap prices.

Macs were made more for graphic works, I think, but then I know alot of the young kids coming out of school for graphic arts have Microsoft operating systems...it's just they get hacked to much...but there is a virus in the wild now for Macs they can't patch.....the hackers are going to start targeting Mac operating systems more and more.....I just heard Macs are easier to patch. Less time worrying about security with Macs, but you still have to keep up on all the latest news.

I get weekly emails from the government and secunia on what bugs are out there.
www.cert.gov is my favorite....when there was a bug on THE Fed's own site, I sent in an incident report and they called me TWICE and asked what was going on...it took them two days to get the pop-up off their own government site. Security is so important if you are going to deal in e-commerce.

Later....


----------



## FRACTURE

i was wondering wut u thought about corel draw 5???????


----------



## queenVee

sunnydayz said:


> I have never used smart designer, but I know alot of others here have. I just use either illustrator or corel draw.


thank you!


----------



## Artwear By Alida

FRACTURE said:


> i was wondering wut u thought about corel draw 5???????


Really, any of the software is good...it's what you learn. 

Inkscape is good open source....to tell you the truth...I know only a little about how to do computer graphics...I only try them out and then give up. I am "html" challenged. All my art is hand drawn. I am still in the "dark ages" but plan to keep it that way. Hand drawn art of t-shirts is getting to be a lost art, so perhaps I am a holding on to a dying art in itself.

But I know about the different software and what the printer use who I have outsourced jobs to.

Some like Corel Draw. Some like Illustrator. I think Corel Draw works best on Windows Platforms and Illustrator, and some others are more geared to Mac operating system software.

It's really what you get used to and how creative you are.

But Corel Draw is extremely popular among graphic artists. I've seen great designs produced with it.

I think there are a variety of Corel Draw products, depending on what your needs are.

Happy Holidays


----------



## sunnydayz

As far as corel draw 5, I would try to get something newer as that is a very old version and there have been alot of great updates since that version. The new corel draw has a really good trace on the program. If you already have version 5 it is really worth it to get the uprade.


----------



## Solmu

FRACTURE said:


> i was wondering wut u thought about corel draw 5???????


As in the one that came out in 1994? I think the Amish would just about consider using that.


----------



## Unik Ink

Why don't they make a mac version of Corel Draw? I would like to try it out but I can't.


----------



## Solmu

Unik Ink said:


> Why don't they make a mac version of Corel Draw?


They used to. They stopped. Presumably because people who are willing to pay more for a better computing experience, are prepared to pay more for a better software experience - making Corel's software sales less than great.


----------



## TripleT

FRACTURE said:


> i was wondering wut u thought about corel draw 5???????


 
Hi, starr - Forget about 5 (and 6 - 12), if you're going to buy, X3 is the latest version. It's a great program and very easy to learn.


----------



## Gunslinger

Solmu said:


> As in the one that came out in 1994? I think the Amish would just about consider using that.


ROFL, Lewis ...

The only thing I dislike about Corel 3X, is that it can take a lot of time to process certain things you wanna do to a given design. I tried the other day to process an underbase for a complex design ... but after 5 minutes, I gave up on it. Illustrator never has such processing delays.


----------



## jimbo17

I have been using PhotoShop for about 8 years and really thought it was the greatest software for designing until I purchased CorelDraw!!!!!

When I first started to try and learn CorelDraw I did what most do and would swear at it and get mad.

But after learning more about the program and how everything working it is much faster to design with CorelDraw then it ever was with PhotoShop.

For photo type work I still use PhotoShop but for all the design work I do it's CorelDraw hands down.

Once you learn how to use CorelDraw it can do everything and more and faster.

When you are designing and looking for letterering styles it is so much faster then PhotoShop and this along saves me a great deal of time.

I use them both but no longer swear at CorelDraw once I learned how to use it.

For any one trying to learn CorelDraw just go to Utube and there are many great tutorals on how to learn to do different things using CorelDraw and you can watch them over and over for Free!!!!!!!!!

Jimbo


----------



## queenVee

jimbo17 said:


> I have been using PhotoShop for about 8 years and really thought it was the greatest software for designing until I purchased CorelDraw!!!!!
> 
> When I first started to try and learn CorelDraw I did what most do and would swear at it and get mad.
> 
> But after learning more about the program and how everything working it is much faster to design with CorelDraw then it ever was with PhotoShop.
> 
> For photo type work I still use PhotoShop but for all the design work I do it's CorelDraw hands down.
> 
> Once you learn how to use CorelDraw it can do everything and more and faster.
> 
> When you are designing and looking for letterering styles it is so much faster then PhotoShop and this along saves me a great deal of time.
> 
> I use them both but no longer swear at CorelDraw once I learned how to use it.
> 
> For any one trying to learn CorelDraw just go to Utube and there are many great tutorals on how to learn to do different things using CorelDraw and you can watch them over and over for Free!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Jimbo


thank you very much


----------



## lokster

lol i used to swear at photoshop when i was learning it. i think trying to learn any graphic software at first is hard and once youve mastered one its hard to migrate. im having a tough time from photoshop to corel ^^


----------



## tgasu

Illustrator / Photoshop / CorelDraw...etc...

Which is the easiest to get separations printed?


----------



## tgasu

Also, for printing acceptable halftones for screenprinting.??


----------



## Artwear By Alida

What type of computer do you have? That's one of the most important things in which to decide which software you use.

Happy New Year!!!!

If you ever use open source, the free Inkscape and Gimp are great.


----------



## Rodney

tgasu said:


> Illustrator / Photoshop / CorelDraw...etc...
> 
> Which is the easiest to get separations printed?


Either one of those will work. Illustrator and CorelDraw would probably be your best choices to look into.


----------



## arabianyte

Hello everyone. I am new to this forum and wanted to start designing and selling t-shirts. I would like to sell t-shirts with a political slogan but fear being sued. Do you know if the political candidates have any reference to their name legally protected? My biggest fear is being sued.


----------



## superiorgraphix

*Re: Political teeshirts*

I'm 99% sure Politics are free reign, check out the tees on Cafepress.com, sky's the limit on those guys, I'll try to find it BUT there is something stating the legality of political candidates and it's pretty open, you can do just about anything surrounding politicians. I've seen the copyright laws concerning this and I was pretty suprised myself at what you can get away with, BUT like I said, check out that website and you will see what I'm talking about...hope that helps.
Steve
Superior Graphix - Home
Untitled Document


----------



## gemais

When I first started reading this thread I was about to cry. I have just bought CorelX4 and thought I had made a mistake. But on reading further I felt better as a lot of you have good things to say about it. I have been using Photoshop for ages but I needed the tracing feature of Corel. Must say I havnt had much time to learn it yet, but hope it lives up to its promises.


----------



## TripleT

gemais said:


> When I first started reading this thread I was about to cry. I have just bought CorelX4 and thought I had made a mistake. But on reading further I felt better as a lot of you have good things to say about it. I have been using Photoshop for ages but I needed the tracing feature of Corel. Must say I havnt had much time to learn it yet, but hope it lives up to its promises.


Don't cry, gemais, you made a wise choice.


----------



## gmille39

Yes, there's no crying in t-shirt design. Corel is a great program. I do all my work in Corel.


----------



## Wags

I have not read all the posts in this thread but I use Macs for all of our production work. We use Adobe Illustrator almost exclusively for all design work and some PhotoShop. Illustrator is far better for text and line art since it is a vector based program. PhotoShop is much better for photographs since it is a raster based program. I used Corel many, many years ago when I was still using a PC. I'm sure it has gotten much better over the years and for most will suffice for general use.

My advice if you have an older Mac running OS9 is to try to find an older version of Illustrator or PhotoShop. They will work very well for T-shirt design and many other applications. I am using Illustrator CS3 on a new Mac running OSX but also regularly use Illustrator 8 on one of my older Macs running OS9. You really can save some money this way and have a great program as well.


----------



## 3XODUS1190

is there a way to get these programs with pretty much little to no money?


----------



## smutek

3XODUS1190,

Look into inkscape and gimp. Blender as well if you are into 3D.


----------



## graphicsguru

TripleT said:


> Don't cry, gemais, you made a wise choice.



See it in action at YouTube - alexisgalvez's Channel


----------



## huggybear1

I have Illustrator but corel draw if your on a budget


----------



## Moo Spot Prints

3XODUS1190 said:


> is there a way to get these programs with pretty much little to no money?


Buy an older version. You can get CS1 or CS2 versions for next to nothing. Older corels are probably even cheaper as it costs less to begin with.


----------



## CUSTOM UK

*Hi. I predominantly use Corel Draw X3 and Photoshop. I also use Illustrator occasionally, plus some specialist software for image manipulation.*

*You can download demos of all the major software for evaluation, to see which you feel most comfortable with. Only advice I'd give is to stick predominantly with one program. When I have Corel Draw and Illustrator open at the same time, flicking from one to the other can really slow down my progress.*

*Software is only a tool, just like a saw or a hammer is. It cannot deliver creativity on its own.*


----------



## ramoody5

hI FOLKS, THIS IS MY FIRST POST EVA IN THIS SITE:
ANY WAYS,
I'm thinking to start the tsjirt productons, easily and low order, 
As I don't know anything about tshirt designing (althoug I am a graphics designer).
So which program is the final, I mean yes I do design it on photoshop but what is the program used by the factory it self when printing??? and what resolution should the designs be???

I will be cery thankfull if anyone replys,
Thanks


----------



## TMOGUL

corel has my vote


----------



## Rodney

ramoody5 said:


> hI FOLKS, THIS IS MY FIRST POST EVA IN THIS SITE:
> ANY WAYS,
> I'm thinking to start the tsjirt productons, easily and low order,
> As I don't know anything about tshirt designing (althoug I am a graphics designer).
> So which program is the final, I mean yes I do design it on photoshop but what is the program used by the factory it self when printing??? and what resolution should the designs be???
> 
> I will be cery thankfull if anyone replys,
> Thanks


All the answers you need are right here in this thread  

There is no "final" answer. What is "best" will be based on what software you personally (or someone else personally) finds easiest to use or what they are most comfortable with.

All the pros/cons/suggestions are right here  Now it's up to you to pick one and start learning how to use it and start designing!


----------



## SIMPLICITY

Can anyone tell me if photoshop can be used for t shirt designs. also do "HAVE TO" convert my psd files to a vector file such as ai or cdr for me to print on a t shirt, because honestly I have been trying to use illustrator for some time now and its just frustratingly complicated. Anyone???? Thanks.


----------



## Moo Spot Prints

SIMPLICITY said:


> Can anyone tell me if photoshop can be used for t shirt designs. also do "HAVE TO" convert my psd files to a vector file such as ai or cdr for me to print on a t shirt, because honestly I have been trying to use illustrator for some time now and its just frustratingly complicated. Anyone???? Thanks.


Yes. You need to be careful about scaling -- Your image needs to be clean at whatever size you want printed. Color separations should not be a problem for any decent printer.

Try corel or get a book and spend the time to learn illustrator. It's a steep learning curve but well worth it in the end. Photoshop and Illustrator complement each other with some overlap but they are different beasts.


----------



## Sci Phoenix

Photoshop & Illustrator


----------



## Hwy101

Hands down the best in both categories is Adobe. Both Illustrator and Photoshop are *GIA* (Graphic Industry of America) and *PIA* (Printer's Industry Assoc) certified as the tools of the trade.

Illustrator is the best vector based program
Photoshop is the best raster based program

It's all of matter of what your preference is. Professional (Adobe) tools or prosumer tools (Corel)


----------



## Moo Spot Prints

Hwy101 said:


> Illustrator is the best vector based program
> Photoshop is the best raster based program


Uh oh. Here we go again...


----------



## smutek

It is a silly conversation, isn't it, but one brought up by new people consistently.

The truth is knowledge and choice of software has nothing to do with being a good artist.

Nothing.

A good artist is not a commodity whose value is determined by how skillful they are with some rotten photoshop filter.

You can take a person with less talent and give them the adobe master suite, maya, cinema 4D, every other software you can dream of along with every gomedia style clip art library on the net and they will get smoked by a skilled artist armed with no more than a pencil, a prismacolor marker, an exacto knife, some film and an imagination, every single time.

So, given that, there is no "best", and that is the truth.

Unfortunately, the truth is also is that if you are planning on getting a job in the design field, working for someone else, you are going to need to know adobe, bottom line, end of story. Sure, there may be some exceptions, but Adobe is, for now at least, industry standard in the design world.

If you aren't looking to work for someone else save your money and go open source, inkscape, gimp, blender and scribus. If you are looking to get a job learn adobe.

With dedication, passion and love of the craft you'll eventually shine, regardless of what software package you decide to use, or not use.


----------



## GraphicGuy

I use illustrator, photoshop and flexisign pro plus.


----------



## maneverfix

If you know nothing about software, you better go for CORELDRAW, it is the best. 





durakraft said:


> I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks


----------



## Wags

SIMPLICITY said:


> Can anyone tell me if photoshop can be used for t shirt designs. also do "HAVE TO" convert my psd files to a vector file such as ai or cdr for me to print on a t shirt, because honestly I have been trying to use illustrator for some time now and its just frustratingly complicated. Anyone???? Thanks.


If you design in PhotoShop you can save them as EPS files but PSD will work as well. We usually then place this file in Illustrator and add any type in Illustrator because it handles text better. After all it is a vector bases program and PhotoShop is not. Then when the design is set, we RIP the file and print. Very simple.


----------



## DTFuqua

Two things . First, does anybody realize this "discussion" has been going on here for over a year. And second. Don't get the educational version of corel. It doesn't have everything the complete version does if you are ever gonna need to add plug-ins to it.


----------



## flirteegirl

I am an accountant/business analyst by day and tee shirt designer by night. So, I am new to software and designing. Thus, I got both Adobe CS3 and CorelDraw X4. I am learning both and as I learn each day, I like using them both. Just depends on user preference I think. What's good for the goose may not be good for the gander! --did i quote that right?

Anyhow, design on!


----------



## dmfelder

We use Photoshop for direct to garment printing. We use Illustrator for screen printing. There is tremendous compatability, expecially when you throw in PDF files.


----------



## nowntaridhar

i use adobe photoshop . It works for me , for some reason i cant use to adobe illustrator , but i would recommend both


----------



## weall

Chani said:


> I've always wondered how to do certain things in Illustrator, but could never figure them out (even with it's help file (which I hate isn't a .chm file)).
> 
> Yesterday, after watching Mark do a bunch of work, I downloaded the 15 day trial of CorelDRAW X3.
> 
> WOW! I can do everything I always wanted to do in Illustrator!
> - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- -- - - - -- - - - --
> 
> There are two things:
> 1.Any problems in quality of any Designs,If we make the desings using Photoshop with CorelDraw?
> 2.Which is one is-CorelDraw or Illustrator- makes it possible for best Designs and for whatever designs and endless designs to make?


----------



## K Chez

Whatever software you use is only as good as the person using it. I can go buy a 56 Les Paul Gold top, but it doesn't mean I can play it.

Corel and Illustrator are both good programs, Corel is easier to learn. ANYTHING that can be done in Illustrator can be done in Corel and vice versa.


----------



## livingagain75

mrdisp said:


> For those on budget, what about Inkscape? I found it and seems okay although I am not really an artist at all and don't know what I am doing. I'm sure lacks CorelDraw or Illustrator ease and abilities but it also depends on what trying to do. Right? Has anybody used Inkscape and liked it? Thanks.


Ya I'm familiar with Inkscape. And think its an awesome program. Especially if you don't have a lot of money to spend. I haven't tried Illustrator yet but will probably be getting it soon. I have been using Inscape to familiarize myself with Vector Graphics and can't wait for the upgrade to AI. Hopefully I can make some sweet designs...


----------



## mdowell87

does any one like paint shop pro?


----------



## 8th Day

I like how this thread gets resurrected about this time every year. 

Me? I'm pro-Adobe.

I'm a professional, therefore I use Adobe. 



Seriously though, what I use is:
Photoshop CS5 (raster)
Illustrator CS5 (vector)
FlexiSIGN-PRO 8 (vinyl)
Wilcom ES-65 Designer (embroidery)
ZBrush 4 (3D)



mdowell87 said:


> does any one like paint shop pro?


For what though? I'm sure _someone_ likes it... never used it myself, so not sure how useful it is for shirt design...


----------



## floridabruce

I started with Corel Draw version 4 back in early 90's and am currently using version 11. I LOVE it!!


----------



## romeopaul29

I'm a designer in the biz myself as well as I gotta tell, if you getting anything screen printed, Adobe Illustrator is always the most beneficial way to go.


----------



## Fluid

CorelDRAW, Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Photoshop are the top programs. All three have their plus and minuses yet for anyone to say one is better than the other for screen printing is just not knowledgeable enough.

CorelDRAW is a lot cheaper than the Adobe products and comes with Corel Photopaint (similar to Photoshop). It is a lot easier to learn and is a lot more user friendly and has been geared towards to T Shirt industry over the past 4-5 versions. Things you can do in Corel you cannot in Illustrator thus the need for more programs. 

I personally can do what you illy guys do in my Corel in most likely half the time.

Adobe Illustrator - Top Vector graphics program in the market and your going to pay for it. 
Adobe Photoshop - Top raster program in the market and your going to pay for it. 

I have all 3 applications as well as many other Adobe products yet I ALWAYS use CorelDRAW for 75% of my work and 100% of my vector work.


----------



## William j Martin

As a totally new begginer what is the difference between coral draw x3 and coral draw x5 which 1 would be best to purchase to learn to create t-shirt designs does it matter is x5 just a newer more up to date program pls explain


----------



## Corel Whisperer

X5 is the latest version available. You might still be able to find X3 for sale less than X5. They did add some new functions both work well. Check out what OS are use with both versions and see if it matches what you have.


----------



## DTFuqua

What happened to X4? I have X3 and X4. you should be able to get X4 as cheap as anything else and it does have a feature (maybe more than just one) that is worth having called "center line trace" which X3 doesn't have and turns out to be worth having. Don't have any knowledge of X5 so I can't say much about it.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

DTFuqua said:


> What happened to X4? I have X3 and X4. you should be able to get X4 as cheap as anything else and it does have a feature (maybe more than just one) that is worth having called "center line trace" which X3 doesn't have and turns out to be worth having. Don't have any knowledge of X5 so I can't say much about it.


 They didn't ask about X4 so I didn't list it. I like X4 better than X5 and have choosen to stay with X4 for now.
CW


----------



## DTFuqua

AHH, keeping the good stuff on the down low!! JK, I like my X4 and don't see any reason to change unless it might be a change on the way the colors come out. I can't seem to get a real red for anything.


----------



## immagic

I have both Illustrator CS and Corel X4 and for Screen Printing Corel is 100 miles in front. The fact that you can have multiple pages on a drawing justifies it alone as we manually separate and set trapping. All the functions that are in Illustrator are in Corel it just works differently and this makes Illustrator people upset. I find it is also a bit of a Mac v PC thing as all designers seem to start out on Mac and Illustrator is the only game in town but we who need to work for a living can only afford a PC.


----------



## Prytec Solutions

Checkout SignLAB, easy learning, www.cadlink.com.


----------



## miktoxic

immagic said:


> I have both Illustrator CS and Corel X4 and for Screen Printing Corel is 100 miles in front. The fact that you can have multiple pages on a drawing justifies it alone as we manually separate and set trapping.


*
you mean like layers in illustrator? you mean like the color separation features in illy and photoshop that are not surpassed by any other software on the market? you mean like the company that puts out the best creative designs packages than anyone in the world?

don't want to throw gas on the fire of this always insanely debated topic but if you don't like a product because of whatever you shouldn't comment about how something is better than another when you obviously haven't taken the time to learn each on an equal playing field. just like mac vs. pc. this stuff needs to be put to bed and to each let us all use what we like to use without the one is better than the other argument. some can do work in corel faster than i can but i could do the same in illustrator. so who's right?*


----------



## immagic

I agree that the argument is insane, that is why it gets the most posts, the insane ones usually do. I did not mean like layers as you can have these in Corel too, I mean totally separate pages in the one document. This argument will never go anywhere as I have one person here who uses Illustrator exclusively and another who uses Corel - both are great programs and do the job equally well, it just depends what you learn first. My comment about Mac's was a bit snide, for which I apologise as I have both.


----------



## leunam12

I just wish that Illustrator had the ability to customize the right-click menu to add commands that you use a lot like "import", "copy", "paste", "print" and even custom commands like I can do in Corel; but when I go to the Adobe feature-request forum and request this kind of functionality I always get smarty answers and a snobish I-am-better-than-you-because-I-use-Illustrator attitude. Sad!


----------



## miktoxic

immagic said:


> I agree that the argument is insane, that is why it gets the most posts, the insane ones usually do. I did not mean like layers as you can have these in Corel too, I mean totally separate pages in the one document. This argument will never go anywhere as I have one person here who uses Illustrator exclusively and another who uses Corel - both are great programs and do the job equally well, it just depends what you learn first. My comment about Mac's was a bit snide, for which I apologise as I have both.


*
it's totally about what you as the user were brought in using and know and feel comfortable with. i don't mean to diss coreldraw, i just don't use it and never have. hey it's probably awesome but why switch when illy does the same things but maybe in a different way?

the mac and pc debate is all mac for me. being in graphics and design field it's hard to argue the fact that macs are waaaaay more pleasing to the eye and simpler to use. but i also have both.*


----------



## printerjohn41

adobe illustrator


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

immagic said:


> I have both Illustrator CS and Corel X4 and for Screen Printing Corel is 100 miles in front.


Only in certain areas. Illustrator is "way out in front" in others of course. Neither of them are "best all around". It just depends on what you're doing with them.



immagic said:


> The fact that you can have multiple pages on a drawing justifies it alone


Illustrator also does multi-page documents.



immagic said:


> as we manually separate and set trapping.


I don't know if you're connecting multi-page documents to doing separations and trapping, etc, but Separations and trapping have nothing to do with multi-pages unless you're doing some kind of bootleg technique. I would also say that you'd be hard pressed to match Illustrator's separations prowess including trapping, underbases, etc. It's a very strong area of Illustrator. I'd be very curious to hear how you do vector trapping in Corel Draw. I've spent a lot of time trying to work out a good technique but I never came up with anything other than allowing a rip to do it.



immagic said:


> All the functions that are in Illustrator are in Corel it just works differently


Definitely not true. Not even logical since the two products are made by different companies. This is not to say that one is better than the other, but that they are simply different and have different featuresets. Many things in Corel Draw aren't even touched upon in Illustrator. And the same goes the other way around.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

The best one.....is the one that works for you!
CW


----------



## JLAM

immagic said:


> I have both Illustrator CS and Corel X4 and for Screen Printing Corel is 100 miles in front. The fact that you can have multiple pages on a drawing justifies it alone as we manually separate and set trapping. All the functions that are in Illustrator are in Corel it just works differently and this makes Illustrator people upset. I find it is also a bit of a Mac v PC thing as all designers seem to start out on Mac and Illustrator is the only game in town but we who need to work for a living can only afford a PC.


So I have a question does it make any difference to use CD x4(x5,etc) in a PC Vs a Mac? Right now I don't want to afford a Mac... I'm not sure yet. I know that a Mac is easier to see for a matter of speaking. And another thing. Learning to use CD X4 as a noob with out any background in designing programs, is to hard? What can i do to learn fast?


----------



## JLAM

Corel Whisperer said:


> The best one.....is the one that works for you!
> CW


By that you mean... Corel Draw right?


----------



## Catbox

Corel Whisperer is right... The best software is the one that you like using... Try the 30 day trials of Photoshop/Illustrator and Corel. There is a learning curve with all of them but usually one will feel the most comfortable to you.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

JLAM said:


> By that you mean... Corel Draw right?


Not necessarily! For me it is Corel Draw Graphics Suite! For you it may be the Adobe products, for someone else it might be one of the free online products.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

JLAM said:


> So I have a question does it make any difference to use CD x4(x5,etc) in a PC Vs a Mac? Right now I don't want to afford a Mac... I'm not sure yet. I know that a Mac is easier to see for a matter of speaking. And another thing. Learning to use CD X4 as a noob with out any background in designing programs, is to hard? What can i do to learn fast?


 Corel doesn't have an updated version that works on a Mac.


----------



## 8th Day

immagic said:


> The fact that you can have multiple pages on a drawing justifies it alone as we manually separate and set trapping.


Please look up:

InDesign.
PDF.
Illustrator links.
Multiple artboards as pages.

Corel has nothing that comes close to Adobe's full Creative Suite. If you believe that Corel is quicker, you just aren't using Adobe right.



leunam12 said:


> I just wish that Illustrator had the ability to customize the right-click menu to add commands that you use a lot like "import", "copy", "paste", "print" and even custom commands like I can do in Corel; but when I go to the Adobe feature-request forum and request this kind of functionality I always get smarty answers and a snobish I-am-better-than-you-because-I-use-Illustrator attitude. Sad!


Learn keystrokes? Much quicker than "right click, scroll through a list and choose which one you want".
"copy" = Ctrl + C
"Paste" = Ctrl + V
"Print" = Ctrl + P
"custom commands" = Edit > Keyboard Sortcuts

Don't want to take the time to learn the program the right way? No problem, your Wacom tablet will also have customizable pop-up or radial menus (you _are_ using a wacom tablet for your designs, right?).



Fluid said:


> Adobe Illustrator - Top Vector graphics program in the market and your going to pay for it.
> Adobe Photoshop - Top raster program in the market and your going to pay for it.


As it is with most other things, you get what you pay for.


----------



## SIMPLICITY

Hey thanks guys for the reply....i'm actually using corel x5 and its working for me... So thanks again


----------



## tnkgaby

I prefer Adobe products, but its you choice, you should give them all a try and use the one you like most!


----------



## JLAM

Corel Whisperer said:


> Corel doesn't have an updated version that works on a Mac.


Thanks. I also want to know how easy to learn to use is Corel Draw? And more exactly, how hard would be learn for someone that had never use a software design? I think that by learning the basics will be enough for me, for now. 
So any help would be good.


----------



## LeftKoast

Is anyone familiar with a program called "Little Snitch"?


----------



## DTFuqua

8th day said:


> please look up:
> 
> Indesign.
> Pdf.
> Illustrator links.
> Multiple artboards as pages.
> 
> Corel has nothing that comes close to adobe's full creative suite. If you believe that corel is quicker, you just aren't using adobe right.
> Learn keystrokes? Much quicker than "right click, scroll through a list and choose which one you want".
> "copy" = ctrl + c
> "paste" = ctrl + v
> "print" = ctrl + p
> "custom commands" = edit > keyboard sortcuts
> don't want to take the time to learn the program the right way? No problem, your wacom tablet will also have customizable pop-up or radial menus (you _are_ using a wacom tablet for your designs, right?).
> As it is with most other things, you get what you pay for.


just get ready for a complete new education and a fat wallet :d


----------



## raylere

So I have been reading through this forum and found that everyone has there own preference to which software they use for creating designs. I am just getting into the industry as a hobby for now. This might be on another forum but I will ask anyway. Say I like an image on iStockphoto. I can buy the extended license for reproduction of 2000 tshirts. So, do I just download the image and upload it to the software (P.S. or CD)? If possible, then can I email it somehow to my screen printing company for them to make the design "come to life"?


----------



## Riderz Ready

JLAM said:


> Thanks. I also want to know how easy to learn to use is Corel Draw? And more exactly, how hard would be learn for someone that had never use a software design? I think that by learning the basics will be enough for me, for now.
> So any help would be good.


If you do not know a program at all it would be better to learn Adobe Illustrator - whether people like it of not it is the industry standard. furthermore it is 100 times more stable than Corel. We use both in our shop. The old geezers, me, use Corel mostly because that is what I learned on. The young guns all use AI. Corel is very unstable, locks up, not repsonsive, etc multiple times a day. Sure if you do simple vector art it works fine but anything of any complexity and it chokes espcially if you have large flat files you import into it. It is a bit easier to use than AI but learning Corel now is like buying a VCR.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

"like buying a VCR". LOL Most people I know who still try to stick with using Corel Draw have a love hate relationship with it. They have learned it, and are comfortable with how it works, but the crashing is unforgivable. But they also find Illustrator difficult to learn so they are stuck with Corel Draw crashing and glitching when not crashed. I did that for 10 years before I switched over to primarily Illustrator. It was not easy. I spent a lot of time thinking how I wished I had some feature or option, or that something was easier to do in Corel Draw. After the first year, I'd put most of that behind me. The reason was because I'd actually learned how to use Illustrator for the most part. The following years just made me really appreciate the power of Illustrator. Whenever I jump back into Corel Draw now for quick operation, I'm both feeling rusty and also returning to some features that I remember how much I liked how much they worked.


----------



## miktoxic

raylere said:


> So I have been reading through this forum and found that everyone has there own preference to which software they use for creating designs. I am just getting into the industry as a hobby for now. This might be on another forum but I will ask anyway. Say I like an image on iStockphoto. I can buy the extended license for reproduction of 2000 tshirts. So, do I just download the image and upload it to the software (P.S. or CD)? If possible, then can I email it somehow to my screen printing company for them to make the design "come to life"?


you would buy the image in a file that either you are going to open it up in or your screen printer is going to open it up in.

if you want to edit the graphic or add text etc. (depending on what the license allows you to do) then make sure it's applicable to the programs you have. hopefully your printer has the same programs. you just email him the file, he'll open it up, do what he has to do and call you if there are any problems. you just have to tell him all the specifics. what color(s) size on what kind of shirt blah blah blah.....


----------



## raylere

That is what I thought. I was just assuming that I would want to open it and edit it myself and then send over the final image. Then again, like you said, I can just send it to the printer and tell them what I want to happen.


----------



## 8th Day

butlermarie38 said:


> I find it difficult to use computer to make design. So I make a design free hand on paper and then scan to upload and use Photoshop to edit and resize or compress the file size. I know that’s a lengthy and tiring way of working on print t-shirts, But since I try to have a finesse and perfection on my work. I find it to be the best way to get a better design.


Have you tried a pen tablet? I used to be the same way before I bought a wacom. They have specialty pens and tips that simulate the feel of quite a few different art utensils (from graphite pencils to brushes and even airbrush). I find the results to be much better than scanning sketches, where you may lose much of your finer details.

You can produce freehand art on the computer now, it's not all technical design work.


----------



## GraphicsFactory

Titere said:


> Freehand! Althought no more upgrades...the death of a truly nice vector program has finally come


Agreed...RIP Freehand.


----------



## GraphicsFactory

butlermarie38 said:


> I find it difficult to use computer to make design. So I make a design free hand on paper and then scan to upload and use Photoshop to edit and resize or compress the file size. I know that’s a lengthy and tiring way of working on print t-shirts, But since I try to have a finesse and perfection on my work. I find it to be the best way to get a better design.


You almost sound apologetic...but don't. I was trained as a true graphic artist, long before computers. It is a lost art. More power to you!


----------



## RAV7

i'm just starting my business and wanted to become familiar with design. while researching i found a listing for an open source free software design program similar to illustrator. it is call inkspace and can be downloaded at inkspace.org. there is a photoshop like package called gimp . there are online tutorials to show you how it works. maybe someone who is more advanced can try these and get back with us. it would be nice to know how these stack up against the major brands.


----------



## immagic

If you search on Inkspace or Gimp in this forum you will find a wealth of info


----------



## livingagain75

I prefer dreamweaver...


----------



## keenanan3j

Adobe Illustrator, Corel Draw or Photoshop is a great way to go. 


catalog printing


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

Natashaimpinge said:


> Hello i am Natasha i joined this site recently and according to me Corel draw is the best software for designing tee shirts. and i personally have a question acually i want to know the best Ecommerce Website Development platform. so please help me out.


Wordpress with a good ecommerce template maybe is a good start. If you have plenty of money and plenty of business, then you can go with one of the more expensive solutions. I see you've linked to one ecommerce development solution. Those typically have all manner of additional costs which is fine but it depends on the scope of ones intended operation.


----------



## miktoxic

haven't we beaten this topic to death? i wish the newbies would understand if they used the search function on this website they'd probably find a hundred threads dealing with 'illustrator or corel or photoshop, which is best' blah blah blah.............................................

there's gotta be at least three new threads started about this same topic every week. they should all be consolidated into one big thread so the people who want to read these opinions can spend all week reading the years and years worth of comments left on these subjects instead of asking it over and over again.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

miktoxic said:


> haven't we beaten this topic to death? i wish the newbies would understand if they used the search function on this website they'd probably find a hundred threads dealing with 'illustrator or corel or photoshop, which is best' blah blah blah.............................................


Just one more hit PLEASE! LOL I have not been on here since the end of June and this thread it still going......
CW


----------



## paullo

hi, frends, i m from indonesia, how to make simulated color sep, for print dark shirt,which software can do it. sorry my english so poor.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

Hi Paullo, you really should make a new posting for your question to get more answers. 
To my knowledge you can’t sublimate onto dark garments. Sublimation is the process of dyeing a material normally 100% Poly. it needs to start out white. 
CW


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

Simulated Process, not Dye sublimation.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> Simulated Process, not Dye sublimation.


Duh! Sorry


----------



## RBMods

I've been using Corel since Corel 6 many many years ago. In the new Corel they use Pantone colors. Terrible and one of the worst thing you can use. Great for painting houses and cars but thats it. All my friends are using the Adobe Illustrator and I'm thinking thats the way to go. Every time I want to print on a different type of media I have to send in 4 profiles for each of my printers so I can have a profile made up so skin color and vibrant colors can be used. Been a big fight using the newest corel for me just trying to get the color profiles to match what is on my computer screen. Illustrator not much of a worry.


----------



## miktoxic

what printing company do you do work for that doesn't know how to match pantone colors????????

you don't think illustrator can use pantone color profiles?

it's only been a standard in print since when? i still have swatch books from the 80's. absurd.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

miktoxic said:


> what printing company do you do work for that doesn't know how to match pantone colors????????
> 
> you don't think illustrator can use pantone color profiles?
> 
> it's only been a standard in print since when? i still have swatch books from the 80's. absurd.


I think something must be getting "lost in the translation" or something. That comment didn't really make sense for me either. Must be something more too it than meets the eye.


----------



## livingagain75

livingagain75 said:


> I prefer dreamweaver...


I don't know where that came from. To clarify I use:

Dreamweaver to design websites,

Illy, Corel Draw 4, Inkskape and Photoshop to design shirts...


----------



## RBMods

miktoxic said:


> what printing company do you do work for that doesn't know how to match pantone colors????????
> 
> you don't think illustrator can use pantone color profiles?
> 
> it's only been a standard in print since when? i still have swatch books from the 80's. absurd.


Why would you want to have to match pantone colors when you don't need to?

Why would you want to use Illustrator with pantones when it already has the best color profile?

Don't care how long it's been around but it's been a up hill fight for me and I own different printers for different types of jobs I do. Pantone makes flesh reddish or a yellow looking at high pixel printing and has to be adjusted to get rid of this. Illustrator or photo shop I don't have to. Don't get me wrong, I have been using Corel since early 80's and I own 5X now. I do everything in Corel 5X and then print it out in photo shop to get away from the Pantone headaches.

So is this a forum that tells people how ignorant they are cause they do something different or have problems that some others don't? Am I seeing a big me little you going on because someone says something you don't agree with? Arm chair riddicules from the you can't touch me . So I can flame you all I want type of forum?

The problem is not with Pantone it's Pantone and Corel5X I'm having the problem with. Never had the problem with any other Corel product I've owned over the last 25 years.

http://www.inkjetcarts.us Here is where I get my profiles done.


----------



## Corel Whisperer

RBMods said:


> Why would you want to have to match pantone colors when you don't need to?
> 
> Why would you want to use Illustrator with pantones when it already has the best color profile?
> 
> Don't care how long it's been around but it's been a up hill fight for me and I own different printers for different types of jobs I do. Pantone makes flesh reddish or a yellow looking at high pixel printing and has to be adjusted to get rid of this. Illustrator or photo shop I don't have to. Don't get me wrong, I have been using Corel since early 80's and I own 5X now. I do everything in Corel 5X and then print it out in photo shop to get away from the Pantone headaches.
> 
> So is this a forum that tells people how ignorant they are cause they do something different or have problems that some others don't? Am I seeing a big me little you going on because someone says something you don't agree with? Arm chair riddicules from the you can't touch me . So I can flame you all I want type of forum?
> 
> The problem is not with Pantone it's Pantone and Corel5X I'm having the problem with. Never had the problem with any other Corel product I've owned over the last 25 years.
> 
> InkJetCarts Home Here is where I get my profiles done.


Ok, we get it you don’t like using Pantone colors, so why do you? Corel and all the rest of them let you work in CMYK and RGB and a whole list of others. If you are not creating something for hard print (books, magazines…) than don’t use Pantone. But I will tell you with my experience if you go trying to match a Customers Corporate logo with specs in Pantone using CMYK or RGB it will not be an exact match. 
If you are trying to match printed colors to your monitor, that is a totally different issue, and can be very difficult to achieve. That is where the correct profile comes in to play. It also takes a good eye to know how a color looks on screen will print and having a good color memory helps. This is something you learn over time and can’t get my reading a book. You could have ten of the same printers, set up all the same way and if you send the same design, from the same computer to each printer, each one will print a little differently. It is just the nature of technology. 
Oh and they don't use Pantone colors to paint houses.
Just my $.02 
CW


----------



## TulsaCane

We use photoshop and illustrator


----------



## miktoxic

yes, learn and prosper. 

rbmods you're right. why worry about setting up a file that everyone on the planet can use? do it different just cuz you don't like PANTONE COLORS? did someone named pantone like do something wrong against you??

my color profile: skipping through the tall grass hand in hand with my big muscular lover...all the while not letting what's in the picinic basket fall onto the ground. (joking) lah lah lah.

i wouldn't want to be from venus either.


----------



## atigerwanabee

You Guys are all right! Except I think Corel is a great program. However, I use it in conjunction with Digital Art Solutions Smart Template Program where I just edit the "Smart Templates" It makes me look like a "Graphics Editor" If you don't have any Ideas on what you wish to design Smart Designer and Corel Draw will help you considerably.


----------



## atigerwanabee

You Guys are all right! Except I think Corel is a great program. However, I use it in conjunction with Digital Art Solutions Smart Template Program where I just edit the "Smart Templates" It makes me look like a "Graphics Editor" If you don't have any Ideas on what you wish to design Smart Designer and Corel Draw will help you considerably.


----------



## Sues Shirts

CoralDraw is what our shop uses. I like it. It is easy to teach people how to use it and it works very well.


----------



## atigerwanabee

Hello! I use a program called Smart Designer from Digital Arts Solution. www.digitalartsolutions.com . There you can see all of their software. I only recommend Digital Graphics volumes 1 & 2. You can view all of their software. Also, I really like Action Illustrated's software as well(www.actionillustrated.com) . What both companies have. are tons of "Templates" A template is a completed graphics design. All you have to do is edit it to your Clients liking and it is done! Action Illustrated has more templates than digital art solutions have. DAS has more realistic Templates. Check them both out. Action Illustrated has all of their books on their site so you can thumb though them all and see what kinds of templates they have. Also, this Company called Printers Listings .com(PrinterListings - custom t-shirt printers reviewed at PrinterListings.com has companies that does outsourcing. Meaning that if you don't have your own equipment to print on to t-shirts they have a list of companies that you can send your artwork to and they can put your designs on transfers and send them back to you to put them on t-shirts if you have a heat transfer machine. I hope the above information will help you.


----------



## KEB

If you want to design for free you can go to Cadworxlive.com and design things there and then download to your output device, printer, whatever. Check it out. At least it's free. You can always purchase something if you don't like it.


----------



## KEB

Almost forgot. Me, I like Adobe Illustrator if not using Cadworxlive.com.


----------



## ryans830

i would have to say photoshop wins hands down


----------



## lemorris

The best tool, hands down...pencil and paper.

After that most of the software does the same kinda stuff in one way or another. 

I'm an adobe user, but I also use Corel, Painter, SAI, and recently mischief for stages in the art.

Good luck.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

Photoshop is the best overall. If I could only have a single program, I would easily choose Photoshop. I would certainly regret not having access to other things, and probably not be able to do other things, but I could do MOST things with Photoshop. No other single program do that. If you took Photoshop out of the options, I'm not sure what I would say. Photoshop is so far ahead of everything else that I would be missing far too much if I had to choose 1 program which is not Photoshop.


----------



## FullSpectrumSeps

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> Photoshop is the best overall. If I could only have a single program, I would easily choose Photoshop. I would certainly regret not having access to other things, and probably not be able to do other things, but I could do MOST things with Photoshop. No other single program do that. If you took Photoshop out of the options, I'm not sure what I would say. Photoshop is so far ahead of everything else that I would be missing far too much if I had to choose 1 program which is not Photoshop.


Lol... are we really in this discussion again?


Ok, come on, if you're talking about "one" program only... then with photoshop you are sorely lacking with any vector capabilities, at least the tools are horrible. And not spot-swatch based, so you'd always have to use channels to do stuff that can be output easily as "separated" art the way a vector program like illustrator works.

But I consider "CorelDraw Graphics Suite" like X6, to be one program... but let's say even without Photopaint... there are enough raster tools within Draw that I think it beats out any other "single program" for "Designing tshirts" whatever that means, lol!


I'm "full-spectrum" --- what is so wrong with learning how ALL the programs work to some degree and finding what works best in any given circumstance and using what works best for oneself??

Everything is going to have its pros, cons, advantages, disadvantages, and just differences. 

It takes some sort of scenario or "problem" which requires creative problem solving using one of these graphics programs as a tool, and the tools within the program, that would determine which one is "best" for "designing teeshirts".

So don't get me wrong, not trying to drum up the debate on Corel vs. Adobe... I'm saying does everyone have blinders on?

I've been working as a graphics and print pre-press professional for about 12 years in various modes working with computers, graphics, printing etc... I have had many situations where I worked with a PC and Mac side by side, using all manner of applications like Corel, Photoshop, Indesign, etc etc.... you have to learn all sorts of stuff, powerpoint, publisher, Acrobat, side-programs for all these depending on whatever industry or product/service you're working within.

There is this new program called mischief: 

Mischief | Sketching & Drawing & Painting Software | 61 Solutions

Seems like it would be great for just going into drawing digitally, it probably has advantages to others in terms of so many factors.

Cost, ease of use, quality, efficiency/speed, tool-set, interface etc etc....

It's great that people share in these discussions, but the questions that start them are so vague and generalized it's hilarious.


Then the hypotheticals start.... 

Well.. if I were marooned on an island with only an old dot-matrix printer and my choice between an Apple IIe and a DOS machine with Lotus 321, hmmm..... I"d have to choose...

oh wait we are in a world that has more options than that??


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

This is one of those times when I'm actually looking forward to the thread getting locked.


----------



## mmantyla

I would def say that we've had the most luck using Adobe Illustrator. There are actually a number of cost effective sites that can help you with getting relatively cheap designs for T-Shirts so you woudln't have to worry about doing that part yourself (fiverr.com being one of them).

But the key to selling your T Shirts is marketing them the right way, getting a clean, eCommerce, responsive website will help funnel people to your shirts. To get the people to your website you need a strong SEO strategy which targets the exact audience you need. 

~Matt
www.2guyscreative.com
[email protected]


----------



## Optiq

The best answer to this question is the one YOU will eventually discover from experimenting and learning how to utilize different ones to accomplish the things that make you stand out as an artist.... asking this question is the same as asking which is better to use for drawing between charcoal pencils, #2 lead pencils, and mechanical pencils....... that answer would depend on your style of art and the amount of solid lines and shading it has to it.... if you did more "life like" stuff that has NO solid lines and is pretty much all %100 shaded you might be better off using charcoal... if you do more "cartoonish" type of stuff with solid lines and hard borders between shadows and highlights..... you might be better off with the #2 pencil or Mechanical..... not to say you couldn't do either or with the others but in terms of HOW they result on paper the nature of each one is just a little better suited towards different things. Same with software.... nobody can really answer this but you.... and you really can't answer it until you find a way to start playing with them to see HOW you can accomplish what you need to accomplish with them..... only then will you be able to know which is "easier" and "better" for YOU personally.... other than that this post is going to point you in as many directions as there are programs to use because every artist is different... hope this helps..


----------



## TLK

lemorris said:


> The best tool, hands down...pencil and paper.
> 
> After that most of the software does the same kinda stuff in one way or another.
> 
> I'm an adobe user, but I also use Corel, Painter, SAI, and recently mischief for stages in the art.
> 
> Good luck.


Pencil and paper was probably right when this thread was started!


----------



## CashCartel

Adobe illustrator. It is a bit of an investment but you can make some pretty awesome stuff on it


----------



## Different

Corel Whisperer said:


> The best one.....is the one that works for you!
> CW


Ditto: I think that pretty much sums it up!


----------



## Raucher

Best software is one you are familiar with. For some reasons i am still using Freehand. But in design has some fantastic possibilities. For instance you can mix spot colors so you can aprox. see how it will look. Now i use overprint method but i only have the top color to see. But with some expirience of using colors over color In design has it great. But drawing in it is little poor. I am not familiar with newest version of Illustrator, but someone did say the can do it also. But Adobe pacage sure is the answer.


----------



## CashCartel

You can rent adobe cloud and get all of adobes apps for an x amount per month


----------



## keepitspinning

I have and use both. I was forced to lean Corel because my original plotter (cutter) didn't play well with Illustrator and Corel does. I tried Corel for designing, but remain partial to Illustrator, however I learned on Illustrator and I know the program and am far more proficient with it. There are things that Corel does that Adobe doesn't and vise versa. Bottom line is you can't go wrong with either. From the above posts, it is evident it is a matter of personal taste.


----------



## T Shirt Design

This is a great tool to design T shirts: T shirt design software: best tool to create customized products


----------



## PHP

Try this t shirt design software http://www.tshirtdesignscript.com/ - T shirt design software: best tool to create customized products


----------



## Iconoclasm

SilverLimit said:


> I'm a designer in the biz myself and I gotta tell ya, if you getting anything screen printed, Adobe Illustrator is always the best way to go. It'll run you a little high price-wise though. There's also the cheaper alternative Corel Draw, but Corel is to Illustrator what MS Paint is to Photoshop, so it's power is a little lacking.


I agree. It works the best!


----------



## AdvancedArtist

Iconoclasm said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SilverLimit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _I'm a designer in the biz myself and I gotta tell ya, if you getting anything screen printed, Adobe Illustrator is always the best way to go. It'll run you a little high price-wise though. There's also the cheaper alternative Corel Draw, but Corel is to Illustrator what MS Paint is to Photoshop, so it's power is a little lacking._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. It works the best!


ROFLOL I really don't believe either of you have any clue relating to CorelDRAW or how powerful it is, what is or is not capable of or how to use it.

You really should do your home work and make sure you understand what you are posting about before you make posts like these. Posts like this are misleading and have no factual foundation.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

Tom you must be cooking up something big. You've been quiet around here for months I think.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> Tom you must be cooking up something big. You've been quiet around here for months I think.


Hi Larry,

Just poking around in the color stuff most of the time. The posts here did grab my attention.


----------



## djuanaanderson

Customized girl can be used for printing tees and other clothes..Check it out you will enjoy designing ...


----------



## miktoxic

PHP said:


> Try this t shirt design software T shirt design software: best tool to create customized products - T shirt design software: best tool to create customized products


i think this post was for designers themselves, not an add-on to a website feature where customers come in a create shirts by uploading designs they've done already using programs like illy and coreldraw or choose from some limited font and clip art library.

whole different ballgame.


----------



## Mister Fantastic

For images I like Photoshop. There are many plug- ins that will allow you to save on steps in your creation and design process (textures, shadows, and gradients).

For vector I like Corel for it's ease of use and support community. Illustrator is great with my drawing pad.


----------



## GEE164

What do you guys feel about GIMP 2.8 I've been practicing on that but I won't lie its a lil hard to use is Corel draw similar also I've been trying to get t shirt templates to design in gimp but I haven't had any luck with it. It seems to me everyone goes with Corel draw maybe I need to change software... does Corel draw have a t- shirt template option ??? I also have a question about the Corel draw software will be able to create logo with the home & student version or will I need the full version??? thanks again


----------



## Hetzer

Adobe Illustrator, CorelDRAW and Adobe Photoshop are the most popular software for designing t-shirts, If you are not familiar with all of them, try to go with CoreDRAW first as this design is easier to use by yourself.


----------



## jumpman21

Your Brain. Your Ideas. Your Sketching. A Scanner. A Printer. A Heat Press. No $300 software needed!


----------



## uncletee

photoshop elements old copy; cheap and easy to learn. Best way to learn find someone you can watch "over their shoulder". good luck uncletee.


----------



## edubplus1

Adobe Illustrator is by far the best way to go. I've used the online Adobe CC which is about $29.00 a month and includes all of Adobe software application. Works great for me !!!


----------



## Stormwielder

This is really great information. By creating your own designs, are there additional costs when producing it through t-shirt.com. Adobe Illustrator is a great program, but I really am looking to cut costs when creating my own work.


----------



## MaximRecoil

CorelDRAW 12 was the first vector program I ever used. I tried Adobe Illustrator a while later (first 10, then CS3). I didn't like it at first, but after doing a full job in it, I already liked it better than CD. There are a lot of comments on this thread saying that CD is easier to learn. For me, AI was easier to learn. After doing one job in it, I felt I could do more with it than CD, even though I'd done several jobs in CD.

Since I mostly do tracing/vectorization, the bezier/pen tool is the most important thing about a vector program. CD has a pen tool and a bezier tool, along with a separate tool (shape tool) for adding/deleting nodes/points. I don't like that setup at all. AI's pen tool is brilliant. To get the functions of it in CD I have to switch back and forth among 3 different tools. I have no idea why CD has a separate pen and bezier tool, given that the pen tool is in fact a bezier tool. They divided functions between the two tools making it so I often have to use both tools to complete an object properly, whereas I only need the pen tool in AI, plus it has the integrated function of being able to add and delete points. 

Another thing I like about AI is how efficiently I can do the most common tasks while I'm working. For example, by itself, the mouse's scroll wheel scrolls the page vertically; hold Alt and you get zoom. After zooming you usually need to make a more precise adjustment of the page position, and to do this you simply move your left finger off the Alt key slightly to the right to press the space bar, which grabs the page and you can reposition it by moving your mouse. This fundamental scroll, zoom, and grab combination is cumbersome to achieve in CD and Inkscape, at least by default (maybe there is a way to customize it in those programs?). 

Also, I like being able to use the Ctrl key to select the previously used tool in AI. When I'm tracing, I select the white pointer first (Direct Selection Tool), and then the pen tool and start tracing, which means I usually don't have to click on a different tool for a while. When I need to select an anchor point to bring up the bezier handles or manually reposition it, I press the Ctrl key and the white pointer comes up. So all of these things, i.e., the powerful and properly-working pen tool with integrated point adding/deleting, the efficient scroll/zoom/grab functionality, and the ability to select the previous tool with the Ctrl key, combine to make AI perfect for tracing in my opinion, while other vector programs I've tried are significantly less than perfect for tracing.

AI is far from perfect in general though. There are things about it which I find highly annoying. You can read about my two main beefs here:

Does Illustrator have dementia?

And here:

Need help creating perfect curves and outlines

To summarize those old threads of mine, I don't like how Illustrator is constantly "forgetting" certain settings you use, and I don't like how you can't just click on the anchor point of a corner and specify a corner radius to make it rounded to the exact degree that you want it rounded. It would also be nice to have a tool which rounds a corner to a specific radius as you are creating it.

Also, does CD have any typesetting tools? AI has very precise typesetting tools (leading, kerning, tracking) which will allow you to precisely overlay a copy of most any text (which is often a part of tracing) without having to convert the text to objects and manually reposition each letter, or having to start a new instance of text for each letter so you can manually reposition each letter without converting it to objects. I haven't been able to find anything like that in CD.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

edubplus1 said:


> Adobe Illustrator is by far the best way to go


No it is not! What do you know about graphic design? How many years have you been doing graphic design? What do you know about color spaces, color models and color separations?

With what experience and understanding can you support...

By far

Just curious if you are speaking from experience or an opinion.


----------



## MaximRecoil

Here is something I did in 2007 which I could only manage to accomplish with Adobe Illustrator, and it wasn't easy either, which is why I tried several different vector programs, trying to find one which had specific tools for what I was trying to do. After initially not being able to figure out how to do it in Illustrator, I tried CorelDRAW, Adobe Flash, and Inkscape, to no avail.

I needed to create those gradients in a way which followed the curves of the black outlined shapes which surround them; and they couldn't just roughly follow the curves; I needed the precision of a bezier tool when specifying the curve, because this was a reproduction project intended to be screen printed on vinyl with a rather high mesh count screen (the raster export image I linked to only shows the black separation obviously, because that's what's relevant here; the full file is for a 3-color screen print with the white vinyl accounting for a 4th "color").

To further complicate matters, I needed the gradients to go from black to transparent. I managed to achieve both goals in Illustrator, despite a conspicuous lack of specific tools for doing so. Are there any other vector programs which could have done this?


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Here is something I did in 2007 which I could only manage to accomplish with Adobe Illustrator, and it wasn't easy either, which is why I tried several different vector programs, trying to find one which had specific tools for what I was trying to do. After initially not being able to figure out how to do it in Illustrator, I tried CorelDRAW, Adobe Flash, and Inkscape, to no avail.
> 
> I needed to create those gradients in a way which followed the curves of the black outlined shapes which surround them; and they couldn't just roughly follow the curves; I needed the precision of a bezier tool when specifying the curve, because this was a reproduction project intended to be screen printed on vinyl with a rather high mesh count screen (the raster export image I linked to only shows the black separation obviously, because that's what's relevant here; the full file is for a 3-color screen print with the white vinyl accounting for a 4th "color").
> 
> To further complicate matters, I needed the gradients to go from black to transparent. I managed to achieve both goals in Illustrator, despite a conspicuous lack of specific tools for doing so. Are there any other vector programs which could have done this?


Very easy... depending on your level of skills that is. Just have to know which tools the use the job.


----------



## TPrintDesigner

Both great programs however my beef with Corel is that it's not great with SVG. If your designing apps for the modern web in HTML5 using SVG then Illustrator kills it... But that's a pretty specialized field.

Corel is by far the easiest to understand. There seems to be a big divide on user base vs location. In Europe it's very much Adobe but Corel seems to win elsewhere.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Very easy... depending on your level of skills that is. Just have to know which tools the use the job.


Go ahead and explain how you would do it. 

Here's a section of the scan I was tracing. Maybe you can copy those gradients and post the vector file. Don't use Illustrator, of course; bonus for using a program from 2007 or earlier.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Go ahead and explain how you would do it.
> 
> Here's a section of the scan I was tracing. Maybe you can copy those gradients and post the vector file. Don't use Illustrator, of course; bonus for using a program from 2007 or earlier.


Shapes to blend to transparency and trim whalla... Not even worth demonstrating really. I can create an kind of gradient with any kind of shapes with any number of tools. Transparent mesh fill, blend tool, contour tool, blured monochorme bitmap the to the shape. 

Really I find it hard to believe you think that would be difficult. 

Dunning Kruger moment I guess...


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Shapes to blend to transparency and trim whalla... Not even worth demonstrating really. I can create an kind of gradient with any kind of shapes with any number of tools. Transparent mesh fill, blend tool, contour tool, blured monochorme bitmap the to the shape.
> 
> *Really I find it hard to believe you think that would be difficult.
> 
> Dunning Kruger moment I guess...*


Do it then; 2007-or-earlier non-Illustrator vector program. Post the vector file; then we can see if your smugness (in bold) is warranted or not. I came across several people on the Adobe forums in 2007 when I was working on this who thought it was "easy", and the best anyone could do in an effort to prove it was produce a rather generic, poorly matched curve.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Do it then; 2007-or-earlier non-Illustrator vector program. Post the vector file; then we can see if your smugness (in bold) is warranted or not. I came across several people on the Adobe forums in 2007 when I was working on this who thought it was "easy", and the best anyone could do in an effort to prove it was produce a rather generic, poorly matched curve.


Corel is not limited to vector that is the beauty of Corel. What does vector have to do with anything? 

Tell you what....

Fill a vector object with a cool cracked lava effect in Illustrator in less than 15 seconds and I will entertain what is now your Dunning Kruger crisis apparently.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Do it then; 2007-or-earlier non-Illustrator vector program. Post the vector file; then we can see if your smugness (in bold) is warranted or not. I came across several people on the Adobe forums in 2007 when I was working on this who thought it was "easy", and the best anyone could do in an effort to prove it was produce a rather generic, poorly matched curve.


Or maybe you can do this...

[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNlSVVojbRk[/MEDIA]


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Corel is not limited to vector that is the beauty of Corel. What does vector have to so with anything?


Your laughable attempt to move the goalpost is denied, and your tacit concession is noted.



> Tell you what....
> 
> Fill a vector object with a cool cracked lava effect in Illustrator in less than 15 seconds and I will entertain what is now your Dunning Kruger crisis apparently.


Your _non sequitur_ is dismissed, and _you_—given your tacit concession above—trying to play the "Dunning–Kruger" card, is comically ironic.



> Or maybe you can do this...
> 
> [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNlSVVojbRk[/media]


This is another _non sequitur_. I'm not the one here who claimed that a specific thing was "very easy". When I do make such a claim, feel free to ask me for proof.


----------



## jmcswain

Hey you guys it has been fun reading your comments I'm very thankful to get this information.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Your laughable attempt to move the goalpost is denied, and your tacit concession is noted.
> 
> 
> 
> Your _non sequitur_ is dismissed, and _you_—given your tacit concession above—trying to play the "Dunning–Kruger" card, is comically ironic.
> 
> 
> 
> This is another _non sequitur_. I'm not the one here who claimed that a specific thing was "very easy". When I do make such a claim, feel free to ask me for proof.


Hmmm so can you do what I did in the video in Illustrator or not?

Really that is the bottom line.. Your gradient is child's play in DRAW.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Hmmm so can you do what I did in the video in Illustrator or not?


Yet another _non sequitur_; dismissed.



> Really that is the bottom line.. Your gradient is child's play in DRAW.


Consider your mere assertion dismissed out of hand, and your tacit concession remains noted.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Yet another _non sequitur_; dismissed.
> 
> 
> 
> Consider your mere assertion dismissed out of hand, and your tacit concession remains noted.


Well lets at least have some fun before we drive the nails in the Illustrator coffin with a child's play gradient.

[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDfevT4FNFo[/MEDIA]


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Well lets at least have some fun before we drive the nails in the Illustrator coffin with a *child's play gradient*.
> 
> [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDfevT4FNFo[/media]


I bolded the part where you unwittingly contradicted yourself. Earlier you tacitly conceded that it is difficult and/or that you can't do it with a 2007-or-earlier non-Illustrator vector program. At this point there is nothing of any relevance that you can post aside from a link to your vector file with the correct gradients.


----------



## jmcswain

Thankyou for sending me information about the software, and looking into now
Jmcswain.


----------



## lvprinting

This thread is bizarre and I'm astounded with some of the childish behavior over two vector applications and the opinion over which is better.


----------



## TYGERON

lvprinting said:


> This thread is bizarre and I'm astounded with some of the childish behavior over two vector applications and the opinion over which is better.


 Haaa-haa! 

Race, religion, politics, platform (Mac/PC) and _software.
_


----------



## lvprinting

TYGERON said:


> Haaa-haa!
> 
> Race, religion, politics, platform (Mac/PC) and _software.
> _


And, of course, Android vs. iPhone.


----------



## TYGERON

MaximRecoil said:


> I needed to create those gradients in a way which followed the curves of the black outlined shapes which surround them; and they couldn't just roughly follow the curves


I've been thinking about a few ways on this but haven't tried yet.

One would be lines as objects fitting the contours then blended together. Another would be ovals stretched to varying degrees to match each curved section, blended/circular fountain filled then powerclipped into each section (or bitmapped and trimmed to create a smaller file)
And looks like curvature of the blend in the open areas
of the "S" don't quite fit the vanishing point curve/path.

If I get it to work I'll post. But not before looking up "non sequitur" 

There's probably a brain-to-app interface where you just think it and it appears. But who reads instructions?


----------



## MaximRecoil

TYGERON said:


> I've been thinking about a few ways on this but haven't tried yet.
> 
> One would be lines as objects fitting the contours then blended together. Another would be ovals stretched to varying degrees to match each curved section, blended/circular fountain filled then powerclipped into each section (or bitmapped and trimmed to create a smaller file)


There are probably various ways of doing it, and maybe it can be done in 2007-or-earlier non-Illustrator vector programs as well (if so, I would love to see it done), but I'll remain skeptical of anyone's claim that it is "very easy" or "child's play" until they prove it.

What I ended up doing is: I made a rectangle, applied a basic straight gradient to it, tweaked the gradient to how I needed it to look (in terms of the abruptness and positioning of the color transition), expanded the gradient to 255 objects, deleted the superfluous clipping path that was automatically created in the process (necessary for a later step), applied an opacity mask, which consists of several steps in and of itself (unlike Photoshop, you can't just select "transparent" as a "color" to fade to), created a brush from this black-to-transparent gradient rectangle (this is why the clipping path had to be deleted; a brush can't contain a clipping path), made the brush width wider than the shapes that they had to fill, drew freehand strokes which were a little longer than the shapes they had to fill, tweaked the curvature of each brush stroke with the bezier handles to match up with the original gradient, then made a clipping mask from a pasted-in-front copy of the outline of the shape I was filling with the gradient brush. 



> And looks like curvature of the blend in the open areas
> of the "S" don't quite fit the vanishing point curve/path.


I matched everything to the 600 DPI scan that I was tracing, because it was a reproduction project. The original artwork is from 1984, so it probably wasn't created on a computer. I assume the original was hand drawn on paper, and the film positives were made with a stat camera.



> There's probably a brain-to-app interface where you just think it and it appears. But who reads instructions?


That would be the cat's teats.


----------



## TYGERON

MaximRecoil said:


> There are probably various ways of doing it


OK. This close enough for an example? I know it's not quite as exacting but this took about 5 minutes. The gradient transition could be smoothed/expanded more, the dark/light range could be adjusted.

I'd do the areas with the gradations as solid color with Black both solid and halftone together overprint.

Of course vinyl would be higher mesh count and finer halftone than for t-shirts.

And though I used CorelDraw X3, both 9 and 7 (which I have) would've sufficed.


----------



## TYGERON

MaximRecoil said:


> ...but I'll remain skeptical of anyone's claim that it is "very easy" or "child's play" until they prove it.
> 
> 
> I assume the original was hand drawn on paper, and the film positives were made with a stat camera.


 Not being flip, but from my standpoint I'd consider your process as you described it as pretty "easy" (as I look at my vertical camera sitting 15 feet away where it has been sitting since I moved it from my dark/wet room years ago). 

The faster and more convenient things are, the faster and more convenient we want things to be. Time equates to money but it's all relative.


----------



## MaximRecoil

TYGERON said:


> OK. This close enough for an example? I know it's not quite as exacting but this took about 5 minutes. The gradient transition could be smoothed/expanded more, the dark/light range could be adjusted.
> 
> I'd do the areas with the gradations as solid color with Black both solid and halftone together overprint.
> 
> Of course vinyl would be higher mesh count and finer halftone than for t-shirts.
> 
> And though I used CorelDraw X3, both 9 and 7 (which I have) would've sufficed.


Is it fading to transparent, and is the gradient vector? You only posted a JPG rather than a vector file, so I can't tell. Also, the gradient looks very centered. Back when I was trying to figure out how to do it, I came across a few methods that would give me centered gradients, which aren't right. My brother sent me an example pretty much identical to yours, which he did in Flash. On the Adobe forum thread I started at the same time, a few people also posted examples like yours.

Also, part of the difficulty is tracing those exact shapes in the original scan, and matching the exact curve of the gradients as well. None of the sides of the horn shapes consist of a single bezier curve, i.e., it is impossible to place an anchor point at the top of one of the sides of those horn shapes, and a second anchor at the bottom where it comes to a point, and then adjust the curve to properly match. Your horn shape wasn't traced from the section of the scan I posted; it is a rough approximation consisting of only 3 bezier curve lines (i.e., only 3 anchor points / nodes).



> Not being flip, but from my standpoint I'd consider your process as you described it as pretty "easy" (as I look at my vertical camera sitting 15 feet away where it has been sitting since I moved it from my dark/wet room years ago).
> 
> The faster and more convenient things are, the faster and more convenient we want things to be. Time equates to money but it's all relative.


It is easy when you know how to do it, as is pretty much anything computer related. The problem is, the method I used was in no way intuitive. The standard gradient tools by themselves were useless. Then, once you do realize that a gradient brush would be just the thing, Illustrator won't let you make one, and it won't tell you why not. You have to find out elsewhere that the clipping path which was automatically created when you expanded the gradient needs to be deleted. And when you try to make the gradient go from black to transparent, you find that there is no transparent swatch in Illustrator, so you have to figure out or otherwise discover the convoluted workaround of making an opacity mask. 

Matching the curves once I had bezier control was the easiest part for me. Bezier curves have always been my thing, as they are the most important thing to know for the type of vector work I usually do, but I've zoomed in on enough vector files made by other people to know that many, if not most, people are sloppy/inaccurate with bezier curves. I've even seen hamfisted bezier curves in fonts from major type foundries.


----------



## TLK

Errm, calm down and just use what you think is best and works for you. No need to get so worked up and into heated debates about software, surely. It's not about the program you use, it's about the design and how well it's executed!


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Is it fading to transparent, and is the gradient vector? You only posted a JPG rather than a vector file, so I can't tell. Also, the gradient looks very centered. Back when I was trying to figure out how to do it, I came across a few methods that would give me centered gradients, which aren't right. My brother sent me an example pretty much identical to yours, which he did in Flash. On the Adobe forum thread I started at the same time, a few people also posted examples like yours.
> 
> Also, part of the difficulty is tracing those exact shapes in the original scan, and matching the exact curve of the gradients as well. None of the sides of the horn shapes consist of a single bezier curve, i.e., it is impossible to place an anchor point at the top of one of the sides of those horn shapes, and a second anchor at the bottom where it comes to a point, and then adjust the curve to properly match. Your horn shape wasn't traced from the section of the scan I posted; it is a rough approximation consisting of only 3 bezier curve lines (i.e., only 3 anchor points / nodes).
> 
> 
> 
> It is easy when you know how to do it, as is pretty much anything computer related. The problem is, the method I used was in no way intuitive. The standard gradient tools by themselves were useless. Then, once you do realize that a gradient brush would be just the thing, Illustrator won't let you make one, and it won't tell you why not. You have to find out elsewhere that the clipping path which was automatically created when you expanded the gradient needs to be deleted. And when you try to make the gradient go from black to transparent, you find that there is no transparent swatch in Illustrator, so you have to figure out or otherwise discover the convoluted workaround of making an opacity mask.
> 
> Matching the curves once I had bezier control was the easiest part for me. Bezier curves have always been my thing, as they are the most important thing to know for the type of vector work I usually do, but I've zoomed in on enough vector files made by other people to know that many, if not most, people are sloppy/inaccurate with bezier curves. I've even seen hamfisted bezier curves in fonts from major type foundries.


Well finally had minute....

Trace the vector shape.... 
Create another vector shape, contour to the inside many steps, break the contour apart, fill with black, select all the objects in that were contoured and set transparency. Then power clip that inside the trace and shape it to the desired form or shape. 

Really nothing difficult and graphic works in both CorelDRAW and Illustrator with transparency. 

You could also use the mesh fill tool, the blend tool and many other techniques just as easily.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Really nothing difficult and graphic works in both CorelDRAW and Illustrator with transparency.


Then why didn't you actually do it? The shape is wrong and the gradient is wrong. This is another centered gradient which looks practically identical to the one TYGERON posted, and the one my brother sent me in 2007, and the various ones posted in my Adobe forum thread in 2007. The project was a _reproduction_, not an exercise in making something that looked sort of similar.

If you try again, _and_ approach it from the angle of a reproduction, don't use CorelDRAW X6 again. X3 was the latest version in 2007.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Then why didn't you actually do it? The shape is wrong and the gradient is wrong. This is another centered gradient which looks practically identical to the one TYGERON posted, and the one my brother sent me in 2007, and the various ones posted in my Adobe forum thread in 2007. The project was a _reproduction_, not an exercise in making something that looked sort of similar.
> 
> If you try again, _and_ approach it from the angle of a reproduction, don't use CorelDRAW X6 again. X3 was the latest version in 2007.


Actually I copied the one TYGERON did I can copy yours too. 2007 is irrelevant its 2014. Now I am not going to tit tat with you over this anymore I don't have time to debate child's play design tasks. Which is what that was.

I have no idea why you even think it is impressive or a point to debate actually. But what ever floats you boat.


----------



## andromat

Back to the OP original post point, well it depends. Just consider that the cost of learning the software is by far the greatest cost that you will incur. And that's aside from the Adobe subscription price model...


----------



## AdvancedArtist

andromat said:


> Back to the OP original post point, well it depends. Just consider that the cost of learning the software is by far the greatest cost that you will incur. And that's aside from the Adobe subscription price model...


Actually that is very good point well said.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Actually I copied the one TYGERON did


What was the point of that?



> I can copy yours too.


Or so you say (and have yet to prove). And it isn't "mine"; the section of the original scan I posted is what is to be copied, given that that's what I copied in 2007.



> 2007 is irrelevant


No, it isn't, and I suggest you reread the posts you've been replying to to find out why. 



> Now I am not going to tit tat with you over this anymore I don't have time to debate child's play design tasks. Which is what that was.
> 
> I have no idea why you even think it is impressive or a point to debate actually. But what ever floats you boat.


Your tacit concession is noted ... again.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> What was the point of that?
> 
> 
> 
> Or so you say (and have yet to prove). And it isn't "mine"; the section of the original scan I posted is what is to be copied, given that that's what I copied in 2007.
> 
> No, it isn't, and I suggest you reread the posts you've been replying to to find out why.
> 
> 
> 
> Your tacit concession is noted ... again.


I realize that this shaped gradient may be a great achievement in your star studded career. But the method I demonstrated can be used to reproduce any gradient so it just not important. Please lets move on its just a gradient. 

ROFLOL I just cannot even believe you think it is special


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> I realize that this shaped gradient may be a great achievement in your star studded career. But the method I demonstrated can be used to reproduce any gradient so it just not important. Please lets move on its just a gradient.
> 
> ROFLOL I just cannot even believe you think it is special


Let me know when you've actually done what you say you can do. You've already had 4 days, when supposedly you only need a "minute". Until then your tacit concession remains noted.

By the way, a significant part of the difficulty is accuracy. If accuracy weren't important, I could have just used the file my brother sent in 2007, or one of my own quick, early attempts which looked about the same as his, yours, and Tygeron's. LOL @ you thinking you can just sort of skip over the accuracy part and call it good.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> Let me know when you've actually done what you say you can do. You've already had 4 days, when supposedly you only need a "minute". Until then your tacit concession remains noted.
> 
> By the way, a significant part of the difficulty is accuracy. If accuracy weren't important, I could have just used the file my brother sent in 2007, or one of my own quick, early attempts which looked about the same as his, yours, and Tygeron's. LOL @ you thinking you can just sort of skip over the accuracy part and call it good.


Have you taken you meds lately? Were talking about a simple gradient, the file your brother sent you?

Oh 4 days well it is the holidays, I do run business and family is here. 

What else do we need to debate Sherlock its a gradient.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Have you taken you meds lately? Were talking about a simple gradient, the file your brother sent you?


*** Reading Deficiency Alert *** 

If not for your unfortunate reading deficiency, you wouldn't have to ask _"... the file your brother sent you?"_



> Oh 4 days well it is the holidays, I do run business and family is here.
> 
> What else do we need to debate Sherlock its a gradient.


Your tacit concession on the entire matter remains noted, simple fellow.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> *** Reading Deficiency Alert ***
> 
> If not for your unfortunate reading deficiency, you wouldn't have to ask _"... the file your brother sent you?"_
> 
> 
> 
> Your tacit concession on the entire matter remains noted, simple fellow.


OK post up all the files and data.. Yawn...

Make a video in Illustrator of how you would do it. I will reply with my video in DRAW.. fare enough?

Then can we end the gradient debate?


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> OK post up all the files and data.. Yawn...
> 
> Make a video in Illustrator of how you would do it. I will reply with my video in DRAW.. fare enough?
> 
> Then can we end the gradient debate?


I already explained in detail how I did it. I'm not looking for a video of how you would do it. I want to see a vector file of it done. It is funny that you took the time to attempt this, but copied the wrong one. Why is that? Is it because copying the wrong one was easier than copying the right one? 

By the way, your drawing wasn't even a particularly accurate copy of Tygeron's (not that it made any sense whatsoever for you to copy Tygeron's drawing). Your bezier curves don't quite match his, plus you have some weirdness going on in 2 of the 3 corners of your shape, i.e., your bottom corner is truncated (and contains a redundant anchor point / node no less), and your upper right-hand corner is rounded. All three corners should simply be sharp corners of course. Also, it only requires 3 anchor points / nodes to make Tygeron's shape, yet you have 10.

Have you ever done reproduction work? And by that I don't mean quickly vectorizing someone's logo to put on a T-shirt. I mean vectorizing something which will be printed in a relatively large format to vinyl, to be used by people who are restoring vintage, collectible items, and who will be closely comparing your work to the original because your accuracy is important to the accuracy of their restoration.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> I already explained in detail how I did it. I'm not looking for a video of how you would do it. I want to see a vector file of it done. It is funny that you took the time to attempt this, but copied the wrong one. Why is that? Is it because copying the wrong one was easier than copying the right one?
> 
> By the way, your drawing wasn't even a particularly accurate copy of Tygeron's (not that it made any sense whatsoever for you to copy Tygeron's drawing). Your bezier curves don't quite match his, plus you have some weirdness going on in 2 of the 3 corners of your shape, i.e., your bottom corner is truncated (and contains a redundant anchor point / node no less), and your upper right-hand corner is rounded. All three corners should simply be sharp corners of course. Also, it only requires 3 anchor points / nodes to make Tygeron's shape, yet you have 10.
> 
> Have you ever done reproduction work? And by that I don't mean quickly vectorizing someone's logo to put on a T-shirt. I mean vectorizing something which will be printed in a relatively large format to vinyl, to be used by people who are restoring vintage, collectible items, and who will be closely comparing your work to the original because your accuracy is important to the accuracy of their restoration.


Post the original file please the actual original file. Then tell me what will be the output size and printing method which I suspect is screen printing.

And please stop running your fingers all the key board. The more you type the more you prove to be a stunning example of the Dunning Kruger effect.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Post the original file please the actual original file.


I've already posted a section of the original 600 DPI scan. That is the source I copied from. 



> Then tell me what will be the output size


The output size is obvious. It was a reproduction and I worked from a scan, which means the output size is the same as the scan.



> and printing method which I suspect is screen printing.


The answer to this is obvious too, given that I already said it was for screen printing on vinyl. 



> And please stop running your fingers all the key board. The more you type the more you prove to be a stunning example of the Dunning Kruger effect.


And this is a stunning (and comical) example of irony, coming from the guy who tried, and failed, to do the thing which he said was "very easy" and "child's play", and who couldn't even manage to make simple sharp-edged corners on a horn shape which only requires a total of 3 anchor points for the whole shape, but rather, made "corners" which look like this ...










... and this ...










The funny thing about the "Dunning-Kruger effect" is that the people who are most likely to reference it (and think they are exempt from it) are the same people who are most likely to exemplify it (you, for example, as you've demonstrated so well).


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> I've already posted a section of the original 600 DPI scan. That is the source I copied from.
> 
> 
> 
> The output size is obvious. It was a reproduction and I worked from a scan, which means the output size is the same as the scan.
> 
> 
> 
> The answer to this is obvious too, given that I already said it was for screen printing on vinyl.
> 
> 
> 
> And this is a stunning (and comical) example of irony, coming from the guy who tried, and failed, to do the thing which he said was "very easy" and "child's play", and who couldn't even manage to make simple sharp-edged corners on a horn shape which only requires a total of 3 anchor points for the whole shape, but rather, made "corners" which look like this ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... and this ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The funny thing about the "Dunning-Kruger effect" is that the people who are most likely to reference it (and think they are exempt from it) are the same people who are most likely to exemplify it (you, for example, as you've demonstrated so well).


Let us not play anymore give me the original file. I need to know exactly what I am dealing with for the production artwork task. 

The objective is obviously to get the file to film and out to production as quickly as possible for screen printing. Am I correct in this assumption? I would also assume the art work set up budget is minimal correct?

For the record the file I posted was done on the fly for demonstration purposes of how you could make a shaped gradient in DRAW.

We have switched gears now to a live production artwork project. So lets not play lets get er done. Give me the file please.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Let us not play anymore give me the original file. I need to know exactly what I am dealing with for the production artwork task.


What are you talking about? I told you, I've already posted a relevant section of the original 600 DPI scan. Since you clearly have trouble following the thread, here is the link again.



> The objective is obviously to get the file to film and out to production as quickly as possible for screen printing. Am I correct in this assumption? I would also assume the art work set up budget is minimal correct?


No, the objective was accuracy. This reproduction project was commissioned by a collector from California. His goal was to obtain a set of reproduction decals for his own collection, and sell off the rest of the minimum order amount (25 pieces) to offset the cost of the project. They all sold before the screen printing even started. I had no time limit to reproduce the art. It took me a few hours to do all of it except for the gradients, then it was on hold until I found a satisfactory method of matching the gradients, which I found a few days later after arguing with people on forums who proposed methods that wouldn't yield satisfactory results.



> For the record the file I posted was done on the fly for demonstration purposes of how you could make a shaped gradient in DRAW.


You still haven't explained why you copied Tygeron's drawing rather than the actual scan I posted. Also, I find it telling that you didn't even manage to make a good copy of his drawing. Doing it "on the fly" is no excuse, because his horn-shaped outline only requires 3 anchor points, and you made 10 anchor points, which obviously takes longer than making 3. I have no idea what possessed you to round off one of the corners and square off another one of the corners. Maybe I should make a basic "Tracing 101" video for you.



> We have switched gears now to a live production artwork project. So lets not play lets get er done. Give me the file please.


You seem to be confused, again. The focus of this project was "*re*production", which is a very specific type of "production". With ordinary production, the goal often is indeed _"to get the file to film and out to production as quickly as possible for screen printing"_, but this isn't necessarily the case with a reproduction project. With a proper reproduction, the focus is on accuracy relative to the original, especially when it is intended for a very small collector niche.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> The output size is obvious. It was a reproduction and I worked from a scan, which means the output size is the same as the scan.


Looks like I can work with your scan but upon my initial evaluation I did notice a few things. Since we are into accuracy notice the rounded end cap on the point where the gradients come together. In the original it was obviously rounded your trace shows a point. 










There are other areas where you clearly missed it as well. 

I would love to see the entire original with your entire reproduction.

Well time to party in the New Year back in a few days!


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Looks like I can work with your scan but upon my initial evaluation I did notice a few things. Since we are into accuracy notice the rounded end cap on the point where the gradients come together. In the original it was obviously rounded your trace shows a point.


That was a judgement call which I made in file revisions for the second print run. My original file, as well the original run of reproductions have rounded corners like the scan. Here is a picture of that area on a first print run reproduction:










And here's what that point looked like in my original vector file which was used for the first run (at maximum zoom: 6400%):










For the second run, I decided that those rounded corners in various places were too irregular to have been intentional; i.e., I believed them to be a combination of ink bleed during printing and a byproduct of the original artwork being hand-drawn (it is from 1984). I believed that the intent of the original artist was probably sharp points, so I revised the file to reflect this.



> There are other areas where you clearly missed it as well.


Or so you say. Consider your baseless assertion dismissed out of hand.



> I would love to see the entire original with your entire reproduction.


Very difficult to photograph side-by-side, as my copy of the reproduction is applied to the side of my machine, and the original is NOS; unapplied.


----------



## dot-tone

MaximRecoil,

Actually, back in the days of Illy 7, I agree. It was not that easy. If I'm catching it right, the thing that you were stressing over at the time was not just getting the curve to look right, but also to get it to blend to nothing. If you got it to blend to a transparent that showed colors under it in true color, thats something I don't remember.

The part of getting it to blend to nothing was easy enough (if you were ok with) understanding that the blends needed to be filled with something and back then, you had to be, thats all there was _(unless you found some method I don't know of).

That "nothing" point was a white fill or 0% (that still looked white). So when placed over something, it shows as white in that 0 point, (but not transparent).
Those days are gone now with Transparency & Multiply features. There were no features like this, either in Corel or Illy. but the times are a changing.

Getting that skinny curve at the bottom, I could only get be duplicating the shape, then hand maneuvering to simulate the look of the original and then filling that with white, then doing a manual blend from the larger shape to the skinnier shape. That skinnier shape filled with white and the back larger shape filled with black. The intermediate shapes provide the blend. Still tho, with just two shapes, goring from black to white, did not provide a very smooth transition. I would probably go back in and create at least a middle tone blending the black to that, and a copy of the middle tone shape, blending that gray to to white. THis would assist in making a smoother transition so that it does not look as abrupt.

Lastly, Did your work require your duplications to be "that exact"? I did duplication work for an ASI Co. back in the day when I started on ai88 and up starting around 1990 and for the next six years. Nothing ever needed to be truly 100% matching. If we did, it as because of our own anal characteristics. The customers never cared that much._


----------



## rocha wear

I also am fairly new, I started with corel and so was very user friendly. I also have illustrator, althou its real cool, and can see why its praised. I always revert back to corel cause its do friendly.


----------



## busa

Corel is the best, then illustrator


----------



## NoXid

LOL You guys be "nice" now 

As to what is best ... *The one you know how to use! *

I've used CorelDraw since the early 1990's, and have messed around with pretty much everything else at one time or another for one reason or another. If one does not already know one of the Adobe products, I think CorelDraw has a more intuitive interface, which should make learning easier for most people.

Admittedly I do have a bit of a beef with Adobe, as I have had to use a lot of their publication/documentation/help oriented software when I worked in the software industry. Only Microsoft annoyed me more often and more deeply 


When it gets down to the details of a particular task, there are smaller, simpler programs that are better than anything from either Adobe or Corel. An example is Gwenview, which has by far my favorite Cropping capability (and it is FREE, being part of the KDE project, and there is a Windows port). But do I want to hunt down, install, and use a dozen different programs in order to get any work done? No. So I have a few small specialized tools I use for what they are great at, but it is in the likes of CorelDraw that I do most of the work.


Rather than Corel vs Adobe vs OpenSource, I think the most common "mistake" people make is using a bitmap program, like PhotoShop, instead of a vector program, like Illustrator. Sure, a bitmap program is probably going to be a necessity, or at least make life easier from time to time, but overall design and composition should be done in a vector program.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> That was a judgement call which I made in file revisions for the second print run. My original file, as well the original run of reproductions have rounded corners like the scan. Here is a picture of that area on a first print run reproduction:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here's what that point looked like in my original vector file which was used for the first run (at maximum zoom: 6400%):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the second run, I decided that those rounded corners in various places were too irregular to have been intentional; i.e., I believed them to be a combination of ink bleed during printing and a byproduct of the original artwork being hand-drawn (it is from 1984). I believed that the intent of the original artist was probably sharp points, so I revised the file to reflect this.
> 
> 
> 
> Or so you say. Consider your baseless assertion dismissed out of hand.
> 
> 
> 
> Very difficult to photograph side-by-side, as my copy of the reproduction is applied to the side of my machine, and the original is NOS; unapplied.


A few things to consider...

Since I started as a commercial artist in the early 80s. If I wanted a point where the gradients meet it would have been a point not rounded to that degree. 

Did you also make judgment calls on the gradients because they are inaccurate also? 

Given this project today I would probably scan it to size at very high resolution do a little clean up on the image and separate it as raster not vector trace it. Which would be a much faster production work flow and would not compromise the integrity of the original art. I do think I see halftones where the gradients are but those areas can be masked out and the halftones smoothed right back to what the image would have originally looked like. What I see in the provided scan clearly shows this would be a very simple color separation requiring only a few minutes of work and the gradients would be dead on. Of course dead on would only be translated on press if your printing process is linearized. Here again your errors in the vector gradients mixed with a little or allot of dot gain and now your reproduction is way off from the original. 

Now back to shaped gradients in CorelDRAW.

1. Drop Shadows can make these.
2. The Blend Tool can make these.
3. The Contour Tool can make these.
4. The Mesh Fill Tool can make these.
5. Blurring raster images can make these.
6. And Artistic Media brush can made to do this.
7. The black trace could be opened in PhotoPaint the area requiring the gradient could be masked out and you could use the paint brush set to air brush to make these. This image could then converted to a perfect monochrome bitmap in CorelDRAW and will then carry spot color separation functionality. 

So really the gradient is just not an issue at all.

As I stated previously the gradient I posted was just a quick example not really tracing anything just working off TYGERONS example.


----------



## dot-tone

I like Macs better than PC. But I have to work on a PC for the last 5 years because of the cost. 

I like Iphones and just got the Iphone6 but due to the cost, If I were paying for it myself, I'd of gotten an Android.

I like Corel, but because I started out on and know most everything there is about Illustrator, I like Illustrator. Although, I'd say that Corel has catered to their target audience over the last 5-10 years, being screen printers, so that makes it a better program (in this arena) of the graphics industry. Outside of screen printing, you can pretty much say that nobody knows it exist.

As for religion, I've dabbled on various extremes of the fence over the years so I have experience in both areas of life. Today, as i am more experienced, I'l say, As for me and my house, I will serve the Lord.


----------



## dot-tone

NoXid said:


> Rather than Corel vs Adobe vs OpenSource, I think the most common "mistake" people make is using a bitmap program, like PhotoShop, instead of a vector program, like Illustrator. Sure, a bitmap program is probably going to be a necessity, or at least make life easier from time to time, but overall design and composition should be done in a vector program.


I'm with you on most of that. and what people use makes no dif to me. I have to use whatever I'm comfortable with. With that, I'd say that while I'm proficient in Illy, I don't use it...unless a customer sends me a vector file in Illy and then, I copy/paste into Photoshop. Just simpler for me there. We are friends me and Photoshop. I do everything in it. EVERYTHING. Graphics Deisgn, Illustration, Separation. Oh, well, I'll admit that there are times I will use Illy's pen tool. It just seems faster. Agin tho, I'm not saying what i do is best. It's just what i do and can be used exclusively.


----------



## MaximRecoil

DTD said:


> MaximRecoil,
> 
> Actually, back in the days of Illy 7, I agree. It was not that easy. If I'm catching it right, the thing that you were stressing over at the time was not just getting the curve to look right, but also to get it to blend to nothing. If you got it to blend to a transparent that showed colors under it in true color, thats something I don't remember.
> 
> The part of getting it to blend to nothing was easy enough (if you were ok with) understanding that the blends needed to be filled with something and back then, you had to be, thats all there was _(unless you found some method I don't know of).
> 
> That "nothing" point was a white fill or 0% (that still looked white). So when placed over something, it shows as white in that 0 point, (but not transparent).
> Those days are gone now with Transparency & Multiply features. There were no features like this, either in Corel or Illy. but the times are a changing.
> 
> Getting that skinny curve at the bottom, I could only get be duplicating the shape, then hand maneuvering to simulate the look of the original and then filling that with white, then doing a manual blend from the larger shape to the skinnier shape. That skinnier shape filled with white and the back larger shape filled with black. The intermediate shapes provide the blend. Still tho, with just two shapes, goring from black to white, did not provide a very smooth transition. I would probably go back in and create at least a middle tone blending the black to that, and a copy of the middle tone shape, blending that gray to to white. THis would assist in making a smoother transition so that it does not look as abrupt.
> 
> Lastly, Did your work require your duplications to be "that exact"? I did duplication work for an ASI Co. back in the day when I started on ai88 and up starting around 1990 and for the next six years. Nothing ever needed to be truly 100% matching. If we did, it as because of our own anal characteristics. The customers never cared that much._


_

Your trace of the shape of the "horn" is a bit off, and your gradient is as well. Plus, your gradient doesn't go from black to transparent, it goes from black to white; at least that's what it's doing when imported into Illustrator CS3 (as you obviously know, it was created in CS5). 

You seem to know what you're doing with the pen tool; I'm sure you could make the horn shape more accurate if you took the time to do so. I don't know about your approach to the gradient.

I don't have a boss, other than whoever is commissioning the vectorization; I am as "exact" as I want to be, though obviously there needs to be a certain level of accuracy or else it wouldn't be a reproduction. I try to interpret the intent of the original artist. For example, if there is a circular shape in the scan that measures 500 points x 498 points, I assume it was intended to be a perfect circle and that's what I use in the trace. 

If you take accuracy to the ultimate extreme it would be counterproductive, because at that point you'd be doing nothing more than perfectly replicating the scan, making your trace redundant (i.e., you would get the same results just printing from the scan). If you replicate things in the scan which seem to be printing errors/imperfections, then when printed, those errors will compounded. The idea is to create a new print source which hopefully is very close to the print source that the original artist created._


----------



## dot-tone

I don't mind you letting me know the trace of the horn was off. It's a friggn vector horn for a blend, not a contest to see who can make the most exacto magnifico duplicatio. I'm not applying for a job with Nasa hear. 

I was trying to see what it was you were talking about on the blend. Shape aside. Tell me if you were getting blends to transparent, and can set a color under it and see that color on the monitor...or if you saw white? If so, HOW?

Thanks and HAPPY NEW YEAR!!


----------



## MaximRecoil

DTD said:


> I was trying to see what it was you were talking about on the blend. Shape aside. Tell me if you were getting blends to transparent, and can set a color under it and see that color on the monitor...or if you saw white? If so, HOW?


Yes; all of the gradients in my vector file fade to transparent. See the attached 10-second video. I explained how I did it in post #261.


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Did you also make judgment calls on the gradients because they are inaccurate also?


The gradients I made in the file for the first run were a closer match to the gradients in the scan, when viewed on a monitor side by side, like so - [media]http://i.imgur.com/5ac8F74.png[/media]

However, there was a limitation with the printing as compared to the original, i.e., the original was possibly offset printed, given its halftone dots which appear to be at least 100 lpi. We knew up front that the screen printing company couldn't match that high of an LPI; 360 mesh screens are the highest they use. They said they believed it was possible to match or come close to the lpi of the original with screen printing, but it requires specialty inks and a certain type of oven to cure them which they didn't have. Since offset printing was out of the question, and inkjet printing was totally out of the question for different reasons, it was decided to go with it.

The resulting gradients in the prints looked fine on their own, but in comparison to the original, they looked a little weak. No one complained; quite the opposite in fact, but as they say, people tend to be their own worst critic. So I compensated for this effect in the revised file I made for the second print run, which made them look more like the original when printed with the relatively low lpi halftone, in terms of general appearance from a normal viewing distance.



> Given this project today I would probably scan it to size at very high resolution do a little clean up on the image and separate it as raster not vector trace it.


There would be way too much "clean up" involved. Every single part of every single line/edge would have to be "cleaned up" to make it as sharp as a print source should be, which effectively means tracing every line with new lines; at that point you might as well vectorize the whole thing. 

A scan of a printed original is a few generations' worth of loss removed from the original print source. There is loss when the original drawing was photographed with a stat camera for the film positive; there was loss when the film was burned to a screen (or plate, if it was offset printed); there was loss when it was printed, and there was loss when the print was scanned. This means that _all_ of the lines/edges have to be recreated if you want a true print-quality source.



> I do think I see halftones where the gradients are but those areas can be masked out and the halftones smoothed right back to what the image would have originally looked like.


I thought about this in 2007, but for one thing, I wanted it all vector, and for another thing, you can't smooth out a scan of halftone gradient print, make a halftone film from it, and expect it will print out identical to the original, not even if you used the exact same setup that the printer of the original did. In any event, it doesn't matter, because the difference in lpi changes things anyway, so you need to compensate for that in order to get them to print out looking as close as possible (given the limitations) to the original.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

MaximRecoil said:


> The gradients I made in the file for the first run were a closer match to the gradients in the scan, when viewed on a monitor side by side, like so - [media]http://i.imgur.com/5ac8F74.png[/media]
> 
> However, there was a limitation with the printing as compared to the original, i.e., the original was possibly offset printed, given its halftone dots which appear to be at least 100 lpi. We knew up front that the screen printing company couldn't match that high of an LPI; 360 mesh screens are the highest they use. They said they believed it was possible to match or come close to the lpi of the original with screen printing, but it requires specialty inks and a certain type of oven to cure them which they didn't have. Since offset printing was out of the question, and inkjet printing was totally out of the question for different reasons, it was decided to go with it.
> 
> The resulting gradients in the prints looked fine on their own, but in comparison to the original, they looked a little weak. No one complained; quite the opposite in fact, but as they say, people tend to be their own worst critic. So I compensated for this effect in the revised file I made for the second print run, which made them look more like the original when printed with the relatively low lpi halftone, in terms of general appearance from a normal viewing distance.
> 
> 
> 
> There would be way too much "clean up" involved. Every single part of every single line/edge would have to be "cleaned up" to make it as sharp as a print source should be, which effectively means tracing every line with new lines; at that point you might as well vectorize the whole thing.
> 
> A scan of a printed original is a few generations' worth of loss removed from the original print source. There is loss when the original drawing was photographed with a stat camera for the film positive; there was loss when the film was burned to a screen (or plate, if it was offset printed); there was loss when it was printed, and there was loss when the print was scanned. This means that _all_ of the lines/edges have to be recreated if you want a true print-quality source.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought about this in 2007, but for one thing, I wanted it all vector, and for another thing, you can't smooth out a scan of halftone gradient print, make a halftone film from it, and expect it will print out identical to the original, not even if you used the exact same setup that the printer of the original did. In any event, it doesn't matter, because the difference in lpi changes things anyway, so you need to compensate for that in order to get them to print out looking as close as possible (given the limitations) to the original.


Bottom line... your now a worm on a hook stop squirming. All of a sudden complete files with edits poping out in abundance. Second files out of no where. Listen Recoil you cannot fool me.

Do you even know how to use the eye dropper? Why do they call it the eye dropper anyway? Your improved file is worse than the file you started with..

Happy New Year Recoil... Next!


----------



## MaximRecoil

AdvancedArtist said:


> Bottom line... your now a worm on a hook stop squirming. All of a sudden complete files with edits poping out in abundance.


That's your unfortunate and well-established reading deficiency talking. 



> Second files out of no where. Listen Recoil you cannot fool me.


"Out of nowhere?" "Can't fool you?" LOL. Your laughable attempt at a crystal ball reading is dismissed. It is well documented online that there were two separate print runs; the first by Modern Screenprint and the second by This Old Game.



> Do you even know how to use the eye dropper? Why do they call it the eye dropper anyway?


Say what? How's the weather out there in deep, _deep_ left field? If you are talking about the colors of the scan vs. the colors in the first print run file, those are just place holders. In case you didn't know, the colors in a file intended for screen printing are irrelevant; they all go as black to the film positives. The screen printers had the original in-hand for color matching when they did the print runs. The "gray" isn't even gray, it is metallic silver, which obviously doesn't show up in the scan.



> Your improved file is worse than the file you started with..


You don't have a clue about what you're talking about. The only changes between the two versions of the files are: I ditched the various rounded corners in favor of sharp corners, and I thickened the gradients because they looked a bit thin in the first print run. I have copies from both print runs, and I own the original; so I know what the results look like in real life; you don't.



> Happy New Year Recoil... Next!


Your tacit concession is still noted, and will remain so until you do what you say you can.


----------



## Biverson

Is this thread for real?!


----------



## jeron

Biverson said:


> Is this thread for real?!


Ha ha, welcome to the forums lol.


----------



## DTD

MaximRecoil, Tom's just trying to get your goat. He probably really is just too busy to take the time to do it and would rather just blow you off with belittling comments.

I considered if I should bother with taking the time to check into it myself, but said, Awe, what the heck, I'm a little curious about the transparency. I will watch your vid next.

I don't remember the transparency, but who knows, It's been such a long time since I.ve had to use Illy _completely_, that it's possible we did do that back in the day. I would think we would have, considering at that time, we did just about every function in Illy for our daily jobs. I digress tho, as I went on to each different job and company, I did find at least 1 thing knew trick at each job that I dind't know before. Each place does something different that may have not been needed at the previous place so new jobs area a good way to increase your knowledge.

Thanks for sharing the info and your experiences.


----------



## ShirlandDesign

> exacto magnifico duplicatio


God I love societies with a sense of drama, (exacto magnifico duplicatio) so freakin magnificent. Made my week, maybe the best quote this month. 

You should come over to the house and meet my sister....really, she cooks great and my mother loves her like a daughter.


----------



## historygear

Illustrator for sure. If your on a Mac and have a tight budget Affinity Designer is getting good buzz and stellar reviews ($39.99). Bought it for my daughter and its excellent.


----------



## lemorris

Pencil and paper.

If you learn to draw, the tool is just a tool. I have Illy, Corel, Photoshop, Painter, Sketchbook Pro, and SAI on my system. My stuff still comes out lookin like my stuff no matter which I use. Go figure.



Find what makes you comfy and get down like that. That's what's "Best".

Wish there was a "Post your recent art thread" around here. We could have great discussion there. You'd see application doesn't matter near as much as execution.


----------



## casperboy77

There isn't a "BEST" program, it is pretty much what will work for you. I learned Photoshop and CorelDraw, yet others will say Illustator is the best. So here are the most popular:

Vector Programs:
CorelDraw
Adobe Illustrator
Inkscape

Raster Programs:
Adobe Photoshop
Corel Paintshop Pro
Gimp

All of those are top notch programs.

I want to comment on the one person who posted: "Pen & Paper". It would be nice if you were an artist but not really needed. A lot if not most graphic designers and graphic artist cannot draw or paint on paper. Then you find artist that can't draw on a computer. To find someone who is both is VERY rare! You can be a great graphic artist and make some of the most unbelievable artwork yet not be able to hand draw snoopy on a piece of paper. Your best bet is to get a couple of those programs and watch a few tutorials on YouTube. You'll pick it up quick if you have an interest in doing this for a hobby or living. 


Sent from my SGH-M919 using T-Shirt Forums


----------



## lemorris

As an artist there's a bit of a misnomer or somethin here. There's also a tiny issue with the tons of us art guys out there.

The *program* whether you're an artist or not doesn't draw anything. You don't just open Illustrator or Corel and say "make a design" and it does it. I have looked for the "draw a car" button in Photoshop and I haven't found it...ever.  Skilled or not you are in fact creating "art" you are an artist.

Picking up a pencil and paper and sketching out your thoughts, however crude, however stick-people-like will in fact help you use your *graphic designer* (you used the correct term for the non artist btw) skills to create a better design. Having that plan to follow and that crude motor memory is a key step that many gloss over and their designs suffer because of it. It's funny....printers often ask their customers to sketch out their idea on paper, but don't do it themselves before opening an application...hmmm....

I would bet most here are waaaaaaaay more skilled than they realize. If only based on the fact that at some level there is interest or they wouldn't be trying to make designs in the first place.

Why just get by..when you could fly?

Give it a shot. It makes a difference.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

lemorris said:


> As an artist there's a bit of a misnomer or somethin here. There's also a tiny issue with the tons of us art guys out there.
> 
> The *program* whether you're an artist or not doesn't draw anything. You don't just open Illustrator or Corel and say "make a design" and it does it. I have looked for the "draw a car" button in Photoshop and I haven't found it...ever.  Skilled or not you are in fact creating "art" you are an artist.
> 
> Picking up a pencil and paper and sketching out your thoughts, however crude, however stick-people-like will in fact help you use your *graphic designer* (you used the correct term for the non artist btw) skills to create a better design. Having that plan to follow and that crude motor memory is a key step that many gloss over and their designs suffer because of it. It's funny....printers often ask their customers to sketch out their idea on paper, but don't do it themselves before opening an application...hmmm....
> 
> I would bet most here are waaaaaaaay more skilled than they realize. If only based on the fact that at some level there is interest or they wouldn't be trying to make designs in the first place.
> 
> Why just get by..when you could fly?
> 
> Give it a shot. It makes a difference.


I think you are oversimplifying things here. Even pure artists who don't have to concern themselves with what goes on with t-shirt work recognize that Photoshop is vastly superior to other raster programs in most ways (though not all)and would not put it in the same sentence with Paint Shop Pro. And that Illustrator's vector drawing tools are likewise vastly superior to any other vector software. 

My analysis is that no single program is best at everything, but depending on what you are doing there are certainly programs that will serve you better or worse.


----------



## MaximRecoil

I can draw with a real pencil and paper; I've always been able to; it is just something that comes naturally to me. Here's an example from when I was in high school over 20 years ago (which I never finished, because it was tedious). The problem is: I can only draw what I see; I don't do well at all drawing from my imagination. I envy people like comic book artists who can sit down and draw anything they can imagine, and draw it well; people like Joe Jusko ​for example.

I do even worse trying to draw from my imagination in a computer graphics program than I do with a pencil and piece of paper.


----------



## lemorris

A tool is a tool.

It won't make anything unless you use it to make it. 

Steve Vesperman is a car art guy in my field. He uses Painter. You can't tell me that because I have Photoshop, I'm better. (I'n not btw...he's so effin awesome!) The illustrator Seegmiller, uses Painter and Photoshop. He's high end in both...not because one is easier to use. He's a good artist. Look at his pencil drawings.

When I started there wasn't seps in photoshop and illustrator. I cut rubylith and used format shade film. I thought I was king of the universe when I got a swivel head xacto so I could cut 360 degrees. The computer programs didn't offer an option. Like Spider in the for Fun and Profit book...(yeah we met)....you had to draw....under everything and at the start of everything, there's a pencil and paper. Design there, then use tools to make it real.

Now...I totally understand that not everyone can do a sketch or a comp and build a design. That's silly to assume and you are right...I simplify...it's my way. My point is that making that rough sketch or loose paper thought part of your process will make you a better artist/designer and you'll end up saving time because you have that muscle memory as well as direction. Even using clipart becomes easier. Plan then execute.

The Pencil is mightier than the....(insert application).

Note: That's just my opinion. I use Adobe products mainly as they do fit within my flow. I'm just an old guy that came up through the trenches and am now almost all digital. I love drawing so...its always going to be my slant. I don't knock how others get down...just putting it out there for consideration.

I actually drew this while having this conversation.










Both worlds...pencil to photoshop...go figure.


----------



## pmzirkle

We have been using Corel for the last twenty years.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

lemorris said:


> Now...I totally understand that not everyone can do a sketch or a comp and build a design. That's silly to assume and you are right...I simplify...it's my way. My point is that making that rough sketch or loose paper thought part of your process will make you a better artist/designer and you'll end up saving time because you have that muscle memory as well as direction. Even using clipart becomes easier. Plan then execute.
> 
> The Pencil is mightier than the....(insert application).


I think that is solid advice and makes perfect sense. I agree with everything you said actually. I just wanted to make a distinction between the different tasks at hand. I've seen the same behavior in myself. Trying to rely too much on software as if the software were going to do the creative part is a mistake and one that is easy to make. I've speculated that the computer and the software can actually be a distraction from your creative process. So I'm glad that you posted your comments.

Since you pointed out that you use Photoshop a lot, I'm curious if you've tried Manga Studio. If you haven't, you should. It's an amazing program. Similar to Photoshop but with a focus on drawing. In that regard, it exceeds Photoshop.


----------



## DTD

I love Seegmiller's work. (Yea, we met).  We (where I last worked) had him come in and do a 4 hour lecture and instructional. Very cool art and method. Another one you might like if you haven't seen his stuff is Peter De Seve. Peter de Sève

I'd have to agree with Mr. Lemorris.

For me, the best designs come after you've done your sketch work first. I've tried it both ways. Just randomly drawing in Photoshop from scratch verses creating a sketch, doing tight clean up line work in vector and then taking it into photoshop works out much better. More planned out. You look at any of the awesome illustrators out their and they have examples of sketches that have been done before their painting wether it be original painting, aka oils, watercolor, or digital art. Kinda like in business, you need a plan.


----------



## lemorris

> Since you pointed out that you use Photoshop a lot, I'm curious if you've tried Manga Studio. If you haven't, you should. It's an amazing program. Similar to Photoshop but with a focus on drawing. In that regard, it exceeds Photoshop.


I have an anime artist daughter and I have seen it, but not used it. Even with it she prefers SAI Paint by far. I like SAI for inking too, but Photoshop is a workhorse.

Like you mentioned there are tons of tutorials on YouTube and Pinterest has a bunch as well. You can learn to do just about anything you want to do in any of these tools. 

oh...and @DTD...Seegmiller is the man! So good.


----------



## TOTAL

I just bought CorelDraw x7, there are a lot of tutorial videos up on youtube that helps.


----------



## janwinard

My vote goes to Adobe Illustrator, but I sometimes use Coreldraw


----------



## miktoxic

MaximRecoil said:


> Then why didn't you actually do it?


wow. you got some big ones my friend.

tom is right. this is a menial task that would take 3 minutes to do if you knew what you were doing.

a lot of hot air for nothing.


----------



## janwinard

MaximRecoil said:


> CorelDRAW 12 was the first vector program I ever used. I tried Adobe Illustrator a while later (first 10, then CS3). I didn't like it at first, but after doing a full job in it, I already liked it better than CD. There are a lot of comments on this thread saying that CD is easier to learn. For me, AI was easier to learn. After doing one job in it, I felt I could do more with it than CD, even though I'd done several jobs in CD.
> 
> Since I mostly do tracing/vectorization, the bezier/pen tool is the most important thing about a vector program. CD has a pen tool and a bezier tool, along with a separate tool (shape tool) for adding/deleting nodes/points. I don't like that setup at all. AI's pen tool is brilliant. To get the functions of it in CD I have to switch back and forth among 3 different tools. I have no idea why CD has a separate pen and bezier tool, given that the pen tool is in fact a bezier tool. They divided functions between the two tools making it so I often have to use both tools to complete an object properly, whereas I only need the pen tool in AI, plus it has the integrated function of being able to add and delete points.
> 
> Another thing I like about AI is how efficiently I can do the most common tasks while I'm working. For example, by itself, the mouse's scroll wheel scrolls the page vertically; hold Alt and you get zoom. After zooming you usually need to make a more precise adjustment of the page position, and to do this you simply move your left finger off the Alt key slightly to the right to press the space bar, which grabs the page and you can reposition it by moving your mouse. This fundamental scroll, zoom, and grab combination is cumbersome to achieve in CD and Inkscape, at least by default (maybe there is a way to customize it in those programs?).
> 
> Also, I like being able to use the Ctrl key to select the previously used tool in AI. When I'm tracing, I select the white pointer first (Direct Selection Tool), and then the pen tool and start tracing, which means I usually don't have to click on a different tool for a while. When I need to select an anchor point to bring up the bezier handles or manually reposition it, I press the Ctrl key and the white pointer comes up. So all of these things, i.e., the powerful and properly-working pen tool with integrated point adding/deleting, the efficient scroll/zoom/grab functionality, and the ability to select the previous tool with the Ctrl key, combine to make AI perfect for tracing in my opinion, while other vector programs I've tried are significantly less than perfect for tracing.
> 
> AI is far from perfect in general though. There are things about it which I find highly annoying. You can read about my two main beefs here:
> 
> Does Illustrator have dementia?
> 
> And here:
> 
> Need help creating perfect curves and outlines
> 
> To summarize those old threads of mine, I don't like how Illustrator is constantly "forgetting" certain settings you use, and I don't like how you can't just click on the anchor point of a corner and specify a corner radius to make it rounded to the exact degree that you want it rounded. It would also be nice to have a tool which rounds a corner to a specific radius as you are creating it.
> 
> Also, does CD have any typesetting tools? AI has very precise typesetting tools (leading, kerning, tracking) which will allow you to precisely overlay a copy of most any text (which is often a part of tracing) without having to convert the text to objects and manually reposition each letter, or having to start a new instance of text for each letter so you can manually reposition each letter without converting it to objects. I haven't been able to find anything like that in CD.


I use Illustrator a lot in my vector works but there are some problems I encounter in Illustrator that are good in Coreldraw. When scaling and measuring a font in Illustrator, Illustrator scale and measure it using the text bounding box. In Coreldraw, it scale or measure precisely at the text with and height.
TILING, Coreldraw perfectly mastered the art of tiling more than Illustrator. Other than that? Id still cast my vote to Illustrator.


----------



## miktoxic

janwinard said:


> Illustrator scale and measure it using the text bounding box. In Coreldraw, it scale or measure precisely at the text with and height.


you can do the same in illustrator. you just have to know what you're doing.


----------



## janwinard

miktoxic said:


> you can do the same in illustrator. you just have to know what you're doing.


Will I know what Im doing in Illustrator by transforming the text in CREATE OUTLINE but the problem is that the text is no longer editable. You see it is easy in coreldraw regarding this matter. If you have other solution then tell me not just by telling me to do the exact thing.


----------



## miktoxic

anything that you select can be transformed to a specific size using the transform palette with or without turning text into an object.


----------



## MaximRecoil

miktoxic said:


> wow. you got some big ones my friend.
> 
> tom is right. this is a menial task that would take 3 minutes to do if you knew what you were doing.
> 
> a lot of hot air for nothing.


Consider your mere assertion dismissed. 

And "Tom" never completed this "menial" task, despite spending far more than "3 minutes" typing out claims that he could.


----------



## miktoxic

MaximRecoil said:


> Consider your mere assertion dismissed.
> 
> And "Tom" never completed this "menial" task, despite spending far more than "3 minutes" typing out claims that he could.


so seeing the example tygeron posted with gradient how long would that take you....4 minutes?


----------



## MaximRecoil

miktoxic said:


> so seeing the example tygeron posted with gradient how long would that take you....4 minutes?


That example was only a rough approximation, and so was AdvancedArtist's example, which inexplicably copied Tygeron's example, instead of the scan.

I never said that making a rough approximation was difficult; making a _close_ approximation was difficult at the time.

I don't know how long copying Tygeron's example would take me, nor it is relevant in any way.


----------



## josephkrueger

miktoxic said:


> you can do the same in illustrator. you just have to know what you're doing.


How exactly do you scale text with the transform pallet with it measuring the text and not the bounding box?


----------



## MaximRecoil

miktoxic said:


> janwinard said:
> 
> 
> 
> When scaling and measuring a font in Illustrator, Illustrator scale and measure it using the text bounding box. In Coreldraw, it scale or measure precisely at the text with and height.
> 
> 
> 
> you can do the same in illustrator. you just have to know what you're doing.
Click to expand...




miktoxic said:


> anything that you select can be transformed to a specific size using the transform palette with or without turning text into an object.


I don't think you understood what Janwinard was saying. Of course you can use the _Transform_ window to specify a size for text, but that size doesn't match the actual size of the letters, it matches the size of the bounding box around the letters. That's why when you expand text to ordinary vector objects, the dimensions shrink drastically, because now it is showing the actual dimensions of the letters, rather than dimensions based on conventions for hot metal typesetting.

Other programs, such as CorelDRAW and FlexiSIGN allow you to specify the size of typed text based on actual letter dimensions, which is handy because that's how nearly all customers specify desired letter dimensions. In Illustrator, you have to use a workaround to do this (some people have even created workaround scripts, one of which involves, for starters, expanding a copy of the text to find out its actual dimensions).


----------



## miktoxic

then i'd guess you'd use the ruler tool to figure out the exact dimension of the text with out relying on the bounding box and figure it out that way.

why do you need to precisely transform the text anyways...just curious?

most typesetting professionals measure text in point size and then edit from there and people like me just adjust using the bounding box.

why does it have to be so literal?

so why couldn't you just display the rulers in your document/file and place guides to the exact measurement you want, then constrain drag the bounding box to fit your dimension?


----------



## MaximRecoil

miktoxic said:


> then i'd guess you'd use the ruler tool to figure out the exact dimension of the text with out relying on the bounding box and figure it out that way.
> 
> why do you need to precisely transform the text anyways...just curious?
> 
> most typesetting professionals measure text in point size and then edit from there and people like me just adjust using the bounding box.
> 
> why does it have to be so literal?
> 
> so why couldn't you just display the rulers in your document/file and place guides to the exact measurement you want, then constrain drag the bounding box to fit your dimension?


Doing it that way is a trial and error pain, and imprecise. Speaking of which, the Measure Tool in Illustrator sucks, because it refuses to snap to anything. It won't even snap to the edges or anchor points of ordinary vector objects, much less typed text. It is pretty bad when you have to resort to e.g., the Rectangle or Line Segment tool to get accurate measurements (and accurate determinations of angles), simply because those tools actually snap to edges and anchor points (though they won't snap to edges of text, and text doesn't even have anchor points). If anyone knows how to make the Measure Tool snap to edges and anchor points, I'd genuinely like to hear it, but until I do, I'll assume it can't. Ctrl + U doesn't do it, at least not in CS3.

Because the Measure Tool doesn't properly snap to anything, to get a reliably accurate determination of the angle of a line, you can e.g., use the Line Segment tool, snap it to one anchor point of the angled line, then drag a line to the other anchor point of the line (which makes an exact copy of the line you want to know the angle of), then with the Line Segment tool still selected, left-click to bring up its options, and it will show the angle of the last line you drew, which will also be the angle of the line you copied.

I love convoluted workarounds for something which should be a basic function of any vector program, especially an expensive "industry standard" one such as Illustrator.

As for the text dimensions workaround, there is a better one than trial and error with the Measure Tool. See my post here.


----------



## casperboy77

lemorris said:


> As an artist there's a bit of a misnomer or somethin here. There's also a tiny issue with the tons of us art guys out there.
> 
> The *program* whether you're an artist or not doesn't draw anything. You don't just open Illustrator or Corel and say "make a design" and it does it. I have looked for the "draw a car" button in Photoshop and I haven't found it...ever.  Skilled or not you are in fact creating "art" you are an artist.
> 
> Picking up a pencil and paper and sketching out your thoughts, however crude, however stick-people-like will in fact help you use your *graphic designer* (you used the correct term for the non artist btw) skills to create a better design. Having that plan to follow and that crude motor memory is a key step that many gloss over and their designs suffer because of it. It's funny....printers often ask their customers to sketch out their idea on paper, but don't do it themselves before opening an application...hmmm....
> 
> I would bet most here are waaaaaaaay more skilled than they realize. If only based on the fact that at some level there is interest or they wouldn't be trying to make designs in the first place.
> 
> Why just get by..when you could fly?
> 
> Give it a shot. It makes a difference.


Lemorris,

You are right, 100%. Many times I do sketch out a crude drawing (if you call it a drawing) to kind of get the feel or layout visualized. You are also right that any computer software is a tool and not a computerized artist. Like I said, I agree with you 100%. My previous comments were with the mobile app so they were brief. The point I was trying to say in a helpful way to the person asking the question is that you may not be a good artist on paper but might find that using software with the tools and virtual environment you might be a really good graphic designer/artist. Now that goes both ways. I have a brother that is a well known incredible tattoo artist. His drawings are out of this world. He has dabbled a but with drawing on a computer. I think he was learning to draw some things in MS Paint, lol. They were pretty good but not like his drawings and tattoos. Yet, I can do things using computer software that are incredible. I believe that some people trying to start out getting into the printing business search for information and they get hit with many opinions (including mine) and don't know what way to go. So for someone brand new with no knowledge of this industry they may be worried because they have little to no artistic talent and a lot of people believe that in order to make amazing art that you must also be able to draw with paper or paint on canvas. And little Johnny just getting through his senior year in high school who wants to start screen printing in his parents garage can only draw stick figures by hand (which can make money too......."life's good" comes to mind). I hope that I explained where I was coming from a little bit better. Some people find the tools of software easier than pencil and paper. I'm one of those people.



> I think you are oversimplifying things here. Even pure artists who don't have to concern themselves with what goes on with t-shirt work recognize that Photoshop is vastly superior to other raster programs in most ways (though not all)and would not put it in the same sentence with Paint Shop Pro. And that Illustrator's vector drawing tools are likewise vastly superior to any other vector software.
> 
> My analysis is that no single program is best at everything, but depending on what you are doing there are certainly programs that will serve you better or worse.


Stone,

I wasn't listing the best software, I even mentioned that the "BEST" is all in one's opinion. Yes you are right Photoshop in my opinion as well as a majority of people's the best raster program money can buy. When I started with Photoshop I learned it in High School version 1.5 on a Mac. I then bought my own Macintosh IIsi and paid about $600.00 for Adobe Photoshop 2.0.1. I am a heavy Photoshop user and love it! I was fortunate enough to push carts at a grocery store and buy the software back then. But there are other options too. There is Adobe Photoshop Elements that they sell at WalMart pretty cheap. And I do own Corel Paintshop Pro. I know that you disregard it is a "good" raster program but come on.... It's better the MS Paint or Paint.Net. If that is all that someone can afford they can do some nice things with that software. The "Picture Tube" feature is also pretty cool. I have done some designs and effects with that software from time to time. Now I want to mention Gimp. I did originally list Gimp. I don't really do any designs in Gimp. But before I opened my own shop I was actually working at a school a couple years back  The computers there at "work" had limited software. I simply had a portable version of Gimp on a USB drive and got done what I needed to on break and lunch periods. That is also what got me into Inkscape (vector software for noobs). Now most people strongly agree with you that Illustrator is the best vector program out there. I personally use CorelDraw and Inkscape every single day. I do own Illustrator but use it rarely. Again my opinion varies from your's and I respect that you are an expert with Illustrator where I happen to be a CorelDraw person. I do agree with one thing about Illustrator and that is the ability to use it on a Mac. Corel no longer makes a Mac nor Linux version of their CorelDraw software, once upon a time they did.

I think it is great that these forums exist and it gives people lots of opinions and options. If someone has the money starting out or getting a loan then spring for Illustrator or Photoshop or CorelDraw, etc. If your poor or fresh out of school trying to get into this industry and you look at free software such as Inkscape or Gimp that is fine too. It is 100% possible and you can have a business and turn out a professional product using just Inkscape and Gimp! There was a point and time that I couldn't afford AccuRIP and I was using Gutenprint which had a plugin for Gimp to output my films. I do have all the nice fancy software now  So I guess I looked at that post from a point of view of how I started out. If you have the money go for the good software. If you have some money then there are less expensive but decent software out there. If you are dirt poor then start with the free stuff until you can afford better.

-Jim


----------



## miktoxic

MaximRecoil said:


> Doing it that way is a trial and error pain, and imprecise. Speaking of which, the Measure Tool in Illustrator sucks, because it refuses to snap to anything. It won't even snap to the edges or anchor points of ordinary vector objects, much less typed text. It is pretty bad when you have to resort to e.g., the Rectangle or Line Segment tool to get accurate measurements (and accurate determinations of angles), simply because those tools actually snap to edges and anchor points (though they won't snap to edges of text, and text doesn't even have anchor points). If anyone knows how to make the Measure Tool snap to edges and anchor points, I'd genuinely like to hear it, but until I do, I'll assume it can't. Ctrl + U doesn't do it, at least not in CS3.
> 
> Because the Measure Tool doesn't properly snap to anything, to get a reliably accurate determination of the angle of a line, you can e.g., use the Line Segment tool, snap it to one anchor point of the angled line, then drag a line to the other anchor point of the line (which makes an exact copy of the line you want to know the angle of), then with the Line Segment tool still selected, left-click to bring up its options, and it will show the angle of the last line you drew, which will also be the angle of the line you copied.
> 
> I love convoluted workarounds for something which should be a basic function of any vector program, especially an expensive "industry standard" one such as Illustrator.
> 
> As for the text dimensions workaround, there is a better one than trial and error with the Measure Tool. See my post here.


there are many things in illy that mystify. sometimes you are in the middle of trying to produce something very simple and ask yourself why is it this hard to do when like you said it should be a basic one step process.

but you have me curious. why does the text need to be so size specific?


----------



## ItPrintsInc

We use Adobe Illustrator at our shop because we feel that the output on films is the best this way. I would not go any other way! When we started we took some online courses in Adobe Illustrator. Took some getting used to but I am 100% satisfied with the return...


----------



## MaximRecoil

miktoxic said:


> but you have me curious. why does the text need to be so size specific?


You'll have to ask someone else (like Janwinard, who made the complaint in the first place). For me it is not normally an issue, because most of what I do in Illustrator is tracing, so in the convenient cases where I can actually use typed text in a trace (rather than having to trace the letters because I couldn't find a matching typeface, or because the letters aren't part of a published typeface in the first place), the right size is determined by matching the letters in the image I'm tracing. Plus, I rarely leave live text in my vector files anyway, and once expanded, there's no problem specifying a size.

It seems that sign makers are the most likely to be annoyed by this.


----------



## BeadyEyeGraphics

Well, RedBubble wants their t-shirt artwork at 72 dpi.


----------



## miktoxic

MaximRecoil said:


> It seems that sign makers are the most likely to be annoyed by this.


i guess, even though in order to cut a graphic file everything must be vector and turned into an outline.....


----------



## BeadyEyeGraphics

BeadyEyeGraphics said:


> Well, RedBubble wants their t-shirt artwork at 72 dpi.


Yep, that's right: https://help.redbubble.com/hc/en-us/articles/202270719

Also, they recommend a couple and mention a whole lot of different programs there and yet, amazingly, CorelDraw is not one of them. Makes you wonder.


----------



## casperboy77

BeadyEyeGraphics said:


> Yep, that's right: https://help.redbubble.com/hc/en-us/articles/202270719
> 
> Also, they recommend a couple and mention a whole lot of different programs there and yet, amazingly, CorelDraw is not one of them. Makes you wonder.


Hi Andre,

I read the entire article posted at RedBubble that you posted. The fact that they didn't or possibly even forgot to mention CorelDraw really doesn't mean anything. They mention: Pixel image editor, which I bought a while back. Pixel image editor is one of the biggest pieces of junk software ever created. I wish I could have got a refund and I tried but no refunds. 

Anyways after reading their article/guide if you go down to: "How your artwork will print", they clearly state that they use DTG printers to print their shirts. With my Fast T-jet2 I have just taken images offline and imported them directly into the RIP and had them print onto t-shirts. DTG's will print anything pretty much, just like your printer at home that prints onto paper, it will print it. So this topic says: "What software is best for designing teeshirts", as you can see that is getting more difficult to get a straight answer. Because there are many ways to print a t-shirt. In theory you could open Notepad type a few words and print something out onto transfer paper and put it onto a t-shirt. I seen a video on youtube of a guy who cuts stencils out of cardboard and uses Krylon spray paint to make his t-shirts. 

To try to help a little better: Whether you use CorelDraw, Illustrator or Inkscape (in order by alphabet, not by best) those are vector programs. There are a couple advantages of designing your t-shirts in vector: They are infinitely scalable without loosing quality. Also if you have some less detailed designs with simple words or simple images, you can print a film to screen print them, or send the vector to your vinyl cutter and cut some heat transfer vinyl or vinyl decals. Now if you are using: Paint.NET, Photoshop or Pixel you are working with raster images. I have some awesome t-shirt designs that are raster only. Now if I follow redbubble's instructions for THEIR requirements, I could take any of my raster designs and save them to a PNG file. I don't care what program you use, if it will read and open a PNG file it will print it out fine (If you happen to screen print just send it to your rip printer and print your film). If you have DTG just open the PNG in your RIP software and print. If you have a new DTG printer then you just use whatever image software you want and send it to the DTG because most new modern DTG printers have built in RIPs.

-Jim


----------



## MaximRecoil

BeadyEyeGraphics said:


> Yep, that's right: https://help.redbubble.com/hc/en-us/articles/202270719


They specify 2400 x 3200. They don't mention ppi, but their screenshots of the setup dialog boxes show 72 ppi, which is fine, because that will print out at 8" x 10.67" @ 300 dpi, or 12" x 16" at 200 dpi. They are obviously not intending to print it out at 72 dpi, because if they did, it would print out at 33.333" x 44.444"; way too big for a shirt.

I think they wrote that guide with the lowest common denominator in mind, and simply specifying a resolution is the least complicated way of ensuring you'll get a print-worthy file, because all graphics programs create in at least 72 ppi by default. 

There is zero picture quality difference between a 33.333" x 44.444" @ 72 dpi raster file, a 12" x 16" at 200 dpi raster file, an 8" x 10.67" @ 300 dpi raster file, and so on; the only difference is the bit of data in the file telling the printer how many dots to stuff into each inch of paper (which ultimately determines the overall print size), and that bit of data can be changed as many times as you want without affecting the quality of the picture.

The problem with 72 ppi comes from when someone creates a raster file at a certain print size (say, 10" x 10"), but it's only 72 ppi. That makes it so the only way to print it at the desired 10" x 10" is to leave it at 72 ppi, and the results will look like crap. If you print it at e.g., 300 dpi, it will print out in good quality, but only be 2.4" x 2.4". Good for a pocket print perhaps, but obviously not a chest print. Then there are the cases of people who don't create the raster file at all, but rather, they grab something off the web. These pictures are usually 72 ppi and relatively low resolution, such as 1024 x 768 or less, because they are intended for the web where they will be viewed on 72 ppi monitors, rather than intended for printing. Such an image will only be 3.413" x 2.56" if printed out at 300 dpi.


----------



## NoXid

miktoxic said:


> you can do the same in illustrator. *you just have to know what you're doing*.


The premise/title of this thread is faulty, or at least how many people respond to it is.

*Any* of these products can get the job done. They all have their own _nuances_ in use. But the key, THE KEY, is knowing the product you are using.

Someone with years of experience using free software like Gimp is going to make better art more quickly than someone who just dumped a ton of $$$ on something from Adobe or Corel but has limited experience using it.

Am I endorsing Gimp? 
No!
I'm saying there isn't a "right" answer to this question. One product is not "better" than the others.

The real question a new user should ask is whether they should work in vectors, pixels, or both. I suggest playing around with some free or trial examples of both types of program before spending any money on a commercial program. Once that decision is made, the rest is mostly irrelevant and amounts to a "member" measurement contest and little else. 

Pick a product and learn how to use it. As in professional racing, it isn't the hardware that wins, it is the driver.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

NoXid said:


> Someone with years of experience using free software like Gimp is going to make better art more quickly than someone who just dumped a ton of $$$ on something from Adobe or Corel but has limited experience using it.


That's the wrong comparison. The correct comparison would be to take a single guy who has mastered both Photoshop and Microsoft Paint and see if he is able to do better work, and faster in one vs the other. There are a few professional artists that have perfectly and convincingly answered this question by blogging about their transition from one program to another for the same work. You wouldn't be able to convince them that actually they are wrong. Since they are professionals at the top of their game, that the software doesn't matter. Only the person using it matters.


----------



## NoXid

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> That's the wrong comparison. The correct comparison would be to take a single guy who has mastered both Photoshop and Microsoft Paint and see if he is able to do better work, and faster in one vs the other. There are a few professional artists that have perfectly and convincingly answered this question by blogging about their transition from one program to another for the same work. You wouldn't be able to convince them that actually they are wrong. Since they are professionals at the top of their game, that the software doesn't matter. Only the person using it matters.


I'm just saying that 95% of this thread is a waste of time for anyone asking this question (see Post #1):

"What software is best for designing teeshirts:
I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks"

Once one gets past the vector, raster, or both decision, one would have to slice and dice the details of the user scenario to determine which product would "win" in a fair fight.

Details like:

Exactly what sort of images will you be creating/modifying?
How will you transfer this art to T-shirts?
Can you actually draw on paper? Have you tried drawing with a stylus/tablet?
Do you have any background or understanding of professional old-school graphics/photographic terminology and techniques?

But someone asking the question that launched this thread is most likely not yet experienced/knowledgeable enough to slice and dice these other details or make decisions about them, or even know what their needs will be in 6 months. What they need is a capable program and time in the seat using it--and to run away from threads like this.

If two masters of graphics arts manipulation and production want to sling it out to see who can produce image X faster and better, well fine! But that does not answer the question posed by this thread, it is a member measurement contest and nothing else. Might as well argue about whose god is better; it does no one any good and is a waste of time that could be better spent making T-shirts 

Some people will _prefer_ the way one program works over another, *regardless* of what any theoretical contest would pick as a "winner." Finding what works for _you _and what you do is what matters. We won't be racing each other down at the straightaway at dusk 

Less debate, more art!


----------



## DigitalInkArts

I love my Illustrator and Photoshop I have used for ten years. But if I am being honest and not a fan boy I would say to learn Corel. 

Your options for cmyk and print are going to save you so much time than designing in Illustrator then having to use Photoshop to finish it off like I do.

I have Corel but each time I try to learn it I get impatient and go back to what I know. One day I hope to have the time to actually learn the program. 

Sent from my D6708 using T-Shirt Forums


----------



## ourbusinessladde

Adobe Illustrator is always the best way to go and also Photoshop is great software


----------



## ShirlandDesign

I would love to hear a defense of Illy's "stream lined interface". I use Corel because I was given a bootleg copy 24 years ago, registered with them and have years of seat time with it. So although I can sort of get around in Illy, it seems like they hide features. I'll freely admit Corel can hang up and act pretty quirky at times.


----------



## TYGERON

CorelDraw stinks and has from the beginning. It's the worse software on the market. A hammer and chisel would be better. Don't waste money on garbage. Any one who uses it needs their head examined 
Illustrator RULES and is for any user who wants to stay on top of the food chain. Nothing else compares!!!


----------



## TYGERON

Illustrator stinks and has from the beginning. It's the worse software on the market. A hammer and chisel would be better. Don't waste money on garbage. Any one who uses it needs their head examined 
Coreldraw RULES and is for any user who wants to stay on top of the food chain. Nothing else compares!!!


----------



## DigitalInkArts

Ah. I see what you did there. Very Political. You have my vote!


----------



## ShirlandDesign

Another way of putting it is that Corel and Illy are two front runners, and their users are well invested in them. Photoshop stands alone. But still, about this Stream lined thing?


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

ShirlandDesign said:


> Another way of putting it is that Corel and Illy are two front runners, and their users are well invested in them. Photoshop stands alone. But still, about this Stream lined thing?


Why is the streamline thing important? Every software claims to be streamlined. All I can say is that Illustrator has some big hits and some bizarre misses. As we see more and more of these new little programs coming on the scene, we get to see some very different ways of thinking, and some of it is certainly better than what Adobe is doing. Even CorelDraw had some great ideas back 10 or 15 years ago. Corel had the dynamic tool bars long before Adobe. Corel also had interactive tools like gradients and transparency where you would edit directly on the object. Adobe took at least a decade to get around to copying this, but in the case of gradients, it's definitely still not very good. It's workable but not very good. And still confusing. There's a gradient tool. One would think that if you grab that tool, you could click on or drag over an object and create a gradient. But it doesn't work. To make a gradient, you have to find the gradient palette, and click on the gradient icon there, at which point the gradient tool is available to edit that gradient. The gradient tool doesn't create gradients! It only edits them. Even after using Illustrator for years, the lack of logic of this method caused me to never remember how it worked. I fumbled with gradients all the time because of this.

Illustrator's deeper features can also be described as hidden. Dealing with masks. The power of the 2nd pick tool. Tool toggling. And some key commands that aren't shown anywhere but exist. For example, you can press Control/Alt, Shift, F and it will open the text dialog and simultaneously jump your cursor directly into it, allowing you to start typing, or tab through the options for kearning, leading, etc. It's very powerful but you only figure it out by accident. It's not listed in the key commands settings. There's more of this kind of thing in Illustrator.

Overall, Illustrator's interface is very pleasant and not buggy. I like the way the palettes work. There's the main column and secondary and tertiary columns that can be small icons that can pop out automatically and to back automatically. That can certainly be described as a kind of streamlining. It allows you to spend more time working and less time managing palettes. 

There's a great interaction between Photohsop and Illustrator which is also I think, streamlined. I don't know when this happened, but if you select an irregular shape on a layer in Photoshop, t-shirt for example, copy it, then paste it into Illustrator, it used to come in with a white box. Which made it less useful. But now when you do that, there's some kind of automatic masking going on and it's brilliant. Copy a graphic from Photoshop and paste directly into Illustrator for a layout. No white background box. That's streamlined. 

An entire separation with all of it's spot channels in Photoshop can be opened directly in Illustrator with not only the layers intact, but all the spot channels come in. Illustrator automatically overlays them and presents them well. The spot colors show up in the palette and are editable. From there you can print seps. Remember when people used to create DCS files to do seps? Or create pdf files and import those into Quark or InDesign for separations? Actually you can just save the Photoshop file and open it in Illustrator.

Paths can move back and forth from Illustrator and Photoshop. Live text can move back and forth from one to the other. Live objects can be linked from Illustrator to Photoshop and update in the other program. That seems pretty streamlined.

So I think a strong case can be made for how Adobe's programs are streamlined to work well with each other. How streamlined is Illustrator itself, that's harder to say. I work very well in Illustrator but I can't say that it's anymore streamlined than any other software. Other than the great palette and interface design, although, they pale in comparison to some of what these newer programs have. Illustrator makes it hard to view all of your brushes. You can open up a brush set, one at a time, and view it's brushes. But in DrawPlus, there's a single long list of brushes, all of them. You can view them at any time. There's also a killer feature. View just the brushes used in the project. Many of the settings that one needs for brush work are only available when you double click something to open up a hidden menu. In DrawPlus, some of those same high use options are visible on it's dynamic toolbar. It's brilliant. Like brush smoothing. Brush smoothing in DrawPlus is a slider that visually and dynamically adjusts your brush smoothness after you've drawn it. It's brilliant. In Illustrator, you double click the brush tool, type in a number, and hope that this will yield what you want when you use the brush. Not brilliant! So you see, there are many hits and misses. I have a freelance project to do today. It will require me to do a lot of inking with my Cintiq. I could use Illustrator or I could use DrawPlus. I'm definitely using DrawPlus but the final result will definitely go through Photoshop for processing for printing. The DrawPlus interface, where drawing is concerned is a world better than Adobe. This is the way we see things when we are not overly concerned with being fanboys but instead, just using the right tool for the job.


----------



## TYGERON

*What's the BEST computer platform for designing T-shirts, PC or Mac?*


----------



## ShirlandDesign

OK Stone, my question was bigger than I thought, and answered well. 

And as for you Tyger, you been a baaaad PuttyCat.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

TYGERON said:


> *What's the BEST computer platform for designing T-shirts, PC or Mac?*


You forgot Android and Chrome.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

For me it boils down to...

Color Spaces
Color Models
Color Gamuts
Color Rendering Accuracy
And access to color data and tools that you have to handle the color data with.

That is the dividing line IMHO because as printers at the end of day we just reproduce images via printing.

Corel has some very unique advantages in this arena. I wont get into because it is very technical and you would need to do allot of home work to fully understand it.

As far as design tools are concerned I use tools in multiple software applications. Adobe, Corel and others.


----------



## ShirlandDesign

> That is the dividing line IMHO because as printers at the end of day we just reproduce images via printing.


 Tom, IMHO Dogs as big as you got better things to think about than humility.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

TYGERON said:


> *What's the BEST computer platform for designing T-shirts, PC or Mac?*


If you're actually drawing or painting, then a strong argument can be made for devices like the Wacom Cintiq companion, Surface Pro, or any tablet PC with touch and stylus. I'm still using an old ASUS ep121. Since there's nothing like this for OS X, the PC wins by default.

On the desktop things are a little less perfectly clear. With Windows you have access to more software and some of it really good. OS X is has better tools for viewing your designs, and everything else. Quicklook on the Mac is worth it's weight in gold and there's no equivalent in Windows. I would upgrade to Windows 10 or whatever just for that one feature. Otherwise, I'm probably going to stick with Windows 7 for awhile longer. Windows 10 looks to be as useless for productivity as Windows 8 was. Meanwhile, OS X never fails to add productivity features to it's productivity OS. Go figure.


----------



## NoXid

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> ...As we see more and more of these new little programs coming on the scene, we get to see some very *different ways of thinking*, and some of it is certainly better than what Adobe is doing...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_FreeHand

Back in the day, FreeHand had the most unique, mind-opening interface. I didn't get to play with it much, but hats off to them for coming up with a different way to work with vectors. It was more direct and intuitive, once you grokked the paradigm or not needing 30 tweaky little tools in order to do anything. Unfortunately, Adobe didn't absorb those ideas into AI ... but I suppose that drastic a change would have been an issue for long-time users of such an established product.


It's funny, and sad, actually. The FTC forced Adobe to exclude FH from the deal when it merged with Aldus, but then they got it anyway when they bought Macromedia. Too bad the FTC didn't stomp on that the second time around, as FH was probably the most innovative of the three main players 
Just another of many products to die in Adobe's embrace ... Reason enough not to like them as a company ... not that many companies are less than sociopathic 


Before committing to Corel X6 and PhotoShop, I investigated various open source programs that one could run on FreeBSD. After over 20 years working in one corner of the software industry or another, I was more than tired of dealing with Microsoft and Adobe products. Unfortunately, I was unable to find a solution that meshed well with my existing 20-year collection of Corel art. If not for that, I would have ditched all the name brands for open source solutions.

Mac guys can at least be a little justifiably smug these days, as they actually are running BSD/UNIX. One of the smartest moves Apple ever made (that and bringing Jobs and his company, NeXt, into Apple).


----------



## jaxsracks

Hi, i'm in the same hunt for a software that will take my drawings and text and smooth out the edges. I use paint and word right now but not happy with the results and not interested in investing in a powerfull software package that is a overkill for me. Is there an inexpensive option for smoothing out my .jpg and word documents? I tried the free trial vector-magic but the results for not good. Although it attempts to smooth out the edges, they are not dark and crisp. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated! thanks Jack


----------



## MaximRecoil

For people who use CorelDRAW, can you tell or show me how you would draw this simple shape with the Pen Tool? I can do it in Inkscape, though it is convoluted compared to doing it in Illustrator (i.e., as far as I can tell, you have to press enter on your keyboard after each curve you draw, then click on the anchor point and draw the next curve). I can't do it at all in FreeHand, this is what happens when I try.

With Corel's Pen Tool (I have version 12), I can't even get past the first curve, at least not when trying to do it in a linear fashion (i.e., always continuing from the last anchor point), because I can't figure out how to convert anchor points so that the next curve will be independent from the last curve. I can do it with Corel's Bezier Tool (why they have both a pen and a bezier tool is beyond me) by double clicking on each anchor point after drawing the curve, but then I run into a problem similar to, but even worse than, what happens in FreeHand when I reach the closing anchor point, like so. I can successfully make the shape by drawing the first three curves with the Bezier Tool and then drawing the last curve with the Pen Tool (like so), which is far from ideal.

What am I missing / doing wrong with regard to the pen/bezier tools in non-Illustrator vector programs?


----------



## NoXid

MaximRecoil said:


> For people who use CorelDRAW, can you tell or show me how you would draw this simple shape with the Pen Tool? I can do it in Inkscape, though it is convoluted compared to doing it in Illustrator (i.e., as far as I can tell, you have to press enter on your keyboard after each curve you draw, then click on the anchor point and draw the next curve). I can't do it at all in FreeHand, this is what happens when I try.
> 
> With Corel's Pen Tool (I have version 12), I can't even get past the first curve, at least not when trying to do it in a linear fashion (i.e., always continuing from the last anchor point), because I can't figure out how to convert anchor points so that the next curve will be independent from the last curve. I can do it with Corel's Bezier Tool (why they have both a pen and a bezier tool is beyond me) by double clicking on each anchor point after drawing the curve, but then I run into a problem similar to, but even worse than, what happens in FreeHand when I reach the closing anchor point, like so. I can successfully make the shape by drawing the first three curves with the Bezier Tool and then drawing the last curve with the Pen Tool (like so), which is far from ideal.
> 
> What am I missing / doing wrong with regard to the pen/bezier tools in non-Illustrator vector programs?


I would probably use the Rectangle tool to click-drag a box, ctrl-Q to convert it to curves. From the Shape/bezier tool with everything selected click the *Convert to curve* button/icon, and drag the control points as desired with the Shape tool. (Yeah, I know, sounds an awful lot like it was converted twice)

The Rectangle tool gets you off on the right foot with the correct number of nodes. The Freehand tool probably generates extra nodes that will require cleanup, and may look more like a doggy bone than an ax head, if your pen/freehand skills are anything like mine 

Uhm, I'm on X6, so I think Pen = Freehand tool and bezier = Shape ... but can't really remember for sure.


----------



## NoXid

jaxsracks said:


> Hi, i'm in the same hunt for a software that will take my drawings and text and smooth out the edges. I use paint and word right now but not happy with the results and not interested in investing in a powerfull software package that is a overkill for me. Is there an inexpensive option for smoothing out my .jpg and word documents? I tried the free trial vector-magic but the results for not good. Although it attempts to smooth out the edges, they are not dark and crisp. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated! thanks Jack


Okay, well, the good news is that anything you use will be better than what you are now using 

A general tip before getting into the programs. Do not work in or save in jpg/jpeg. It is a lossy format that throws away image data to make the file smaller. Which is fine for showing things on the internet, but is horrible for any sort of print process.

I assume you are printing text on shirts, maybe with simple graphics, or maybe just the text alone? If so, you are on the right track by looking at vector programs.

If you want inexpensive, well, free is pretty inexpensive. Download Inkscape and see what you think. It is open source and there are versions for all platforms.
https://inkscape.org/en/

I use CorelDraw myself, but more out of a need for compatibility with my pre-existing work than for any other reason (other than not liking Adobe as a company, AI itself is actually fine).


If you can't accomplish what you want with Inkscape, then you may be trying to turn lead into gold ... and rather than advice on buying the best cyclotron, perhaps some advice on materials and methods would do the trick. If so, start a thread with more details, and some example files, so we can help you past the hump.


EDIT: Above is assuming creating new work with the new tool. You will not be able to do much with any existing graphics from MS Paint, as Paint is deliberately handicapped. A polished turd is still a turd.


----------



## MaximRecoil

NoXid said:


> I would probably use the Rectangle tool to click-drag a box, ctrl-Q to convert it to curves. From the Shape/bezier tool with everything selected click the *Convert to curve* button/icon, and drag the control points as desired with the Shape tool. (Yeah, I know, sounds an awful lot like it was converted twice)
> 
> The Rectangle tool gets you off on the right foot with the correct number of nodes. The Freehand tool probably generates extra nodes that will require cleanup, and may look more like a doggy bone than an ax head, if your pen/freehand skills are anything like mine
> 
> Uhm, I'm on X6, so I think Pen = Freehand tool and bezier = Shape ... but can't really remember for sure.


I used that particular axe head shape just as an example to show the problems I have with non-Illustrator pen/bezier tools. These problems will present themselves with many irregular shapes you may be creating (in my case, usually tracing/vectorizing). For example, suppose you are tracing the outline of a car or most anything else. With FreeHand's Pen Tool, or CorelDRAW's Bezier Tool (CD's Pen Tool is next to useless as far as I can tell, except to use as part of a workaround), all goes well until you need to make your last line to connect with the first anchor point / node you made, in order to close the shape (i.e., you get the problem that is seen in my FreeHand and second CorelDRAW video). 

There are workarounds of course, like what I did in the first CD video (i.e., use the Bezier and Pen Tool in combination), or you can also end your final line close to, but not on, your first anchor point, then manually move it to connect with the first anchor point, then make final tweaks to the last line with the bezier handles if necessary.

I wish I could find another vector program which had the following three things:

1. A pen tool which works exactly like Illustrator's.
2. Mouse wheel scroll and zoom functionality exactly like Illustrator's.
3. Space bar to activate the "hand tool" to manually position the page by dragging it with the mouse.

If another program had those three things, I could do practically everything I ever need to do without feeling encumbered / having to use workarounds. I would like to be able to find a satisfactory alternative to Illustrator, because I hate how bloated it has become, and the whole "Creative Cloud" thing can go pound sand. I'll have nothing to do with that; ever.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

MaximRecoil said:


> I used that particular axe head shape just as an example to show the problems I have with non-Illustrator pen/bezier tools. These problems will present themselves with many irregular shapes you may be creating (in my case, usually tracing/vectorizing). For example, suppose you are tracing the outline of a car or most anything else. With FreeHand's Pen Tool, or CorelDRAW's Bezier Tool (CD's Pen Tool is next to useless as far as I can tell, except to use as part of a workaround), all goes well until you need to make your last line to connect with the first anchor point / node you made, in order to close the shape (i.e., you get the problem that is seen in my FreeHand and second CorelDRAW video).
> 
> There are workarounds of course, like what I did in the first CD video (i.e., use the Bezier and Pen Tool in combination), or you can also end your final line close to, but not on, your first anchor point, then manually move it to connect with the first anchor point, then make final tweaks to the last line with the bezier handles if necessary.
> 
> I wish I could find another vector program which had the following three things:
> 
> 1. A pen tool which works exactly like Illustrator's.
> 2. Mouse wheel scroll and zoom functionality exactly like Illustrator's.
> 3. Space bar to activate the "hand tool" to manually position the page by dragging it with the mouse.
> 
> If another program had those three things, I could do practically everything I ever need to do without feeling encumbered / having to use workarounds. I would like to be able to find a satisfactory alternative to Illustrator, because I hate how bloated it has become, and the whole "Creative Cloud" thing can go pound sand. I'll have nothing to do with that; ever.


In later versions of CorelDraw, they began to copy some of Illustrator's path editing features so a new copy might not have that particular problem. Also, when working in CorelDraw, some people work differently with path editing. For example, you could start by drawing a square, then convert the paths to curves instead of straight lines. Then you could grab a path, not the node, but the path itself and simply push or pull it to the position where you want it. And if you are drawing a complicate shape, you could go around it first by simply placing points and straight lines. Then convert all of the lines to curves and go around it pushing and pulling lines to fit the original object. That's how I used to work with CorelDraw years ago. I find the Illustrator method to be superior, faster, and more flexible though. For example, you can connect any two lines. And you can start on one end of a line. Stop. Then start drawing again on the opposite end. Corel doesn't like either of those examples and quite a few more. But Corel has some big advantages with path editing as well. Pushing and pulling lines is new in Illustrator CC but they definitely did not get it right. Deleting nodes off a line in CorelDraw causes Corel to attempt to keep the same shape without the node. In Illustrator, you get a broken line. Which is also good but sometimes Corel's method comes in handy. And Corel has it's smart shapes which are not well developed in Illustrator.


----------



## MaximRecoil

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> Also, when working in CorelDraw, some people work differently with path editing. For example, you could start by drawing a square, then convert the paths to curves instead of straight lines. Then you could grab a path, not the node, but the path itself and simply push or pull it to the position where you want it. And if you are drawing a complicate shape, you could go around it first by simply placing points and straight lines. Then convert all of the lines to curves and go around it pushing and pulling lines to fit the original object.


That's how my older brother does/did it, using Macromedia/Adobe Flash. We had an argument one day, about 8 years ago, about which method was better in terms of speed and accuracy (the argument started because he said he hated Illustrator and its Pen Tool). So we decided to both trace a raster image of a letter "S", to see who finished first and whose was more accurate. I won on both counts (and he agreed), and after that he showed some interest in actually learning Illustrator (he had only dabbled with it previously, and his frustration with the Pen Tool came mainly from not being entirely familiar with how it works). 



> That's how I used to work with CorelDraw years ago. I find the Illustrator method to be superior, faster, and more flexible though.


I think it is too. It makes more sense to me, when tracing, to shape the lines as you lay them down, rather than laying them all down and then going back and shaping them.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

MaximRecoil said:


> I would like to be able to find a satisfactory alternative to Illustrator, because I hate how bloated it has become, and the whole "Creative Cloud" thing can go pound sand. I'll have nothing to do with that; ever.


We're in the same boat here. I never wanted to go along with that mess, and later versions of Creative Cloud have become very bloated and taking longer and longer to open. I cancelled my cloud account and went back to using CS3. Eventually I'm probably going to have to buy CS6 and ride with that for another 5 or 6 years I guess. After that, I don't know what I'm going to do. Adobe has the best software for me, but I'm not doing the rental thing.


----------



## MaximRecoil

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> We're in the same boat here. I never wanted to go along with that mess, and later versions of Creative Cloud have become very bloated and taking longer and longer to open. I cancelled my cloud account and went back to using CS3. Eventually I'm probably going to have to buy CS6 and ride with that for another 5 or 6 years I guess. After that, I don't know what I'm going to do. Adobe has the best software for me, but I'm not doing the rental thing.


I've used CS3 for years; pretty much since it came out. A few annoyances: 

When you apply _offset path_ to an object, the new object usually has redundant anchor points. For example, if you have a square, which only needs 4 anchor points, and you offset path, the new square it creates will usually have 12 anchor points; 3 on each corner.

When you _divide_ (Pathfinder), it often creates a bunch of random junk paths, which is maddening if you used the divide function so that you can delete certain line segments and then join them in a different manner, i.e., when there is an invisible junk path on top of two anchor points you are trying to join, it won't join, because when you select the two anchor points, the invisible junk path's anchor point gets selected too.

It sometimes hangs and then crashes when you close it, at least it does with Windows XP. This has never caused me an actual problem, i.e., it has never corrupted a file or caused settings to be lost, but it's annoying nonetheless. I read about a possible solution to this problem recently, and so far it seems to be working (no crashes when closing since I tried it). The possible solution is _Edit > Preference > File Handling & Clipboard_; uncheck both boxes under _Clipboard on Quit_.

I tried CS5 for a couple of days, and while it didn't have the annoyances of CS3, it had its own new set of annoyances. Here is what I wrote about it in an old Adobe forum post:



> I've been trying out CS5 for a day or two and it has a new set of issues. It doesn't freeze on exit, nor does it create redundant and additional unnecessary anchor points; but sometimes the shortcuts are unresponsive. For example; Ctrl+U for toggling the smart guides sometimes does nothing; the same applies to Ctrl+Z (undo). There are also various things that formerly worked with a single-click that now require a double-click. For example, in CS3 you can click the down arrow on either the fill or stroke color palette; select your color; then _with a single-click_ on the other palette's down arrow, you can make the other palette drop down and the palette you just had open disappear simultaneously. In CS5, that single-click only makes the palette flyout disappear; you have to click again to open the other palette.
> 
> Also, the smart guides in CS5 don't always work correctly. For example, I had an L-shaped line (3 anchor points) and a single straight line (2 anchor points). I selected the whole line (both anchor points) with the white pointer ("Direct Selection Tool") and then clicked on one anchor point to drag the whole line. I wanted to snap it to the L-shaped line at one of its anchor points; but its anchor point I wanted to snap to wouldn't reveal itself. Oddly enough, if I just dragged one of the anchor points (instead of having them both selected) it worked correctly (but of course, that's not what I needed to do).


CS4 is pretty good; none of the issues of CS3 or CS5 if I remember right (I used it when I was working with my brother in AZ from 2008 to 2009) and I've never tried CS6 or CC.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

I have no problems with CS3. It doesn't ever crash. Never did from when I bought it back in Jan 2008. Even version 1.0 with no updates is rock solid stable.

As for the shapes that have no fill and no stroke, that's actually stuff I use in my workflow. I believe you can change the settings in the pathfinder dialogue so that they don't get created but I actually need them. if you have an empty space and you need to create some fillabke shapes just divide and it creates shapes to fill.

Extra points on a path are not an issue for me. Especially since Illustrator seems to be the only vector program where path operations actually work correctly.

I think I began to have issues with shortcuts not responding at CS5 or 6 too. Some issues were never resolved. Control Tab doesn't work in the PC version of Illustrator anymore. It works sporadically. I reassigned the key command and it works fine. The key command for Grid visibility also stopped working somewhere along the way.

Basically these issues are so small that they weren't worth reporting to Adobe. But I think Adobe's most stable years are behind it now. CC has more little issues than past versions of Adobe software and they aren't gerting fixed.


----------



## NoXid

MaximRecoil said:


> I used that particular axe head shape just as an example to show the problems I have with non-Illustrator pen/bezier tools. These problems will present themselves with many irregular shapes you may be creating (in my case, usually tracing/vectorizing). For example, suppose you are tracing the outline of a car or most anything else. With FreeHand's Pen Tool, or CorelDRAW's Bezier Tool (CD's Pen Tool is next to useless as far as I can tell, except to use as part of a workaround), all goes well until you need to make your last line to connect with the first anchor point / node you made, in order to close the shape (i.e., you get the problem that is seen in my FreeHand and second CorelDRAW video).
> 
> There are workarounds of course, like what I did in the first CD video (i.e., use the Bezier and Pen Tool in combination), or you can also end your final line close to, but not on, your first anchor point, then manually move it to connect with the first anchor point, then make final tweaks to the last line with the bezier handles if necessary.
> 
> I wish I could find another vector program which had the following three things:
> 
> 1. A pen tool which works exactly like Illustrator's.
> 2. Mouse wheel scroll and zoom functionality exactly like Illustrator's.
> 3. Space bar to activate the "hand tool" to manually position the page by dragging it with the mouse.
> 
> If another program had those three things, I could do practically everything I ever need to do without feeling encumbered / having to use workarounds. I would like to be able to find a satisfactory alternative to Illustrator, because I hate how bloated it has become, and the whole "Creative Cloud" thing can go pound sand. I'll have nothing to do with that; ever.


I totally hear you about the Cloud thing. Read your Software License Agreement, and you will find that in the opinion of the company you just gave money to, that you own nothing, and are using _their_ software at _their_ pleasure (and your expense). The whole Cloud thing actually gives them a way to make that a physical reality. The way companies merge and buy and sell each other, and then kill off the competing products (see Freehand) ... I just don;t like giving them that much power over my choices. Hell, I can boot up an old scrap computer, load up Window 3.11, and install CorelDRAW 4 any damn day I want 
(Uhm, not that I'd want to )

But it is the principle. I'm still using XP on one of my systems because I have some pro audio hardware that requires it. And truth be told, I like XP better than 7 (and don't even mention what the Redmond bunch has been up to since then!).

Point being, for reasons both critical or trivial, sometimes one wants to stay stuck in the past. The Cloud rains on that ability rolleyes.


As to your particular needs/desires for the editing features, one does get used to working the way the program likes to work! After years of mainly using one application or another, it is painful to work/think like some other application would like you to work. Hmmm, maybe you should dust off that old 386 sitting in the closet and bootup an older, non-bloated version of AI


----------



## NoXid

MaximRecoil said:


> That's how my older brother does/did it, using Macromedia/Adobe Flash. We had an argument one day, about 8 years ago, about which method was better in terms of speed and accuracy (the argument started because he said he hated Illustrator and its Pen Tool). So we decided to both trace a raster image of a letter "S", to see who finished first and whose was more accurate. I won on both counts (and he agreed), and after that he showed some interest in actually learning Illustrator (he had only dabbled with it previously, and his frustration with the Pen Tool came mainly from not being entirely familiar with how it works).
> 
> 
> 
> I think it is too. It makes more sense to me, when tracing, to shape the lines as you lay them down, rather than laying them all down and then going back and shaping them.


Uhm, what about the built-in Trace feature? It is actually pretty good in Corel, and probably in others too. But, yeah, outside of that, I would lay a line and shape it, rather than try to draw it to shape with the Pen. See! Corel has taught me to work the way it likes


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

NoXid said:


> Uhm, what about the built-in Trace feature? It is actually pretty good in Corel, and probably in others too. But, yeah, outside of that, I would lay a line and shape it, rather than try to draw it to shape with the Pen. See! Corel has taught me to work the way it likes


Tracing is great. It's just that not everything is a candidate for tracing. And sometimes we're using the path tools when we're not tracing anything. Just editing vector shapes.


----------



## MaximRecoil

NoXid said:


> Uhm, what about the built-in Trace feature? It is actually pretty good in Corel, and probably in others too. But, yeah, outside of that, I would lay a line and shape it, rather than try to draw it to shape with the Pen. See! Corel has taught me to work the way it likes


I've never been happy with the results of an autotrace; not from Corel, not from Illustrator, and not from Vector Magic. I always manually trace, primarily with the pen tool. When there are geometric shapes in the image I'm tracing, such as squares/rectangles or circles, I use the dedicated tools for those shapes and incorporate them into the trace; sometimes by just cutting a line segment or two from them (like a half or quarter of a circle).

I still use XP too, and I'll continue using it for as long as I can. When it gets to the point that using it becomes a hassle, I'll have to change, but at this point, I've yet to come across a piece of software that I want that isn't compatible with XP.

No new version of Windows has actually been needed past Windows 2000 (additional functionality can be added indefinitely with updates / service packs), including XP. But at least XP can be quickly de-fluffed to make it essentially like Windows 2000. Vista was a joke, and Windows 7 was an improvement over Vista, but a downgrade from XP. Things which you could accomplish with one step in XP take e.g., 3 steps in Vista or 7, because you have to drill down through "helpful" wizard-type pages to get where you want to go. Windows 8 is another joke, worse than Vista and WinMe combined, in my opinion. I put it in Microsoft Bob territory. I doubt there will ever be another decent version of Windows.

I can live (begrudgingly) with Windows 7, but it will likely be the last version of Windows I ever bother with.


----------



## NoXid

MaximRecoil said:


> ...
> I still use XP too, and I'll continue using it for as long as I can. When it gets to the point that using it becomes a hassle, I'll have to change, but at this point, I've yet to come across a piece of software that I want that isn't compatible with XP.
> 
> No new version of Windows has actually been needed past Windows 2000 (additional functionality can be added indefinitely with updates / service packs), including XP. But at least XP can be quickly de-fluffed to make it essentially like Windows 2000. Vista was a joke, and Windows 7 was an improvement over Vista, but a downgrade from XP. Things which you could accomplish with one step in XP take e.g., 3 steps in Vista or 7, because you have to drill down through "helpful" wizard-type pages to get where you want to go. Windows 8 is another joke, worse than Vista and WinMe combined, in my opinion. I put it in Microsoft Bob territory. I doubt there will ever be another decent version of Windows.
> 
> I can live (begrudgingly) with Windows 7, but it will likely be the last version of Windows I ever bother with.


 First thing I do setting up XP is turn off "Cartoon Mode" and get back to a reasonable looking interface: Windows Classic style.

7 Has a few nice things, but not worth the inevitable creep of change for change's sake. I wish they would leave the interface mostly alone and focus on improving performance, supporting new hardware, etc. But some marketing genius always makes them focus 90% of the effort on reimplementing the look and feel of the interface.

8 and it's Idiot phone interface!!!!! I have a 30 inch screen. I don't want a stupid phone interface 

So here we are decades into the computer revolution, Macs are running UNIX, and Microsoft is trying to turn my 4 core monster-powered PC into a big buttoned toy computer for kiddes (most of whom these days are probably coding Ukrainian porn sites while at day care)


----------



## MaximRecoil

NoXid said:


> First thing I do setting up XP is turn off "Cartoon Mode" and get back to a reasonable looking interface: Windows Classic style.
> 
> 7 Has a few nice things, but not worth the inevitable creep of change for change's sake. I wish they would leave the interface mostly alone and focus on improving performance, supporting new hardware, etc. But some marketing genius always makes them focus 90% of the effort on reimplementing the look and feel of the interface.
> 
> 8 and it's Idiot phone interface!!!!! I have a 30 inch screen. I don't want a stupid phone interface
> 
> So here we are decades into the computer revolution, Macs are running UNIX, and Microsoft is trying to turn my 4 core monster-powered PC into a big buttoned toy computer for kiddes (most of whom these days are probably coding Ukrainian porn sites while at day care)


I agree entirely. Not only do I switch XP to Windows Classic style, but I also disable the themes service entirely, which keeps the Luna theme, AKA: Yoshi's Island Mode, from running in the background and poking its head out during e.g., shutdown. 

Then I disable "use the welcome screen" and "use fast user switching", which gives me the classic Win2K style logon box, and also brings up the 2K-style "Windows security" dialog box (with the options: lock computer, log off, shut down, change password, task manager, and cancel) when you press Ctrl+Alt+Del, instead of just bringing up the task manager. 

Then I disable "use simple file sharing" in folder options, and that gives me the security tab in folder and file properties dialog boxes. 

Finally, I use Microsoft's own Tweak UI to bring back the classic 2K-style file search in Explorer, kicking that cartoon Microsoft Bob dog to the curb in the process. There are several other things I do as a matter of course when setting up XP, and at that point, XP becomes practically identical to 2K. Hell, I would run 2K if I could, but there's too much that's incompatible with it now.


----------



## j3rkface

Ha, tons of hate aimed at the later Windows versions and Adobe cloud.

I believe it was Confucius that said all of the warriors of the past can be found at the crossroads of change. That would be the case here. We have tons of people that want innovation and cutting edge development. Here we are with gobs of options: PCs, tablets, smart phones, automotive dashboard computers, smart TVs, the list goes on and we want them all to talk to one-another. Try and load Windows XP or 2000 or Vista on tablet with a touch screen and be able to navigate around, it'll never happen. It's our innovation that is driving these changes and without it we'd have under-developed buggy products, and none of our devices would talk to each other.

I hate renting my software too, but truth be told, I love being able to quickly log in on any PC or tablet (of decent specifications) and be able to log into to my cloud account and run my app in a reasonable amount of time. There is a pro for almost every con. If you break down the cost of buying a couple of licenses in the old software model and then upgrading every few years versus the cloud model, it's pretty cost effective to use the newer cloud model. It's always being updated, covered by support, loaded on several devices. The only way it doesn't work is if you have a single old PC with a specific function, or you do not use the software for a few months at a time, then the old model is better.

I fought change as well but found myself with fewer problems and better productivity once I acclimated to the new ways. I sometimes do fire up an old laptop with CS5 or Corel on it, even though there is some comfort in that I do still find myself missing a tool/feature/improvement available only in the newer versions. It's like the jump from Office 2007 to 2010, everything went to ribbons and it's easy to hate at first but eventually you'd never go back to using 2007 once you've truly used 2010 or 2013.

It's OK to hate on the new software models, but you can't deny the benefits. 

Both a Model T and a Tesla Roadster can take you on a 240 mile trip, but one of them is certainly going to take longer to get there and need 15 gallons of gas to do it, and not to mention "be a whole lot less fun to drive". That's innovation, but no matter what, someone will want to ride in the Model T for nostalgia's sake or because it's simpler.....hence I give you Windows XP or classic Adobe products.


----------



## MaximRecoil

j3rkface said:


> Ha, tons of hate aimed at the later Windows versions and Adobe cloud.
> 
> I believe it was Confucius that said all of the warriors of the past can be found at the crossroads of change.


Change is great, when the change is for the better. For example, I was more than happy to ditch the DOS kernel versions of Windows (e.g., 95, 98, and especially Me) for the NT kernel versions of Windows (e.g., NT4, 2K, XP). Then the changes started to be decidedly for the worse, starting with Vista.



> It's OK to hate on the new software models, but you can't deny the benefits.


That's all fine and good, which is why the "new software models" should be an _option_. It isn't an option I want anything to do with.



> Both a Model T and a Tesla Roadster can take you on a 240 mile trip, but one of them is certainly going to take longer to get there and need 15 gallons of gas to do it, and not to mention "be a whole lot less fun to drive". That's innovation, but no matter what, someone will want to ride in the Model T for nostalgia's sake or because it's simpler.....hence I give you Windows XP or classic Adobe products.


I'm impressed with neither. As far as I'm concerned, the pinnacle of car design can be found in the United States during the late 1960s and early 1970s (the "muscle car era"), with the second-generation ('68-'70) Dodge Charger being my favorite.

In any event, your analogy isn't valid. You're comparing mature technology to _primitive _technology. Windows XP isn't primitive technology, and neither is any version of Illustrator since at least version 8. Windows XP is still perfectly suitable as a _desktop_ OS, which is exactly what it was designed for, and Illustrator has had way more than enough capability than most people will ever need/use, for over 15 years, while a Model T Ford only has a top speed of about 45 MPH, i.e., not even capable of highway speed, nor would I trust its primitive buckboard suspension, mechanical brakes, and ultra skinny tires at highway speed either. This is where your analogy fails.

With my '69 Charger, I've upgraded things in areas where there have been meaningful improvements since it was manufactured. For example, I ditched the front drum brakes and installed disc brakes. I ditched the points-type ignition system and installed electronic ignition. I use radial tires rather than bias-ply, gas-charged shocks rather than hydraulic, halogen headlights rather than standard headlights (along with heavier wiring and relays added to handle the increased draw), added intermittent windshield wiper functionality, and so on.


----------



## CalicoInk

Photoshop, Illustrator, Corel Draw. Corel Draw is easier, if your new to either one of them. 

If you need help locating best price, we could help. our contact is at calicoink.com

Good Luck


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

I don't mind Windows 7 at all other than the fact that it's greatest feature was to resolve Vista issues. But it was still a largely boring update with almost nothing to improve productivity. The comimg Windows 10 is looking to be the same for Windows 8. So far there's nothing remotely interesting about it other than it walks back foolishness from Windows 8. It can't be compared to all the new features that come with a new OS X update. Frankly I would update to Windows 10 if Microsoft were to only add the equivalent of Quick Look from OS X. OS X has some really great productivity aspects that Microsoft needs to copy. Otherwise why should I upgrade. To have apps in my start menu? That's the big news for Windows 10. The start menu and the apps that are going to live there.


----------



## NoXid

MaximRecoil said:


> Change is great, when the change is for the better. For example, I was more than happy to ditch the DOS kernel versions of Windows (e.g., 95, 98, and especially Me) for the NT kernel versions of Windows (e.g., NT4, 2K, XP). Then the changes started to be decidedly for the worse, starting with Vista.
> 
> 
> 
> That's all fine and good, which is why the "new software models" should be an _option_. It isn't an option I want anything to do with.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm impressed with neither. As far as I'm concerned, the pinnacle of car design can be found in the United States during the late 1960s and early 1970s (the "muscle car era"), with the second-generation ('68-'70) Dodge Charger being my favorite.
> 
> In any event, your analogy isn't valid. You're comparing mature technology to _primitive _technology. Windows XP isn't primitive technology, and neither is any version of Illustrator since at least version 8. Windows XP is still perfectly suitable as a _desktop_ OS, which is exactly what it was designed for, and Illustrator has had way more than enough capability than most people will ever need/use, for over 15 years, while a Model T Ford only has a top speed of about 45 MPH, i.e., not even capable of highway speed, nor would I trust its primitive buckboard suspension, mechanical brakes, and ultra skinny tires at highway speed either. This is where your analogy fails.
> 
> With my '69 Charger, I've upgraded things in areas where there have been meaningful improvements since it was manufactured. For example, I ditched the front drum brakes and installed disc brakes. I ditched the points-type ignition system and installed electronic ignition. I use radial tires rather than bias-ply, gas-charged shocks rather than hydraulic, halogen headlights rather than standard headlights (along with heavier wiring and relays added to handle the increased draw), added intermittent windshield wiper functionality, and so on.


You nailed it.

My first car: 1970 Cougar XR7 with 351C. Added a high lift Crane cam, headers, B&B, forged pistons. Green pearl over a black base. Cragar SSTs. Went 145 once ... 

Wow! You still have your Charger? I parted ways with the Cougar in the early 1990's. Landlord unexpectedly took over the garage for his own use, and I had ran out of family options for storage. A few years out of grad school and a few years married, didn't really have the money to work on it or to rent it its own place (our rent didn't go down, of course).

Rear disc brakes would have been on the list, had I kept it. I had already upgraded the lighting/wires and installed electronic cooling fans. EFI would have been on the menu, too. 

Now I have an RSX with a hacked ECU that I can reprogram from a laptop, aftermarket cams, header, 9,000 rpm redline, etc. It puts out about 125 HP per liter, and still gets 32 mpg on the freeway at 85 mph. The Cougar got about 11 on the highway. Top speed would be well over what the Cougar could do, but I've upgraded _myself_ enough since then not to try a stupid stunt like that 

In the early 1990's the place I worked gave me a pager. My boss walked out the door and I took out the battery and tossed pager and battery in a drawer. They stayed there for two years until they came around to collect unused pagers. I don't have a CEL phone. CEL phones, like pagers before them, provide a whole host of things that I actively do not want.

Progress/change is not bad. I'm not a Luddite. It is a matter of whether the new thing offers something I want, or something I don't ... and that includes how affects _me_ and my life. To constantly be carrying the black hole that is the internet around with me all the time? I'd never get anything done. Anyway, I reject the electronic leash, no matter its form. I want to be out of touch when I walk out the door. I know other people have uses for them; I'm not saying they shouldn't. I'm just saying what works for me, and I know me, if nothing else.


----------



## MaximRecoil

NoXid said:


> You nailed it.
> 
> My first car: 1970 Cougar XR7 with 351C. Added a high lift Crane cam, headers, B&B, forged pistons. Green pearl over a black base. Cragar SSTs. Went 145 once ...
> 
> Wow! You still have your Charger? I parted ways with the Cougar in the early 1990's. Landlord unexpectedly took over the garage for his own use, and I had ran out of family options for storage. A few years out of grad school and a few years married, didn't really have the money to work on it or to rent it its own place (our rent didn't go down, of course).
> 
> Rear disc brakes would have been on the list, had I kept it. I had already upgraded the lighting/wires and installed electronic cooling fans. EFI would have been on the menu, too.
> 
> Now I have an RSX with a hacked ECU that I can reprogram from a laptop, aftermarket cams, header, 9,000 rpm redline, etc. It puts out about 125 HP per liter, and still gets 32 mpg on the freeway at 85 mph. The Cougar got about 11 on the highway. Top speed would be well over what the Cougar could do, but I've upgraded _myself_ enough since then not to try a stupid stunt like that
> 
> In the early 1990's the place I worked gave me a pager. My boss walked out the door and I took out the battery and tossed pager and battery in a drawer. They stayed there for two years until they came around to collect unused pagers. I don't have a CEL phone. CEL phones, like pagers before them, provide a whole host of things that I actively do not want.
> 
> Progress/change is not bad. I'm not a Luddite. It is a matter of whether the new thing offers something I want, or something I don't ... and that includes how affects _me_ and my life. To constantly be carrying the black hole that is the internet around with me all the time? I'd never get anything done. Anyway, I reject the electronic leash, no matter its form. I want to be out of touch when I walk out the door. I know other people have uses for them; I'm not saying they shouldn't. I'm just saying what works for me, and I know me, if nothing else.


That's funny. I don't have, nor do I want, any "mobile devices", and I've referred to cell phones as "digital leashes" for years. 

First-generation Cougars are among my favorite bodystyles. Another one from Ford that I especially like is the second-generation Torino ('70-'71). I'm not so much of a fan of the later smog era Starsky & Hutch style Torino with its clunky government-mandated "5 MPH bumpers" that all cars got saddled with starting in '73. I don't know why they didn't use a '72 Torino on that show if they wanted a third-generation body style; at least it had bumpers designed to fit the contours of the car rather than the whims of bureaucracy. 

Detroit was on fire in the late '60s and early '70s; they could practically do no wrong. Mopar, Ford, GM, and AMC all had awesome looking (and performing) muscle and pony cars in their lineup. Then Uncle Sam said, _"You boys are having way too much fun"_, and enacted regulations (e.g., emissions, safety) which killed the era almost instantly.

I bought my '69 Charger in 1994 when I was 19. It was a basket case and was wearing the remnants of a "General Lee" uniform. I was gung ho about fixing it up when I first got it, but other pesky things in life got in the way, and it just sat for the next 17 years. In the spring of 2011, with encouragement from my mechanic friend (who offered the use of his tools, garage, lift, etc.), I finally started working on it. The trunk floor was so rusted out that when I removed the gas tank and opened the trunk lid, I could stand in the trunk area with my feet on the ground, and have room to walk around. The rear quarter panels and rear sections of the subframe rails were severely rusted out too, and the floor boards had seen better days.

Getting the engine started was surprisingly easy (tough old 318 Chrysler); I replaced the tuneup parts (plugs, points, condenser, distributor cap, rotor button), along with the ballast resistor and the fuel pump; fed it gas with a rubber line into a small gas can, and it started right up. I turned it off quickly because the alternator was frozen though (I replaced it later that day).

For the rest of that spring and summer I worked on it whenever I could; cutting out rust and replacing with new steel, forming all new brake, gas, and transmission lines, replacing every single brake component, rebuilding the frontend (all new bushings), and various other things, and by August it was solid and road-worthy, though far from pretty. It is still far from pretty, because I've been concentrating on mechanical and electrical things, rather than cosmetics, plus I'm not made of money so it is a slow process. Here is a picture of it from this past summer.


----------



## NoXid

MaximRecoil said:


> That's funny. I don't have, nor do I want, any "mobile devices", and I've referred to cell phones as "digital leashes" for years.
> 
> First-generation Cougars are among my favorite bodystyles. Another one from Ford that I especially like is the second-generation Torino ('70-'71). I'm not so much of a fan of the later smog era Starsky & Hutch style Torino with its clunky government-mandated "5 MPH bumpers" that all cars got saddled with starting in '73. I don't know why they didn't use a '72 Torino on that show if they wanted a third-generation body style; at least it had bumpers designed to fit the contours of the car rather than the whims of bureaucracy.
> 
> Detroit was on fire in the late '60s and early '70s; they could practically do no wrong. Mopar, Ford, GM, and AMC all had awesome looking (and performing) muscle and pony cars in their lineup. Then Uncle Sam said, _"You boys are having way too much fun"_, and enacted regulations (e.g., emissions, safety) which killed the era almost instantly.
> 
> I bought my '69 Charger in 1994 when I was 19. It was a basket case and was wearing the remnants of a "General Lee" uniform. I was gung ho about fixing it up when I first got it, but other pesky things in life got in the way, and it just sat for the next 17 years. In the spring of 2011, with encouragement from my mechanic friend (who offered the use of his tools, garage, lift, etc.), I finally started working on it. The trunk floor was so rusted out that when I removed the gas tank and opened the trunk lid, I could stand in the trunk area with my feet on the ground, and have room to walk around. The rear quarter panels and rear sections of the subframe rails were severely rusted out too, and the floor boards had seen better days.
> 
> Getting the engine started was surprisingly easy (tough old 318 Chrysler); I replaced the tuneup parts (plugs, points, condenser, distributor cap, rotor button), along with the ballast resistor and the fuel pump; fed it gas with a rubber line into a small gas can, and it started right up. I turned it off quickly because the alternator was frozen though (I replaced it later that day).
> 
> For the rest of that spring and summer I worked on it whenever I could; cutting out rust and replacing with new steel, forming all new brake, gas, and transmission lines, replacing every single brake component, rebuilding the frontend (all new bushings), and various other things, and by August it was solid and road-worthy, though far from pretty. It is still far from pretty, because I've been concentrating on mechanical and electrical things, rather than cosmetics, plus I'm not made of money so it is a slow process. Here is a picture of it from this past summer.


Nice! I guess we represent the Covered Headlights Crew on here 
Would look awesome in black.

Friend of mine had a Roadrunner of that same vintage, with a 440. Ran it off a curve at speed, landing about 100 feet out into a freshly plowed field. Car was a total loss, but everyone walked away with only minor injuries (already being almost unconscious on various substances probably helped keep them loose ... Ha, though that is what also put them off the road).

Having a car like that when you are young, and surviving it , shows a certain amount of self control--or at least luck


----------



## lemorris

I use 7 Adobe applications regularly.

To be able to have the latest in all of them has been awesome. The price of buying them individually would be waaaaaaaay too much for me.

I held out for a while, but now I love being on the cloud.

I also have Painter, Sketchbook Pro, and SAI Paint Tool.

SAI Paint is a very capable program and drawing feels very natural in it. It's only like $65.

SYSTEMAX Software Development - PaintTool SAI

pretty cool actually


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

The latest and greatest versions of Adobe software are certainly very nice, but I definitely don't need it. Not for production and not for creative work. By the time of CS2 or 3, Adobe software was already powerful beyond belief. So I can roll with CS3 for as long as it can be installed on a PC and save my $50.00 a month. Eventually I think I will buy CS6 outright since that's still possible but right now I don't need to. I still have access to the latest versions but for my personal use, CS3 is great.


----------



## lemorris

It's still not a bad deal. I do video work, animation, web work etc. so it works out pretty good for me. I understand it may not fit everyone's needs and it is a very odd concept to buy into to, but then again....I held onto Photoshop 7 until I just couldn't anymore. I regret that decision. 

Regardless...eventually they'll get you...pay them now or pay them later, but you will pay. That's not even Program maker specific. LOLOL


----------



## dial911forme

Chevy or Ford? All in personal preference. I have used CorelDRAW since version 3. Not X3...THREE. I love in and it is super powerful.


----------



## NoXid

dial911forme said:


> Chevy or Ford? All in personal preference. I have used CorelDRAW since version 3. Not X3...THREE. I love in and it is super powerful.


 I made the same "THREE not X3" statement earlier in this thread. Remember Corel Magazine? Remember Windows 3.11? Remember ... uhm, I forgot 

And Dodge


----------



## MaximRecoil

NoXid said:


> Remember Windows 3.11?


Should I upgrade to Windows 95, or is it just a passing fad?


----------



## NoXid

If that's not a PhotoChop or VM, I am very impressed! (even if it is, you get points for being a smartbutt)

I still have the software ... just no hardware that could run it. I actually worked for a company that duplicated/produced the discs for that release of Windows. Maybe I should wander down to the computer junk shop and spend me $5 on a 386 .


Uhm, stay with 3.11. 95 was one of the worst ever. Had to wipe the disc and totally reinstall every 6 months because it slowed down so much. 3.11, like XP, was one of the better releases. One where they fixed more than they messed up.

So if that is real, what are you running it on?

On a lark, I recently setup Word to look like an Apple IIe mono color (green) monitor (my first computer). "You are in a dark and lonely place ..."

I wonder how far Netscape 3.0 would get trying to surf the net today ...


----------



## dial911forme

When I bought my first PC with a hard drive I remember the salesman telling me about the MASSIVE amount of storage a 10 MEG HD, (Tandy 1200HD), was. There was no way I would EVER fill that thing up!!


----------



## MaximRecoil

NoXid said:


> If that's not a PhotoChop or VM, I am very impressed! (even if it is, you get points for being a smartbutt)
> 
> So if that is real, what are you running it on?


It is Virtual PC, but getting it online via a broadband connection is rather convoluted. Here is the process. I installed MS-DOS 6.22 and WFW 3.11 in Virtual PC and set up the NIC and TCP/IP to get it online about 10 years ago, and I've kept a copy of it around ever since. Back then IE5 (the newest version that's compatible with 3.11) was still somewhat viable as a browser. I also have Opera 3.62 installed, but it usually does even worse than IE5.

As for real hardware, I did that as an experiment about a dozen years ago when I first got broadband internet (cable), with an Am486 DX4 (100 mHz) machine from the early 1990s that I had in deep storage, but it was hopeless. The hardware was just too slow (slow CPU clock speed, slow FSB, slow hard drive, slow RAM). Despite having a relatively fast internet connection (3 mbps down) and a 10Base-T NIC (ISA card), Google (which is a tiny web page) rendered on the screen slowly, inch-by-inch. The only reasonable way to get 3.11 online these days is on much newer hardware than it originally ran on, either real or virtual. But the real problem with using it online is the lack of an up-to-date web browser for it.


----------



## j3rkface

Ha, this thread went all kittywampus on us, right from the car analogy. The analogy is relevant in the sense that the windows XP operating system is only sufficient if you keep it off of the Internet. As a stand-alone PC without Internet access it's still a decent OS but don't compare it to the muscle cars of the 60's and 70's. It's still primitive, those of us that reverse engineer code love two things, old un-patched operating systems and new operating systems where patches do not exist yet. XP fits the bill perfect. 

The only thing XP has in common from cars of the classic era, is that the manufacture doesn't supply parts for it anymore, anything you put into it is aftermarket and the original support/warranty ran out long ago. I'm not saying the Tesla Roadster is better than the Model T or classic muscle at all, merely stating that it's clearly superior when it comes to innovation. Quite honestly it's still an over priced piece of tech. I'm like many here, taken the muscle car and added new tech, be it fuel upgrades or 4 wheel disc or NAV/entertianment. It's kind of like patching an old operating system that you don't want to give up on in that regards. All the farting around with after market and yet my wife's 2014 Jeep SRT comes stock with digital dash/tech, is just about as fast and is definitely better tuned for safety.

Sadly, if it weren't for all of the software theft and pirating, we wouldn't be forced to subscribe as a service. 

In the meantime, the wife keeps threatening to take my TRS-80 (with 1.78Mhz processor and 4K of RAM) outside and use it as a terrain test for her jeep. I keep it proudly displayed in a glass cabinet downstairs. She wants a mini-cooper, wish I had the guts to gut the dash on a new cooper and plop in the display from the TRS-80, be like that ugly monochrome screen in those Buicks from the 90's.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

lemorris said:


> Regardless...eventually they'll get you...pay them now or pay them later, but you will pay. That's not even Program maker specific. LOLOL


Definitely we will pay somebody. But pay far less, and pay when we want to and on our own terms.


----------



## TYGERON

dial911forme said:


> When I bought my first PC with a hard drive I remember the salesman telling me about the MASSIVE amount of storage a 10 MEG HD, (Tandy 1200HD), was. There was no way I would EVER fill that thing up!!


Haaa-haaa!!! Gateway 2000 here. 

Partner joked that we could've run a small country with it.


----------



## XPTartjob

Titere said:


> Freehand! Althought no more upgrades...the death of a truly nice vector program has finally come


Ohh man I miss FREEHAND MX!!!!!


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

dial911forme said:


> Chevy or Ford? All in personal preference. I have used CorelDRAW since version 3. Not X3...THREE. I love in and it is super powerful.


So as long as you personally prefer it, that makes it super powerful? LOL


----------



## MaximRecoil

j3rkface said:


> The analogy is relevant in the sense that the windows XP operating system is only sufficient if you keep it off of the Internet.


Neither part of that claim is correct. The analogy is invalid for the reasons I already stated, and XP works fine on the internet.



> As a stand-alone PC without Internet access it's still a decent OS


It is still a good OS _with_ internet access, and will remain so until the latest versions of web browsers will no longer install on it _and_ enough websites move on to newer coding standards that the latest XP-compatible web browsers can't render properly. As for now, the latest versions of e.g., Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome still support XP.



> but don't compare it to the muscle cars of the 60's and 70's. It's still primitive, those of us that reverse engineer code love two things, old un-patched operating systems and new operating systems where patches do not exist yet. XP fits the bill perfect.
> 
> The only thing XP has in common from cars of the classic era, is that the manufacture doesn't supply parts for it anymore, anything you put into it is aftermarket and the original support/warranty ran out long ago.


I didn't compare it to cars at all; _you_ did. It doesn't even make sense to compare it to cars. An analogy isn't even needed here (nor is a valid one likely to be found), because it all comes down to the simple question: Does it do what you need/want it to do? 

By the way, you can still get certain factory parts for my '69 Charger. For example, I plan to buy a pair of new, genuine Mopar torsion bars soon (Mopar part# MOPP5249157). See here. Note that a lot of those catalogs have pictures of classic cars on the front (one of the catalogs even specifically has a picture of a second-generation Charger, like mine), and that is an official Mopar website, Mopar being the official parts division of Chrysler.

And XP is not even remotely "primitive". If it were, I wouldn't be able to do everything I need/want it to do with it in current mainstream areas of desktop computer usage. 



> I'm not saying the Tesla Roadster is better than the Model T or classic muscle at all, merely stating that it's clearly superior when it comes to innovation. Quite honestly it's still an over priced piece of tech. I'm like many here, taken the muscle car and added new tech, be it fuel upgrades or 4 wheel disc or NAV/entertianment. It's kind of like patching an old operating system that you don't want to give up on in that regards. All the farting around with after market and yet my wife's 2014 Jeep SRT comes stock with digital dash/tech, is just about as fast and is definitely better tuned for safety.


I couldn't care less about "digital dash/tech" (in fact, I specifically dislike digital dashes).



> Sadly, if it weren't for all of the software theft and pirating, we wouldn't be forced to subscribe as a service.


You bought into that line of BS from Adobe? Do you really think they were so naive as to think this would even make a dent in piracy of their products?



> *That was quick: Adobe's Creative Cloud already pirated*
> 
> The application was hacked just a day or so after it officially launched with an eye on curbing Creative Suite piracy.
> 
> That was quick: Adobe's Creative Cloud already pirated - CNET





> *Cracked With a Vengeance: Photoshop CC Pirated In One Day*
> 
> Cracked With a Vengeance: Photoshop CC Pirated In One Day | TechnoBuffalo


The "Creative Cloud" had nothing to do the software piracy cover story (because anyone who is even remotely computer savvy knows that uncrackable software is effectively a pipe dream; if a particular piece of software hasn't been cracked it is only because there isn't enough interest out there in doing so), and everything to do with Adobe wanting a predictable, uninterrupted revenue stream from everyone, like a landlord. They know that their software has been more powerful than most people will ever need for at least the last 15 years, and they hate the fact that there are plenty of people out there who won't upgrade for no other reason than to have the "latest thing" and a few hundred extra pounds of bloat.


----------



## lemorris

I actually got on the cloud because I claim to be a professional, and I like being legit. I charge for my products/services.

I get really pissed off when I find people who just took my art. I can't get mad at a company for wanting to make money off their products. It's really not fair.

Adobe isn't evil. Their just a business. They sell a product. They are not out to screw anybody. Adobe doesn't owe any of us s_it. I don't get all this "something for nothing" stuff up here. If you wanna ride outdated software into the sunset, ride on. Understand that your needs are not identical to everyone's though. I use photoshop for a lot more than just drawing. I use Illustrator for a lot more than just lineart. Like I said....I use no less than 7 products regularly. Tell me how the cloud does not make sense as far as MY application is concerned. 

Purchase Photoshop, Illustrator, In Design, Premiere, After Effects, Acrobat, and Dreamweaver individually...even outdated versions....how does that make better fiscal sense than the cloud for me? 

If you just use one or two apps and you don't really use much of it...ok.....buy Photoshop 7...Illustrator 8....fine. When you're ready to step up though....step up.

Hate the game.


----------



## ShirlandDesign

Lem, you are one of the rock stars here. Your work is so wonderful it actually gave me a very small mid life crisis. Two days, one liter of Gin, and a public letter (on a different board) of self pity about the road less traveled. 

To quote Clint in The Unforgiven "fairs got nothing to do with it". 

What people have come to hate is "sure you can if you sign up for the plan", "but it's all in the _I Agree_ statement you just clicked", please refer to page 17 of the small type", "that options only available with the extended program".

I have heard a professor of contract law at Harvard say on NPR she can't understand the credit card conditions the 15 Ivy league MBA's wrote in the plan she was offered.

The cloud for storage puts every thing you know in someone else's hands. You don't worry a bit about data mining?

Adobe may not be evil, but are you sure their lawyers aren't?


----------



## MaximRecoil

lemorris said:


> Adobe isn't evil. Their just a business. They sell a product.


You mean they _rent_ out a product, like Rent-A-Center, but with no option to buy.



> Understand that your needs are not identical to everyone's though.


Exactly, which is why software rental is a good option for some people, people like you for instance. It isn't so great as a _mandate_.


----------



## janwinard

MaximRecoil said:


> I don't think you understood what Janwinard was saying. Of course you can use the _Transform_ window to specify a size for text, but that size doesn't match the actual size of the letters, it matches the size of the bounding box around the letters. That's why when you expand text to ordinary vector objects, the dimensions shrink drastically, because now it is showing the actual dimensions of the letters, rather than dimensions based on conventions for hot metal typesetting.
> 
> Other programs, such as CorelDRAW and FlexiSIGN allow you to specify the size of typed text based on actual letter dimensions, which is handy because that's how nearly all customers specify desired letter dimensions. In Illustrator, you have to use a workaround to do this (some people have even created workaround scripts, one of which involves, for starters, expanding a copy of the text to find out its actual dimensions).


Nice explanation Maxim. Thanks. lol sorry i do have limited English.


----------



## lemorris

PFFFT!!! Don't have no crisis on my behalf...I have my own over Mitch Different, Scott Seibel, Jeremey Duncan, Ron Webber and countless others. trust me. I'm no where near those cats. There is always...*ALWAYS* a bigger fish.

You can buy illustrator or Photoshop CS6 for like $400 so it's not like you don't have the option. heck...it used to be over $600. However, the cloud is $20 a month for a single app. That's $240 for a year and you get the upgrades. Now...that being said if you're a printer I wouldn't go past Photoshop CS3 as the rip stuff has gone bye bye. If you're an art cat though the software pays for itself in no time.

To each his own though. They make good stuff. It's worth it IMO. Maybe I'll fell different in a couple years. 


cs6 Illy link: Adobe Illustrator CS6 Windows Download Delivery - Join the Pricefalls family - Pricefalls.com Online Marketplace & Stores


----------



## MaximRecoil

lemorris said:


> You can buy illustrator or Photoshop CS6 for like $400 so it's not like you don't have the option.


For now, and there is no option to buy the latest version like there was for 25 years. How is that a good thing in general? It is good from your perspective specifically because it happens to suit you personally.


----------



## lemorris

me....and others like me....yeah.

I'm not the only person on it am I?

Like I said, get down how you get down. If I understand correctly, you don't have need past CS3 anyway. Cool.

I started on Photoshop 2.5 and Freehand 1, and Flash before it even had a number LOLOL. I remember having to pay several hundred to upgrade so I could get things we take for granted like layer effects and clipping masks. 

The cost to keep one app on the cloud is less than the cost of buying a full version of an older version. Significantly less actually.

Once again I realize it's not for everyone, but if you are solely an artist and you find value in some of the new stuff, then it's not a bad option. 

However there are great alternatives for the "artist" Look into Paint Tool SAI. It's like *$60* and it's awesome!!! Look into Illy 10 which is by far the most compatible format ever. It still runs on Windows 7 I believe. (Could be mistaken on that.)

I pay for cell phone, Hightail, DropBox, Napster (  ), etc....It's not much more than those things....less in some cases.

If you wanted to expand your skillset, the pricing makes it very affordable to do that as well. Picking up things like AfterEffects, InDesign, and Dreamweaver can really boost your career opportunities for a fairly minor investment in yourself.

Regardless...the cloud isn't all bad for everyone. I really like it. Just sayin.


----------



## MaximRecoil

lemorris said:


> me....and others like me....yeah.
> 
> I'm not the only person on it am I?


So you're saying that one of the reasons you like it is because others like you like it? If that's not what you're saying then this part of your reply is a _non sequitur_.




> Regardless...the cloud isn't all bad for everyone. I really like it. Just sayin.


Who said, suggested, or even hinted that it was all bad for everyone? Obviously it isn't bad for people who would rather rent than buy, and who like the idea that Adobe can pull the plug on them at any time, or have their authentication servers go down (which has already happened once).


----------



## lemorris

All I'm sayin is, I like it. I "rent" a lot of stuff in my life, like many people do.

I like the idea of spending less in the long run than I did before. I also like the idea of being current which helps maximize my opportunities. I really like the idea of food.

They are not going to pull the plug. If they do I will still have my pencil which is the ultimate tool anyway. (I know, I know)

You know...the trial is free. I tried it first. You might actually dig it. Won't hurt nothin to try, just sayin.

I bet if you contacted them you could sit down with someone of influence and maybe make a difference. I'm just some clown on a forum, I'm good with them. maybe look into airing your grievances there...you never know.

No issues, no worries.


----------



## lemorris

Oh....I drive a 1958 VW bug, daily for the last 14 years.


----------



## MaximRecoil

lemorris said:


> You know...the trial is free. I tried it first. You might actually dig it. Won't hurt nothin to try, just sayin.


No thanks. I want someone to hack Illustrator 8 for me so that it scrolls and zooms with the mouse wheel like the CS versions do, then I'll be happy. Illustrator 8 was the last lean, light, and essentially bug-free version of Illustrator, and the last version which was a GUI for genuine Postscript rather than PDF, and the last version before they tried to turn Illustrator into a bad Photoshop. I've only ever done one job in Illustrator that I couldn't have done in Illustrator 8, and that's only because it called for an opacity mask. I normally do standard spot-color style line work; paths and compound paths, drawn mostly with the pen tool.

The ironic thing is: if you are primarily the artist rather than the art recipient, you run into a lot more file compatibility problems using the lastest versions of Adobe products than using older versions. In other words, most anyone you would send art to won't have any compatibility issues with an Illustrator 8 file (except for in the unlikely case of them having only Illustrator 7 or older). On the other hand, far fewer people can open a CC or even CS6 file without issue.

Notice that when you save as a PDF in a newer version of Illustrator it defaults to Acrobat 6 (PDF 1.5) format. They do that for compatibility reasons (and it also shows that underneath the shiny hood, not much has actually changed in many years). Acrobat 6 is from 2003, and if your file can successfully be saved in that format and retain its correct appearance, that means it could have been created from scratch in that old format in the first place.


----------



## j3rkface

MaximRecoil, 
You have got to be one of the most argumentative users in this forum. I am not sure why you can't just admit that that it's forward thinking to place apps in the cloud. You seem to be in denial.

As a stockholder Adobe (which I am and have been since Jan of 2012), I want to see them in the cloud. If they are not actively pushing it, then they are failing for me as an investor. 

As a consumer of Adobe (which I have been since 1993, going back to Photoshop 2.5 - Brimstone), I would like to see the option to purchase it outright, my only gripe. Though I don't prefer to purchase over cloud, I'd still like to see it as an option, giving consumers options is always a best practice. Though my stock has more than doubled in price, so I won't cry about how things are run.

As a developer (which I did from 1993 to 2006, before I sold my accounting software company to a larger corporation), I can tell you that you are all wet about your theories of versions and incompatible file types. We'd have to totally hijack this thread to make that case though. BTW, I've never had file problems dealing with vendors but I don't doubt it happens. It's the _reasons _that I doubt.

As a person that has circumvented security and limitations on software such as those from Adobe, I can agree with you in not wanting to buy into the cloud as the solution for pirating. No one ever said it would be bullet proof but it does/did *curtail *the process temporarily. It doesn't matter though, the company's main focus for cloud should be for other reasons.

Feel free to blast and quote items in this and from others like Lemorris. It's clear that you need to rant and be more destructive than constructive here. There comes a time when a thread has outlived it's usefulness and forum etiquette should be restored. Hopefully you'll allow this thread be put out to pasture.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

lemorris said:


> They are not going to pull the plug.



But what about you? Are you going to pull the plug? Eventually? I'm going to say with absolute certainty, yes you are going to pull the plug. Maybe 10 years. Maybe 20 years. But you will pull the plug. On that day, Adobe will hold all of your creations ransom. Without renting the software, you can't edit any of your creations. This is the greatest problem with the rental system, but not everyone is looking ahead enough to recognize it and consider it. Now you know.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

MaximRecoil said:


> The ironic thing is: if you are primarily the artist rather than the art recipient, you run into a lot more file compatibility problems using the lastest versions of Adobe products than using older versions.


That is indeed the ironic part. If you're not servicing customers but rather just making your own art, then it's even easier to use whatever software or version you want. You don't have to keep up with a thousand customers. 

Eventually I may truly find myself in a situation where not getting with the rental program is too much to bear, but I'm going to resist that for as long as possible. Frankly, for productivity, I really need Illustrator and Photoshop, but for creative stuff, I have plenty options, cheap software, that has great features. I'm not talking about junk like Inkscape or Gimp. LOL I'm talking about Serif software, Manga Studio, etc. These companies are making some impressive stuff so for now, I don't need to worry too much about Adobe, and the future is looking positive without renting from Adobe.


----------



## NoXid

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> But what about you? Are you going to pull the plug? Eventually? I'm going to say with absolute certainty, yes you are going to pull the plug. Maybe 10 years. Maybe 20 years. But you will pull the plug. On that day, Adobe will hold all of your creations ransom. Without renting the software, you can't edit any of your creations. This is the greatest problem with the rental system, but not everyone is looking ahead enough to recognize it and consider it. Now you know.


Exactly.

Any true archive/backup of a digital work of art has to include the software that created it. Thanks to VMs, you can even keep it in the form of a complete install including OS. 

Of course, there be may no need to keep the art for a week, much less 10 years. In that case, it hardly matters what you used to create it as long as it got the job done in a reasonable way.


----------



## lemorris

SAI opens every one of my Photoshop files including layers and whatnot and allows me to save them as layered tiff or whatever. It's really not a problem.

I save religiously so I don't have to worry, and yeah I use physical drives and cloud based storage systems.

In 20 years it may matter, or maybe I'll finally have the surgery and became a centaur in which case it probably won't. 

I guess we'll see.


----------



## lsart

Used Illustrator and Photoshop since the 80's pretty much the best for me anyway.


----------



## plainhavoc

I do 3D modelling, and was wondering if I choose to do renders, and then touch them up with a tad more detail in Photoshop, what format would be best to send to the printing company? I can render out any image size but was thinking of starting at 2048x2048px size.


----------



## MaximRecoil

plainhavoc said:


> I do 3D modelling, and was wondering if I choose to do renders, and then touch them up with a tad more detail in Photoshop, what format would be best to send to the printing company? I can render out any image size but was thinking of starting at 2048x2048px size.


For raster images, you generally want at least 300 pixels per inch (PPI) for the desired print size. For example, if you want your image to be printed at a size of 10" x 10" on a T-shirt, it should be 3000 x 3000 pixels resolution.

As for format, save it as a .TIFF with lossless LZW compression, and with embedded color profile (generally it should be CMYK, but check with the printing company about the exact color profile to use).


----------



## gbruins

Has anyone tried using Affinity Designer for designing t-shirts?
https://affinity.serif.com


----------



## DigitalInkArts

gbruins said:


> Has anyone tried using Affinity Designer for designing t-shirts?
> https://affinity.serif.com


I am so jealous I do not have a Mac right now!


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

gbruins said:


> Has anyone tried using Affinity Designer for designing t-shirts?
> https://affinity.serif.com


It's a kind of consumer level software with a very slick interface. It's basically the same software as Serif's long running DrawPlus but with a lot less features and a much nicer interface, more stable, and less glitches. Like DrawPlus the killer feature is the brush tools. Otherwise, it's slick but rather short on professional features.


----------



## Naelynae

can you use photos of people w CorelDraw?


----------



## BeadyEyeGraphics

Naelynae said:


> can you use photos of people w CorelDraw?


Yes, you can use photos (raster images), including those with people, in CorelDraw. As for specific pics that you might have in mind, those could have copyright and other intellectual property rights protection.


----------



## gatorGRAFIX

I have been screen printing since the early 80's and back then we use to lay out art all by hand (overhead projector and some tracing) and then cut it all out using an exact knife on amberlyth and rubylith (Google it). We also use to use an Ole Roy (I think it was called) that would mirror a cut on rubylith for fonts and then peel it all out. We even had a dark room and a stat camera to make clear film positives. Looking back compared to now that all sucked, ha ha.

In the early 90's I discovered the benefits of a scanner for getting artwork into a computer and a Mac LC for layout and printing type. It would all still have to be mocked up by hand because our only output was on a laser printer, 8 1/2 X 14 if I remember correctly.

With the Mac I also discovered Illustrator (2.0 I believe) and Photoshop. Back in those days a Mac was the only choice for those two proggies. Eventually Corel Draw came along for the PC users and for a while life was good for nearly everyone. Now those programs are available cross platform and things have changed a bit but the PC folks still tend to live by CD and the Mac people still seem to be Adobe followers. I am sure CD gives the PC crowd what they need happily but I know Illustrator and Photoshop backwards, forwards and inside out and for sure they are the programs for me.

The things that you can do with Illustrator are incredible. I cut straight to my vinyl cutter with it.

In Photoshop and Illustrator I use a RIP called Acurip which is top notch. It lets me send art to my Epson Workforce 1100 for film positive printing.

Also in Photoshop I use QuickSeps Professional which is an art separation program that lets me separate any Photoshop art into print plates that I can use to burn screens and screen print with. Amazing program.


----------



## ShirlandDesign

> we use to lay out art all by hand (overhead projector and some tracing) and then cut it all out using an exacto knife on amberlyth and rubylith


The first print I did in 82 or 83 was hand drawn on paper, cut with an Xacto and put on the platen of the press. Next I squeegeed Nazdar ink through a blank screen onto the knife cut paper, lifted up the screen with the paper stuck to it and weeded it like vinyl, let it dry and then printed. 

Have taken clear film over a drawing, and color separated by eye stippling with a touch up pen (poor results) although I've seen great prints made using this method.

The next evolution was cutting Amberlith on a plotter, weeding and using the film as a film positive with direct emulsion.

Then Laser prints on vellum that had to be spliced together to get up to size. One year the only progress I made for the whole year was getting a Post Script laser printer to output Index seps through an educational version of Illy. 

And still yet I get winy trying to get a feel for channel seps.

If and when I do, I'm sure DTG will be cheap enough, accurate enough, and reliable enough to render the channel method obsolete.


----------



## dbs

what are the best sites to subscribe to for clip art?


----------



## KerensTeeShop

dbs said:


> what are the best sites to subscribe to for clip art?


This really isn't related to this post, but I'll be glad to help. I'm going to apologize in advance because this is going to be a long post. Anything that has to do with design work, I just can't shut up.

I wanna start by saying that this is simply how I see things based on what has worked for me. Nothing in this business is universal, and it's the flexibility and room for creativity that really makes this business as awesome as it is.

First, you need to decide if you actually need a subscription. Many designers keep an arsenal of vector (what you probably consider clip art) and raster art (usually textures for me) in a library to pull from, sometimes buying packs to use over and over again, mixing the elements together to create unique designs. This typically works faster and is more affordable long-term when you are making your own designs and shirts. There is also a ridiculous number of free vector sites out there. They are updated often and have an ok selection. I find these typically need more work to give them that "wow factor" than premium sites, but you really can't beat the price. Just google, search, bookmark, and you're good to go.

Ok, well, lets say that isn't good enough and you want really awesome stuff with minimal work and you have a reasonable size monthly budget for a subscription. I would recommend istockphoto. It's pricey but the quality of work is fantastic. Aside from spending hours creating brand new content, this is the best I've experienced.

As far as the best software out there (as per the actual subject matter) I use CorelDraw for vector work and Photoshop and CorelDraw for raster work. I almost never use Photo-paint. Draw has raster tools built in and I focus on monochrome work in Corel and pretty much everything else in photoshop. 

tl;dr istockphoto is my recommendation. It's expensive but I think it's worth it.


----------



## gatorGRAFIX

I ran across this guy the other day. Seems pretty reasonable for those who don't have an artist inhouse: _digitizingone.com_

Here is a great place to pick up free quality vector based files: _all-free-download.com_


----------



## teehugger

if no-one has mentioned it yet, a lot of artists out there are raving about and switching to *manga studio* which also happens to be dirt cheap. especially compared to photoshop, manga studio has better shortcuts and if i remember right, it also has better brush weight modulation than illustrator.

i know when i start doing my own graphics, that's the first program i'll try.

before that, i was looking into getting *xara* which is also much cheaper than illustrator, even when you get the version with a great photo editor that's compatible with photoshop filters.

i am not a fan of greedy and overly complicated adobe products and would only use them if i had to share files with pros


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

I mention Manga Studio pretty often. It's one of the best programs that can be had right now for drawing and painting.


----------



## bvmprinting

is there a online program can I use the got milk font on


----------



## sindhu g n

hi..
According to me CorelDraw Graphics Suite and Adobe Illustrator there two are good software for t-shirt design.


----------



## sixo

well as we can all conclude coreldraw is the better software. Not to knock illustrator but i believe user friendliness carries the day any day..... im not as experienced as most hence my patience to let yo all comment first LOL!!!


----------



## sixo

we can safely conclude the X3 carries the day. its very user friendly. might not have the special effects savvy of photoshop but its a very practical software, had to wait to talk late cuz im still relatively a greenhorn LOL!!


----------



## sindhu g n

hi..
CorelDraw Graphics Suite and Adobe Illustrator these two are the best softwares for t-shirt design.


----------



## teehugger

many will argue illustrator because "it's the industry standard", but that's precisely one reason i despise the program... it's intentionally "busted" so it can only communicate properly with other adobe programs and not with others that properly adhere to format standards. that, and adobe are greedy SOBs who won't even let you OWN their program anymore and charge an obscene yearly rental fee that's higher than it should be to own. oh, and it's one of the most complicated programs.

i just bought a copy of manga studio for something like $40 (you can get REALLY great under $20 deals when new versions come out) because it gets so many raves from users on amazon and many of them are illustrator converts. it may be a cheap program, but it's quite deep, offers superior brush control over illustrator, and does some things more intuitively. it even offers halftones and color separations.

don't think of it as a "cartoon drawing program". it can also be used for photoshopping and many prefer it for that over actual photoshop. (i can't remember if it can use photoshop filters)

just watch some of the demo videos on youtube. it's amazing what can be done with it and the wide variety of visual styles you can achieve with it. the 3D character model feature is a really nice "bonus" too.

i'm just annoyed that i can't use my copy yet as it requires an internet connection to activate it and i'm not online yet, but just browsing at the interface in demo mode, it's a really deep program.

after that, i'd go with xara studio for graphics AND photo eding as well as an affordable price, but then again, i'm not much of a conformist. still, both programs get much love from users. xara is often favored for it's simpler, more intuitive interface which appeals to me as i hate "hackerware" you can't figure out even with a manual


----------



## sindhu g n

hi..
CorelDraw or Illustrator.


----------



## aldorabancroft

You have t-shirt ? or still it pending to buy? If still its pending then there are many online t-shirt stores available which provide t-shirt design feature. So you can find cheap and best t-shirt.


----------



## KevinTSM

Even though I am a fan of Corel, I would go with Illustrator/Photoshop. Just my opinion.


----------



## sindhu g n

CorelDraw Graphics Suite and Adobe Illustrator are the two best software for designing t-shirts.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

If you buy Photoshop or Illustrator or CorelDraw, the best programs to also have are Manga Studio/Clip Studio Paint, and Serif Draw Plus. I say this because these two programs are both dirt cheap, and both add tools that put some aspects of major software to shame. Both programs have very powerful drawing tools not matched in either Adobe or Corel software. They're certainly not replacements for these major programs though.


----------



## amymac

I am also making t-shirts. Ive recently bought the heat press & vinyl express R2. My daughters are into all these shirts with the initials on them. Prints or graphics with the center out so the initials go in the middle.....or shirts like you see on Etsy of facebook. Is this the program Graphics x3) you would suggest? I went to Staples yesterday but they sold me the CorelDraw home & Student Suite X8. Im returning that today.


----------



## sinGN

Hi,
Corel Draw is best for tshirt designing.


----------



## sinGN

Hi,
CorelDraw is best for designing teeshirts.


----------



## allan373

The simplest software for designing teeshirts is Inkscape.,its free you can easily download it on thier website,


----------



## sinGN

Hi,
PhotoShop and CorelDraw both softwares are best for teeshirts designing. both softwares works differently but results are same.


----------



## brushyourideas

A Very simple, use friendly custom online designer is best for the any website that allows your online store customers to create unique printable designs for their products.


----------



## aldorabancroft

Nowadays there are many more t-shirt designner tool available on market but all are best for you. If you want to run with current trend and technology then Advance Product Designer from Biztech is best option for you.


----------



## loner

is there a free t-shirt design programs that can be used for designing t-shirts. thank you so much for your help. loner


----------



## Ripcord

Free vector program is Inkscape. Free raster program is Gimp. Both are quite good.


----------



## loner

thank you all very much for your help you people are the best. this forum is so great because of people like you that make the forum what it is. this forum has always been above all other forums because you all. thank you all again for your help. god bless. loner


----------



## barravoxJB

GIMP is pretty difficult software. I wouldn't recommend it for beginners. A template based approach like Creative Studio or CorelDRAW is the easiest way, IMHO, to get started quickly. For a complete suite of design tools, Adobe's Creative Cloud is the most versatile for experienced designers.


----------



## TshirtEvolution

I personally use photoshop. if you want to work with vectors then illustrator. Never used CD, but the guys in here seem to love it, so maybe give that a try. 

T-SHIRTEVOLUTION.COM - T-Shirtevolution


----------



## ddozier234

What about Mac software?


----------



## Sunjoa

I have used Corel Draw for over a decade and I love it. There are many quality programs available. The key is to pick one and learn it inside and out. Most programs offer much more capability than the user is able to utilize. Whatever program you choose spend the time and effort to learn it to the best of your ability.

Hope this helps,
Dane


----------



## davidshaw

superiorgraphix said:


> Illustrator or PhotoShop, that's the way to go...http://www.superiorgraphix1.com


I think if you are serious about getting into designing t-shirts for sale and making a living out of it you have to get Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop. They are the industry standard.

----------------------------------------
Krowmark.com


----------



## into the T

davidshaw said:


> I think* if you are serious* about getting into designing t-shirts for sale and making a living out of it *you have to* get Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop. They are the industry standard.


untrue

many, many here use programs other than adobe's ridiculously expensive 'pay us monthly, or else' programs

it is hardly 'industry standard' for t-shirt making

many don't use any programs to make their tee's 
(hand-painted, photos printed straight from camera, pre-made plastisol designs, have others do the designing, etc.)

there are also online programs for designing

plenty of free programs available, plenty of really good programs under $75
then for screen-printers coreldraw seems to be the favorite

all of which you own forever on your hard-drive
never to be hit with another monthly increase from adobe
(or if their cloud goes down, which it has, no access to your designs)

_me:_ can you recommend a zodiac to move a case of cigars?

_you_: if you are serious, you have to get a container ship
they are the industry standard for moving supplies on the water


----------



## pippin decals

durakraft said:


> I would like to create my own tee shirt designs on the computer. However, I am new at this so I wanted to know what software should I purchase thanks



Where are you located.Send me a pm.


----------



## into the T

please tell us how graphics programs are location dependent?

don't give this person any of your personal info,
they are constantly asking for private chats to extract your personal details

better to be safe than sorry


----------



## Ripcord

I agree with Edward. While many graphic designers use Illustrator on a Mac platform, I think the majority of T-shirt printers use Corel Draw. I love the program, especially the "Print to Postscript" command which allows you to print halftones on any printer. I did a tutorial about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHJ8qvYVV6w&t=117s


----------



## Ripcord

I should add that you can export vector files as EPS, PDF, SVG, etc. no matter what program you use and anyone that needs to use it can import it into their own vector program. Sometimes crossing platforms (Apple-PC) can cause problems but there are ways of getting around that, including Ghostscript. (I think I'll do another tutorial about that...)


----------



## 360Graphics

Chani said:


> That's not at all true. I've been using Illustrator, and after my Fiance moved up here I've been watching his workflow with CorelDRAW. Let me tell you, CD is EXTEMELY powerful software, and I'll be switching as soon as we can afford a new license.


I agree! This guy/gal obviously never used CorelDraw. I self taught myself with multi-media CDs back in the day (CorelDraw 5.0). Much easier to learn than Illustrator.


----------



## 360Graphics

Ripcord said:


> I agree with Edward. While many graphic designers use Illustrator on a Mac platform, I think the majority of T-shirt printers use Corel Draw. I love the program, especially the "Print to Postscript" command which allows you to print halftones on any printer. I did a tutorial about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHJ8qvYVV6w&t=117s


Interesting... I've used Xante printers for decades but monochrome postscript laser printers aren't even manufactured anymore (not that I can find) so I converted to the Epson 1430 a couple months back after my AccelerWriter took a crap on me. I was going to pull the trigger on buying AccuRip but learned to convert my grayscale plates to bitmaps for all my 1/2 tones. I'll have to look into this when I get back to my shop Monday.


----------



## Ripcord

360Graphics said:


> Interesting... I've used Xante printers for decades but monochrome postscript laser printers aren't even manufactured anymore (not that I can find) so I converted to the Epson 1430 a couple months back after my AccelerWriter took a crap on me. I was going to pull the trigger on buying AccuRip but learned to convert my grayscale plates to bitmaps for all my 1/2 tones. I'll have to look into this when I get back to my shop Monday.


I print most of my transparencies on an HP Laserjet that I bought at Office Max five years ago for less than $100. It prints halftones fine, as will most laser and inkjet printers, as long as you print from a Postscript file with the halftone information embedded. And "Device Independent Postscript File" is one of the options on the CorelDraw print menu. I haven't used Illustrator in many years so I don't know if it also has this option.


----------



## 360Graphics

Ripcord said:


> I print most of my transparencies on an HP Laserjet that I bought at Office Max five years ago for less than $100. It prints halftones fine, as will most laser and inkjet printers, as long as you print from a Postscript file with the halftone information embedded. And "Device Independent Postscript File" is one of the options on the CorelDraw print menu. I haven't used Illustrator in many years so I don't know if it also has this option.


What size transparencies does your HP output?


----------



## Ripcord

360Graphics said:


> What size transparencies does your HP output?


It's a standard size printer and I use 8 1/2 X 14" transparencies. This size will accommodate many prints, but if I have a print that's too large for the sheet and it's a one color job I'll print it in two sheets and splice them together (I'm doing a video about that too...)

For multicolor work that is too large for 8 1/2 X 14 I use a wide format inkjet printer (also an inexpensive HP.)

The laser printer is so much faster and more convenient than the inkjet (not to mention the transparency is cheaper than the inkjet film...) that I think if and when the inkjet bites the dust I'm going to invest in a wide format laser that I can run 17 X 11" through.


----------



## 360Graphics

Ripcord said:


> It's a standard size printer and I use 8 1/2 X 14" transparencies. This size will accommodate many prints, but if I have a print that's too large for the sheet and it's a one color job I'll print it in two sheets and splice them together (I'm doing a video about that too...)
> 
> For multicolor work that is too large for 8 1/2 X 14 I use a wide format inkjet printer (also an inexpensive HP.)
> 
> The laser printer is so much faster and more convenient than the inkjet (not to mention the transparency is cheaper than the inkjet film...) that I think if and when the inkjet bites the dust I'm going to invest in a wide format laser that I can run 17 X 11" through.


You should make the investment into an Epson 1430 ($230). 13" X 19" output. Convert the 6 color cartridges to an all black system for $60. Black ink refill is $16 a pint. I should have done this years ago.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

davidshaw said:


> I think if you are serious about getting into designing t-shirts for sale and making a living out of it you have to get Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop. They are the industry standard.
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> Krowmark.com


As much as I hate Adobe's rent forever scheme (Corel will be the same as soon as they can), I have to agree that in my experience Adobe is the best solution for t-shirt design and production work. It's the total package and it's extremely reliable. Although, CorelDraw can get the job done. My shop has a few guys that use only CorelDraw. They get things done, but not without issues and not without 3rd party plugins.


----------



## Ripcord

360Graphics said:


> You should make the investment into an Epson 1430 ($230). 13" X 19" output. Convert the 6 color cartridges to an all black system for $60. Black ink refill is $16 a pint. I should have done this years ago.


Last Epson I had was a 1520 years ago and (at least back then) the nozzles were separate from the ink cartridges. So if it clogged and you couldn't clear it you were SOL. With HP printers, if worse comes to worst you can get a new cartridge and start printing again. But a laser printer just keeps on putting 'em out day after day year after year.

(Just curious what the Epson 1430 can do that I can't with the printers I have...)


----------



## 360Graphics

Ripcord said:


> (Just curious what the Epson 1430 can do that I can't with the printers I have...)


It can print 13" X 19" and it costs me $60 a year in black ink as opposed to a $240 toner cartridge. The all black cartridge setup uses all 6 ink cartridges, so there's no clogging (so far-knock on wood)with daily use.. My exposure time on screen is less as well, 4 color process/simulations/ and 1/2 tones are much crisper. I was using Casey's vellum with my Xante.


----------



## Kiri Katz Tz

360Graphics said:


> You should make the investment into an Epson 1430 ($230). 13" X 19" output. Convert the 6 color cartridges to an all black system for $60. Black ink refill is $16 a pint. I should have done this years ago.


I have the Epson 1400 and am curious as to how you can convert it to an 'all black system'? Do you have to make system changes to the printer itself so it's not looking for the colors or what? Or is there some software that can do that? I figure you're putting black cartridges into the color cartridge slots. So this has got me curious.


----------



## kevincook

So many on market - just google it for better.

you can try adobe for 30 days for free, Corel has the same option I think so


----------



## Danielk

I have been using Corel since 2002 it is a lot easier to use and will do everything you want. I am currently using X3


----------



## webtrekker

I don't really understand all of these suggestions for best designing software for t-shirts. Surely it depends on what printing methods you intend to use.

For example, if you wish to print sublimated designs in many colours and gradients then Photoshop would be best for designing. 

If you wish to use HTV in a small range of colors with no gradients then Corel or AI would work best.

Horses for courses.


----------



## Screen168

I should 2 programs Adobe Photoshop and Illustator


----------



## janwinard

You should learn to use both corel and illustrator. Huge advantage on corel is the Dimention feature and tiling. For illustrator, im comfortable using the pen and you can easily drag and drop your design to photoshop vise versa.


----------



## janwinard

Its 2018, try x7 or x8


----------



## Funkyfreshrags

I have been using Adobe Illustrator for about a year and I have been teaching myself through youtube videos. I am about to get a DTG printer at the end of September and I was wondering if I should use Photoshop to make the color look better/brighter or if Illustrator can do the same? Thanks


----------



## brushyourideas

Just search on Google as T-shirt Design Software adn you will find many there. You just need to read some more in detail about top 5 result.


----------



## HoppyArtist

Definitely the Adobe Suite. More bang for your buck if you can. If not Corel will work


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

Adobe is the total solution. It’s expensive as heck, but it has everything from start to finish. But Adobe software is heavy. You’ll need a powerful system and you’ll probably need to upgrade it every few years just to keep up with the demands of the later updates to Adobe software. That’s how it is with Adobe.

After Adobe there’s CorelDraw. It’s not as complete or reliable as Adobe software, but it gets the job done. In my shop, I’m the only one using Adobe right now. 4 other guys are working with Corel software + plugins. They get the job done but it is a far cry from the elegance and simplicity of Adobe.

If you don’t need the productity oriented tools and just need to make art, or draw and paint, then there are lots of good choices. CorelDraw Home and Student version is about $120.00. It has of course lots of features and functions, minus the productivity stuff. Microsoft’s Expression Design is excellent, and free to use. Serif’s DrawPlus costs $25.00 and is also very good. Serif’s Affinity Designer is in the same neighborhood in terms of features for t-shirt work and costs $50.00. I prefer DrawPlus for t-shirt work though. Clip Studio Paint is $47.00, but very often on sale for 50% off! It’s among the best drawing programs money can buy. I would say it’s the very best. It’s very similar to Photoshop but only as far as drawing and digital painting goes. It has Photoshop’s legendary quality and stability. I think it’s actually more reliable than Photoshop. I highly recommend it.

Even the iPad apps are very serious now. There’s a full port of Clip Studio Paint, Affinity Designer, and Affinity Photo on the iPad right now. Not cut down versions but the whole shebang. Plus there’s the omnipresent and famous Procreate on the iPad Pro, and Sketchbook 4. These apps can all work on very large documents. Procreate can do it with zero hit on performance of any kind. It’s kind of magical in terms of performance. My wife is working exclusively on the iPad Pro to make art for our POD accounts. She is using Procreate or Affinity Designer. You can save to native psd, or of course to a range of other options. It works for real.

On Android, there are also a few good apps that are perfectly good for t-shirt work, and large sized art. Artflow is the smoothest and highest quality app on Android. Infinity Painter is the most featureful painting app, and Infinity Designer is the most featureful vector app on Android. All of it good although the Infinity stuff can be rather buggy. Or, quite buggy. LOL

So, there are lots of choices for just making art.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

astromark said:


> I have to start by saying I have been in graphic design for a little over 10 years now. I have used many different programs, and I have to say that despite it's "prestigious" standing- Illustrator can't hold a candle to CorelDraw. I am currently using X3 and it is the easiest, most user- friendly software for any price. I'm still not sure why Illustrator gets the praise and CorelDraw gets put down. In My opinion, CorelDraw will always be better than Illustrator.
> 
> Photoshop is great software, though


Care to take that to a challenge which software has the best color engine and color space options? That is if you understand such things which very few do. Corel will crush Adobe like a tin can in that arena and that is the arena of color which is the foundation of graphics work. You see you run with a Standard that has very poor standards in the color space game. Junk ware!


----------



## AdvancedArtist

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> Adobe is the total solution. It’s expensive as heck, but it has everything from start to finish. But Adobe software is heavy. You’ll need a powerful system and you’ll probably need to upgrade it every few years just to keep up with the demands of the later updates to Adobe software. That’s how it is with Adobe.
> 
> After Adobe there’s CorelDraw. It’s not as complete or reliable as Adobe software, but it gets the job done. In my shop, I’m the only one using Adobe right now. 4 other guys are working with Corel software + plugins. They get the job done but it is a far cry from the elegance and simplicity of Adobe.
> 
> If you don’t need the productity oriented tools and just need to make art, or draw and paint, then there are lots of good choices. CorelDraw Home and Student version is about $120.00. It has of course lots of features and functions, minus the productivity stuff. Microsoft’s Expression Design is excellent, and free to use. Serif’s DrawPlus costs $25.00 and is also very good. Serif’s Affinity Designer is in the same neighborhood in terms of features for t-shirt work and costs $50.00. I prefer DrawPlus for t-shirt work though. Clip Studio Paint is $47.00, but very often on sale for 50% off! It’s among the best drawing programs money can buy. I would say it’s the very best. It’s very similar to Photoshop but only as far as drawing and digital painting goes. It has Photoshop’s legendary quality and stability. I think it’s actually more reliable than Photoshop. I highly recommend it.
> 
> Even the iPad apps are very serious now. There’s a full port of Clip Studio Paint, Affinity Designer, and Affinity Photo on the iPad right now. Not cut down versions but the whole shebang. Plus there’s the omnipresent and famous Procreate on the iPad Pro, and Sketchbook 4. These apps can all work on very large documents. Procreate can do it with zero hit on performance of any kind. It’s kind of magical in terms of performance. My wife is working exclusively on the iPad Pro to make art for our POD accounts. She is using Procreate or Affinity Designer. You can save to native psd, or of course to a range of other options. It works for real.
> 
> On Android, there are also a few good apps that are perfectly good for t-shirt work, and large sized art. Artflow is the smoothest and highest quality app on Android. Infinity Painter is the most featureful painting app, and Infinity Designer is the most featureful vector app on Android. All of it good although the Infinity stuff can be rather buggy. Or, quite buggy. LOL
> 
> So, there are lots of choices for just making art.


Lets take Adobe to task in color I have done allot of color research. Adobes color engine is a POS across the boards that makes it a POS. Where did the CWB color model come from deep research in Corels engine. 

Color is the bottom line and Adobe sucks at it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtfK4nG6FiY&
t=41s

[MEDIA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtfK4nG6FiY&t=41s[/MEDIA]


I could wake you up but most likely you would not enjoy that.


----------



## Waiting

11 years and 32 pages and the argument continues. The OP left after 3 years of frustration, never having designed a single shirt.


----------



## TABOB

AdvancedArtist said:


> Lets take Adobe to task in color I have done allot of color research. Adobes color engine is a POS across the boards that makes it a POS. Where did the CWB color model come from deep research in Corels engine.
> 
> Color is the bottom line and Adobe sucks at it.



Ehm... we are just printing t-shirts here.
There is no "best" software. All you need is something to take care of the raster graphics and something for the vectors. You can use whatever you currently have, or get the one you know how to use. 

I really don't see how Adobe vs. Corel, or vice versa, helps people design better t-shirts. Realistic example anyone


----------



## AdvancedArtist

Color is very important when you get to certain levels of printing. For me it is the most important aspect of an application because if the color engine and functionality is not correct color reproduction will not be correct on press when working on things like high end prints. 

But I will just let this slide because would have to do allot of work to explain all the issues I do not have that time at this time.


----------



## webtrekker

AdvancedArtist said:


> Color is very important when you get to certain levels of printing. For me it is the most important aspect of an application because if the color engine and functionality is not correct color reproduction will not be correct on press when working on things like high end prints.
> 
> But I will just let this slide because would have to do allot of work to explain all the issues I do not have that time at this time.


Yes, but what 'high end prints?' I'm with TABOB on this. It is a t-shirt forum after all!

Thebest software for designing, in my opinion, is software you know how to USE. The number of people who own the likes of Photoshop and can't do anything but the basics tells its own story! 🙂


----------



## printshirts

adobe illustrator without a shadow of a doubt


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

AdvancedArtist said:


> Lets take Adobe to task in color I have done allot of color research. Adobes color engine is a POS across the boards that makes it a POS. Where did the CWB color model come from deep research in Corels engine.
> 
> Color is the bottom line and Adobe sucks at it.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtfK4nG6FiY&
> t=41s
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtfK4nG6FiY&t=41s
> 
> 
> I could wake you up but most likely you would not enjoy that.


Just stop it bro. You go on the Corel forum and say that Coreldraw is the biggest piece of crap the world has ever seen. Then the Corel defenders argue with you and yell at you and you talk about CorelDraw in the absolute worst possible terms. Then you come over here and sing a completely different tune. If you keep up the foolishness, I'll just copy/paste them and let you argue with yourself.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

AdvancedArtist said:


> Care to take that to a challenge which software has the best color engine and color space options? That is if you understand such things which very few do. Corel will crush Adobe like a tin can in that arena and that is the arena of color which is the foundation of graphics work. You see you run with a Standard that has very poor standards in the color space game. Junk ware!


The last time you challenged me like that, it went very poorly for you. You have a short memory. As far as Adobe's color problems are concerned. I'll gladly debate you on that subject. Just as soon as you prove to me that Photoshop is not singlehandly responsible for millions of successful prints spanning decades and in use by hundreds of thousands of shops around the world. Make that become untrue. Then let's debate Photoshop color problems. Until then, I think you are the single lonely voice yelling in the woods about this, while everybody else is making great prints with Photoshop. Besides, I see your products in use every day in my own shop. It's hit and miss, just like every other plugin I've seen over 20 years. Sometimes results are good. Sometimes not. And all of these vendors will honestly tell you that nothing is a one click solution. Except maybe you. The rest don't bother pretending that their solution is knocking out perfect results. LOL Getting a great result is up to the experienc of the operator.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

Could not disagree more color is digital that is why they call it digital color which is math nothing more and math-numerical values can be divided perfectly. And I am not the only one that would disagree with you.

I have done a ton seps using my process fully automated and never made an adjustment. And more than one user will say the same.


Building the PS plugin to import our seps was a night mare because getting an actual accurate conversion to gray-scale conversion is a night mare. Unless you mess with the color settings. So we had to do it correctly in the APP before download. 

Then take that into spot channels BAM things get very nasty color wise there. So we had to RIP to channels to avoid the issues in the channels. 

It just is what it is and I do not have time to deal with this but do some deep color research, makes some testing images and see what happens. You will quickly see exactly what I mean.

And no I have not been happy with Corel releases but I am fairly happy with 2018. 

I moved out of the graphics apps and built my own because I did not like how long the seps took to process in Adobe or Corel. I did like the limitations and issues in channels. I just want to sep and go and we are there now. With the coming updates it will only get better.


----------



## TABOB

@AdvancedArtist
I have no idea what you are printing, but I have no use for any of the things you mention, and the same is probably true for 99.99999% of the people printing t-shirts.
I don't even care about color profiles much.


----------



## AdvancedArtist

TABOB said:


> @AdvancedArtist
> I have no idea what you are printing, but I have no use for any of the things you mention, and the same is probably true for 99.99999% of the people printing t-shirts.
> I don't even care about color profiles much.



Is you shop over 1 M ask me how we got beyond that. Color, national brands orders in the 10s of Ks pieces. You can play or you can nail it. That is your choice. And 99.99999% are just playing.


----------



## TABOB

AdvancedArtist said:


> Is you shop over 1 M ask me how we got beyond that. Color, national brands orders in the 10s of Ks pieces. You can play or you can nail it. That is your choice. And 99.99999% are just playing.


Let's just say that I don't find this number impressive.
What I'm selling is "style". I don't sell photographs. 

If the test print looks OK to my eye, then the whole batch gets printed, and shipped off. It's as simple as that. 

I don't have any color matching to do, and I don't see why I should have.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

Which Tom are we talking to? The one that hates CorelDraw passionately and thinks it's the buggiest software ever (At least on the Corel forum), or the one that loves CorelDraw passionately on this forum and thinks Adobe is junk. It's confusing.


----------



## Waiting

Probaby both. T-shirts can be designed in MSPaint. I doubt most buyers care, all they're concerned with is the sentiment expressed, or the image of the wearer it creates. How did people design shirts in the 60's-80's?



Or are you suggesting they are the same person?


----------



## AdvancedArtist

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> Which Tom are we talking to? The one that hates CorelDraw passionately and thinks it's the buggiest software ever (At least on the Corel forum), or the one that loves CorelDraw passionately on this forum and thinks Adobe is junk. It's confusing.


I am talking about color engines not apps and I am not going into color because I am sure you understand very little about it. And as I said I do not have the time.


----------



## TABOB

AdvancedArtist said:


> I am talking about color engines not apps and I am not going into color because I am sure you understand very little about it. And as I said I do not have the time.


The subject of this thread is "What software is best for designing teeshirts"... It is not "What software is best color engine".


----------



## AdvancedArtist

TABOB said:


> The subject of this thread is "What software is best for designing teeshirts"... It is not "What software is best color engine".



Color and color engines are the bottom line in design. You can design like a king but if you cannot produce the color on press? What are you?


----------



## TABOB

AdvancedArtist said:


> Color and color engines are the bottom line in design. You can design like a king but if you cannot produce the color on press? What are you?


 A king using slightly different color I guess . 

I don't have to produce the exact color. All I have to do is get it close, and I never had a problem doing so, with any software.


----------



## seacookie

Damn I see this thread wen't bananas lately. Need to read this. Love it  Gonna get something to eat and damn I will enjoy this 

I needed something with sparks today. I hope you guys bring this to the another level. Level of fire


----------



## AdvancedArtist

TABOB said:


> A king using slightly different color I guess .
> 
> I don't have to produce the exact color. All I have to do is get it close, and I never had a problem doing so, with any software.



No close is not an option but then we clients like companies that chains of 20 casinos that send us all that work. Unless your printing for beer money. 

Major brands have serious color requirements you better hit them if want them as clients.


----------



## Waiting

What's wrong with beer money? I like beer. It makes me a jolly-good fellow. It helps me unwind and sometimes it makes me feel mellow.

You probably don't like dogs either.


----------



## webtrekker

AdvancedArtist said:


> No close is not an option but then we clients like companies that chains of 20 casinos that send us all that work. Unless your printing for beer money.
> 
> Major brands have serious color requirements you better hit them if want them as clients.



Just a quick question: Do you actually produce merchandise yourself, or do you only do design work? I can't see anywhere on your website where you actually sell a t-shirt.


The people you are arguing the toss with are actual producers and know the best methods for getting the job done.


Just saying. ;-)


----------



## TABOB

AdvancedArtist said:


> Major brands have serious color requirements you better hit them if want them as clients.


Right...OK.
Now, lets say for somebody like me, who has no use whatsoever for that color matching you are talking about... What would be the best software to use?


----------



## seacookie

This thread is a joke... The best one is the one you know how to use. If we talking about color matching it's not about software. Yea,yea, calibrators, and blah blah blah. If you don't have eizo monitor for few k and calibrator for few k, there's no point talking about close enough reproducing colors.

Color matching is done on a print level. So I dont' waste my god like worth time  , here's a quote...

quote:
What is colour matching for t-shirt printing?


SWAG is an acronym taken from the phrase Scientific Wild Arsed Guess.

It is always better to avoid 'SWAGGING' it if real data and executive accuracy can be deployed to help produce the right outcome in a situation where an error has tangible and painful consequences.

Colour matching is one of those areas where a SWAG approach can produce pain.

If your logo has colour elements and been drafted by a professional, the designer will have considered colour in a 'print' context as well as a 'web design' or 'screen' context where RGB and HEX values offer a wider gamut. They will have followed your corporate guidelines, adhered to your brief, or used their skill to create your logo in the correct colours.

These colours are important. Different shades and hues in a certain colour can convey different things. You will often here the terms 'warm' and 'cold' or 'angry' and 'calm' or 'strong' and 'weak' when people refer to colour, and this peculiar phenomenon were humans transpose emotions or physical attributes into the communicative qualities of colour is a clear example of how important it is to get it right.

Getting it right is the opposite of swagging it.

The best way to get your colour choices right for t-shirts is to actually see what your colour will look like when it is printed. If you are looking at your colours on a computer screen, you are not looking at them in the way as they will actually appear in real life. Your screen is not calibrated to show colours accurately and will have tonal and hue biases that distort their accuracy. Computer screens use RGB (red, green, blue) or HEX (hexadecimal) values to display colour were the real world needs CMYK values or solid colours. (CMYK values can be displayed in programs like Photoshop but the backlit quality of a screen is misleading)

A Pantone colour chart can show you what solid colours are supposed to look like in real life and the number coded and catalogued way they are collated is the global standard by which printers work to. A Pantone book costs around £150 and they can be purchased from a multitude of graphics related retailers online.

Pantone books are usually sold in pairs with a 'coated' and 'uncoated' colour charts. A coated chart has a gloss finish on the colour swatches, which produces a more saturated looking colour. An uncoated colour has no finish and makes the colour appear 'matt' and somewhat less saturated.

It is possible to transpose RGB and HEX values into a Pantone number but this does not always produce 100% accuracy as the available spectrum or gamut that is available for screen colours is brighter and 'punchier' than that which is available in the physical world of CMYK or spot colours. The backlighting on a computer monitor produces a brightness and luminescence, which is not available in the real world where light is reflected off a t-shirt.

It is also possible to transpose CMYK into Pantone colours but again there is a translational difference.

This is because CMYK printing uses a blend of the four primary printing colours to produce the required colour. That blend is created using very small dots arranged in a tight pattern, which fool the human eye at viewing distances of casual scrutiny.

If your t-shirt printer is screen-printing a photographic image or an illustration where there are too many colours to count and variable blends and tonal variation, then CMYK is the only option and you will just have to accept that absolute colour accuracy is not achievable for all of your colours.

If your design is spot colours or solid colours then you should always be aiming to provide your t-shirt printer with a Pantone colour.

This will give them to best chance of supplying you with precisely what you want. There are challenges for a t-shirt printer with matching many of the Pantone colours depending on what colour garment is being printed on or the choice of mesh count or whether they are matching to coated or uncoated colours but this is the subject for another blog.

Your T-shirt printer can lift your colour profiles out of your graphic using a Photoshop eye dropper tool but the variables in what version of Photoshop (or other program) the original image was created, what monitor the document is being viewed on and innumerable other unknown variables, makes consistency a problem for t-shirt printing companies when using this tool.

For now, try not to SWAG it, get to know your Pantones and remember, there is no such thing as red, blue, green, yellow, purple, orange, brown, pink, beige, mauve, teal, turquoise, sunset, grey, greeny grey, bluey grey, browny grey, post box red and rosehip pink.

We just want a number.


----------



## Waiting

I was just trolling AdvancedArtist. Looking below his avatar I see he's been thanked 998 times; he's obviously been helpful. It bother's me that he denigrates people. Not everyone can sell, or even wants to sell, one million t-shirts. Others use different tools than the ones he evangilizes. Neither is a reason to act like they are somehow inadequate.


----------



## teehugger

i want to sell one teeshirt at a time...

even THAT can be hard for a little guy when corporations can buy stock art for peanuts and plaster it on a million billboards worldwide, but some just trying to START a business has to pay up to a couple hundred to print just ONE teeshirt.

not every niche has millions of potential customers.


----------



## Saumya DNB

The quick answer is: “Invest more in tee shirt design software”.

These days, the demand for T-Shirt Designing is rising and lots of tee shirt designer software available but may all those are not best compared to others. To choose perfect tshirt design tool provider is really a very tough and tricky. A good online t-shirt design software should support all printing methods and user friendly and easier for your customers to use depending on their graphic design skills. 

So are you ready? Start selling your products!


----------



## webtrekker

I hate posts like this. They ask a question, then answer it themselves by plugging their own product or solution.


----------



## TABOB

webtrekker said:


> I hate posts like this. They ask a question, then answer it themselves by plugging their own product or solution.


Always rubbish products though... and that's the most annoying part.




cogtees said:


> i want to sell one teeshirt at a time...
> 
> even THAT can be hard for a little guy when corporations can buy stock art for peanuts and plaster it on a million billboards worldwide, but some just trying to START a business has to pay up to a couple hundred to print just ONE teeshirt.
> 
> not every niche has millions of potential customers.


Collaborate with others... Those corporations are not one person businesses.


----------



## theroadshowguy

Chani said:


> If you're NOT a student or teacher, you can STILL get a fully licensed, FULL commercial version of that program for under $100. You just need to look around a little.
> 
> We got it for just under $100, and yes, it's perfectly legal and unused.


Is it "legal" to share with me where to look??

Thanks. 
Doug

I decided to look at when this post was made...2007! LOL! I'm such a dork...hahaha! Chani, you can tell me if you want, but i'm pretty sure that the version you were posting about is very much out of date...kinda like me.


----------



## theroadshowguy

webtrekker said:


> I hate posts like this. They ask a question, then answer it themselves by plugging their own product or solution.


I agree 100%...it's kinda like a fireman/arsonist thing...create the problem, then ride in on your white horse to fix it.


----------



## theroadshowguy

So I went to ebay and looked up CorelDraw 2020...there are a ton of listings for under $10.00 from users who have zero or minimal feedback. Is there a chance in hell that these are NOT scams??


----------



## theroadshowguy

theroadshowguy said:


> So I went to ebay and looked up CorelDraw 2020...there are a ton of listings for under $10.00 from users who have zero or minimal feedback. Is there a chance in hell that these are NOT scams??


Just wanted to give this one more shot. Anyone know if listings on ebay for CorelDraw 2020 at under $10.00 are legit?


----------



## into the T

theroadshowguy said:


> Just wanted to give this one more shot. Anyone know if listings on ebay for CorelDraw 2020 at under $10.00 are legit?


they are probably pirated/cracked and come with special additions to relieve you of your personal data

there are good legal programs for about $50 out there 
even free legal ones, like gimp and inkscape, or even silhouette studio (just use this to convert to svg for cutter, 10 free/day)

affinity designer (it's actually 50% off right now, $25 for the full edition, cheap like borscht!)

xara's photo & graphic designer (download the trial first and they will probably send you a coupon for the full version)


----------



## theroadshowguy

into the T said:


> they are probably pirated/cracked and come with special additions to relieve you of your personal data
> 
> there are good legal programs for about $50 out there
> even free legal ones, like gimp and inkscape, or even silhouette studio (just use this to convert to svg for cutter, 10 free/day)
> 
> affinity designer (it's actually 50% off right now, $25 for the full edition, cheap like borscht!)
> 
> xara's photo & graphic designer (download the trial first and they will probably send you a coupon for the full version)


Thanks for your reply Edward. My brother recommended gimp, but he is not a graphic designer and did not know if it was anything that could be used for a vinyl cutter. I want to learn CorelDraw, and am not specifically looking for cheap...just was surprised to see so many listings on ebay so cheap. I think I'll explore these options a bit, but really am thinking of jumping into CorelDraw sooner rather than later. I really appreciate your help. Thanks & stay safe!


----------



## into the T

theroadshowguy said:


> Thanks for your reply Edward. My brother recommended gimp, but he is not a graphic designer and did not know if it was anything that could be used for a vinyl cutter. I want to learn CorelDraw, and am not specifically looking for cheap...just was surprised to see so many listings on ebay so cheap. I think I'll explore these options a bit, but really am thinking of jumping into CorelDraw sooner rather than later. I really appreciate your help. Thanks & stay safe!


gimp is raster for now, they are planning to add some vector capabilities soon

cutters need vectors (affinity and photo & graphic designer are hybrids combining vector and raster, like coreldraw)


----------



## webtrekker

"cutters need vectors (affinity and photo & graphic designer are hybrids combining vector and raster, like coreldraw)."

Whilst that is perfectly right, I'll just add that I do all of my design work in Photoshop then vectorise it with VectorMagic for cutting. 

Incidentally, a nice, free, online, alternative to Gimp, is Photopea, which also supports Photoshop Smart Objects (Gimp doesn't, unfortunately).


----------



## into the T

webtrekker said:


> "cutters need vectors (affinity and photo & graphic designer are hybrids combining vector and raster, like coreldraw)."
> 
> Whilst that is perfectly right, I'll just add that I do all of my design work in Photoshop then vectorise it with VectorMagic for cutting.
> 
> Incidentally, a nice, free, online, alternative to Gimp, is Photopea, which also supports Photoshop Smart Objects (Gimp doesn't, unfortunately).


another interesting/viable option worth considering

here is the link to vectormagic  ($10/month online or $295 full desktop edition) and photopea


----------



## theroadshowguy

So my next question is since I have zero background in any of this graphic design stuff, which would be the best investment of time for me in the long run. I am willing to put in the time to learn something, but not if it really isn't a long term solution. Yes...of course I'd like something that's easy, wouldn't we all, but I'm not a teenager looking for a hot date lol! I don't mind spending money either, but if I can get a solution for free like Inkscape..which IS native vector, I'd like to invest my time on a something that's going to last! Willing to make a commitment...hahaha!


----------



## into the T

theroadshowguy said:


> So my next question is since I have zero background in any of this graphic design stuff, which would be the best investment of time for me in the long run. I am willing to put in the time to learn something, but not if it really isn't a long term solution. Yes...of course I'd like something that's easy, wouldn't we all, but I'm not a teenager looking for a hot date lol! I don't mind spending money either, but if I can get a solution for free like Inkscape..which IS native vector, I'd like to invest my time on a something that's going to last! Willing to make a commitment...hahaha!


what is your cutter?


----------



## theroadshowguy

Right now I'm going to be using an unbranded Seiki for any vinyl cutting I do, but will probably be doing more sublimation than vinyl. I have an SK375T and one that is about 53" long. I buy and sell stuff on ebay, and having recently acquired a Geo Knight clamshell heat press is what made me realize that I have the basics to start a decent home based business. The challenge is to make sense of all the "noise" that is out there about this on YouTube and all...lol. sorry...with me there is no short answer to any question...


----------



## into the T

theroadshowguy said:


> Right now I'm going to be using an unbranded Seiki for any vinyl cutting I do, but will probably be doing more sublimation than vinyl. I have an SK375T and one that is about 53" long. I buy and sell stuff on ebay, and having recently acquired a Geo Knight clamshell heat press is what made me realize that I have the basics to start a decent home based business. The challenge is to make sense of all the "noise" that is out there about this on YouTube and all...lol. sorry...with me there is no short answer to any question...


you can also just get sure cuts alot and learn that
this is a 'cutting program' with its own design space (works with seiki, ask at the supplier below for your specific model)

here is a vid on its new features for version 5 and a more general vid here

this will probably do 99% of what you need, and the other 1% would be unknown to you anyway

get it here for $47.75 + $200 bonus to spend on fonts/designs at sofontsy
i've purchased from here before and highly recommend them

then your cutter is up and running and you can download gimp and learn that for raster (and/or tracing vector sas webtrekker mentioned)


----------



## webtrekker

@into the T I'll second that. Sure Cuts A Lot (SCAL) is fantastic software for the price, with good support too.


----------



## theroadshowguy

I want to thank you guys for your help. I just purchased the SCAL5 software and I assume I need to go to Sofontsy.com to redeem the coupons for free stuff...YAY! I love free...lol!

Thanks again,

Doug, The Road Show Guy


----------



## into the T

have fun!

there are many vid's/text lessons online for scal if you need some help

if you do download gimp, make sure to add the g'mic extension


----------



## theroadshowguy

Actually, I went to gimp, but they are closely associated with Inkscape, so I downloaded Inkscape, and there are tutorials and a lot of help there too. I have a lot of learning to do, but most important is the cutter...it is the easiest to use to make product, and from what I'm learning, the text based designs are the most popular for non-branded product. If and when I ever decide to move into branding, then I hope to be up to speed in terms of graphic design. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step! So grateful for all the help here!

Doug


----------



## into the T

theroadshowguy said:


> Actually, I went to gimp, but they are closely associated with Inkscape, so I downloaded Inkscape, and there are tutorials and a lot of help there too. I have a lot of learning to do, but most important is the cutter...it is the easiest to use to make product, and from what I'm learning, the text based designs are the most popular for non-branded product. If and when I ever decide to move into branding, then I hope to be up to speed in terms of graphic design. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step! So grateful for all the help here!
> 
> Doug


that is a good plan, learn the cutter program and you are off to the races

for the vinyl itself, i would recommend thermoflex plus/joto premium and/or their turbo/one-4-all (same vinyls from poli-tape in germany)
here is a review,
in case you miss it in that thread, here is a technique to get a soft hand (feel on the tee)
also read to the end, as it appears one of my issues with the turbo may have been human error

edit to add:
if you do download gimp, i can hook you up with a decent, free t-shirt mockup (here is the thread on it)


----------



## wseago2

I've used Illustrator for about 9 years now. I've also used Corel Draw. If I was getting started right now, and had no knowledge of using either, I would download Inkscape for free and start learning it. It's open source, and will do everything you need to do in this business, and it gets better every new version.


----------



## into the T

if you can do all you need within your cutter program, like scal, then your time is best spent learning that

even if you have a silhouette cameo, silhouette studio will do everything you need for tee's 
(except bitmap manipulation, that is where gimp comes in)

inkscape has a large learning curve and is still buggy/crashey/laggey


----------



## OutlawJohn

It's a matter of what you can afford, what you plan to produce and what you get used to...I have been using and updating Corel since version 2 on a big ol floppy disk and am so use to it that I can't really take the time to switch. Cost can make a lot of the decision for you but for a quality easy to use format I would say Corel...


----------



## OutlawJohn

It's a matter of what you can afford, what you plan to produce and what you get used to. I have been using and updating Corel since version 2 on a big ol floppy disk and am so use to it that I can't really take the time to switch. Cost can make a lot of the decision for you but for a quality easy to use format I would say Corel.


----------



## OutlawJohn

I also do sign work and my Corel easily converts files directly to my printer/plotter so that is also a plus.


----------



## into the T

OutlawJohn said:


> I also do sign work and my Corel easily converts files directly to my printer/plotter so that is also a plus.


welcome back john!

5 years later and you've matched your previous total post count on one thread,
you must really like corel


----------



## OutlawJohn

well this is the first break I have had in 5 years so thanks to COVID I got a chance to post


----------



## into the T

OutlawJohn said:


> well this is the first break I have had in 5 years so thanks to COVID I got a chance to post



i did mean the 'welcome back'

the rest was just some good-natured ribbing


----------



## OutlawJohn

it was funny I was just going through old boxes in our storage area and I found the 5.5inch floppies from Corel 2 and thought man I had it made back then. I started with it and updated about every 2 versions until 13 and now I just make it work. I would see other cool artwork that guys were doing with the Adobe programs but I stuck with Corel and geared my worked to it...like I said it's what you get used to.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

Adobe and Corel are still the only two brands offering complete solutions more or less. If you're making regular money directly from these tools then I think it makes sense to pay them their rent money. It's hard to say, but we have to consider how much time is lost messing with workaround, trying to use tools that are not built for the task, or poorly developed.


----------



## amtygroup

I use Inkscape exclusively. I do mostly HTV, but also outsource full colour prints. Inkscape has been a part of my toolkit from the start, especially in the early days when I couldn't afford the pricey alternatives.


----------



## crwhite32

I have Corel Dtaw along with Advanced T-shirts Software


----------



## dcbevins

Hi people. Took a hiatus. Saw the tale end of this. Thought I'd wade back in with a Corel thumbs up. Gosh this is an old dead horse to beat. Illustrator is a designers dream. It can do wild things. It can do many things. You can tweak and tweak and tweak and tweak until you go blind. CorelDraw to me is more for people needing to get crap done quickly and move on to the next thing.


----------



## webtrekker

The truth is - there's no 'best software' for designing t-shirts.


Designs come from the mind of the designer, who then uses any tools available to realise those designs, whether that be Photoshop, Illustrator, Affinty, Corel, Inkscape, Gimp, or even MS Paint!


This is much the same discussion as 'which language is best for programming.' You either have a logical mind that can see a path to the end result, or you don't, and PHP, Javascript, Python, Ruby, Node, C#, etc are just the tools you use to create the path. Loads of people think learning Javascript will put them on the road to riches and fail because they don't have the capacity for logical thinking.


----------



## OutlawJohn

the best software software for assisting the designer is determined by the designer and the client sometimes. Having a little bit of human ability to create and make designs helps no matter what software you use. If you are working freelance and providing artwork I have noticed the majority of those I do work for want illustrator files. Even though I have used Corel for decades I can see where by using Illustrator it would have simplified a lot of my work, no conversions and corrections when I save my work as an .ai file. It really comes down to what you are comfortable using and what your end product needs to be.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

webtrekker said:


> The truth is - there's no 'best software' for designing t-shirts.
> 
> 
> Designs come from the mind of the designer, who then uses any tools available to realise those designs, whether that be Photoshop, Illustrator, Affinty, Corel, Inkscape, Gimp, or even MS Paint!
> 
> 
> This is much the same discussion as 'which language is best for programming.' You either have a logical mind that can see a path to the end result, or you don't, and PHP, Javascript, Python, Ruby, Node, C#, etc are just the tools you use to create the path. Loads of people think learning Javascript will put them on the road to riches and fail because they don't have the capacity for logical thinking.


I would love to see the artist that says, "I don't need all that fancy smancy Corel Painter, whatever nonsense, I'm going to create this fantastic, realistic water color painting with MS Paint because....... the painting is going to come from my mind.....watch and learn!". LOL


----------



## into the T

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> I would love to see the artist that says, "I don't need all that fancy smancy Corel Painter, whatever nonsense, I'm going to create this fantastic, realistic water color painting with MS Paint because....... the painting is going to come from my mind.....watch and learn!". LOL



here is what you can do with ms paint (images below and video detailing a realistic santa claus)


----------



## NoXid

into the T said:


> here is what you can do with ms paint (images below and video detailing a realistic santa claus)


*It ain't how "big" your tool is, but how you use it *

Must be the longest thread on the forum, yes?


----------



## seacookie

I am so disappointed with this thread.


I am waiting for so long when that day will come that Splathead will close this thread. I was expecting a good laugh.


But noooooooooooooo, you guys need to be civil...


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

into the T said:


> here is what you can do with ms paint (images below and video detailing a realistic santa claus)



In the real world, the concept of better and worse tools is not controversial. Artists know that there are high quality brushes, inks, papers, and poorer quality versions. The same rules apply with digital tools. It shouldn't be controversial. We know that great art can be created with basic tools. We also know that better things can be done with better tools. A good example is a piece of specialized software like Rebelle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvL7hVvA7bs

You're not going to do this with MS Paint or Gimp, or even Photoshop. Artist understand the difference between the different tools that they use, just as creators do in every pursuit. Carpenters know the difference between a hammer and a nail gun. Musicians know the difference between the guitar they perform with on stage and the one they bought for their 5 year old. If software is just a tool to assist artists in making art then it shouldn't be controversial to suggest that there are better quality and lesser quality software. Or just different kinds of software made to achieve different kinds of art, digitally. And hardware also. There's a difference between an iPad Pro/Apple Pencil and a Surface Pro tablet, and a Wacom Cintiq. They are not all the same.


----------



## webtrekker

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> into the T said:
> 
> 
> 
> here is what you can do with ms paint (images below and video detailing a realistic santa claus)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the real world, the concept of better and worse tools is not controversial. Artists know that there are high quality brushes, inks, papers, and poorer quality versions. The same rules apply with digital tools. It shouldn't be controversial. We know that great art can be created with basic tools. We also know that better things can be done with better tools. A good example is a piece of specialized software like Rebelle.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvL7hVvA7bs
> 
> You're not going to do this with MS Paint or Gimp, or even Photoshop. Artist understand the difference between the different tools that they use, just as creators do in every pursuit. Carpenters know the difference between a hammer and a nail gun. Musicians know the difference between the guitar they perform with on stage and the one they bought for their 5 year old. If software is just a tool to assist artists in making art then it shouldn't be controversial to suggest that there are better quality and lesser quality software. Or just different kinds of software made to achieve different kinds of art, digitally. And hardware also. There's a difference between an iPad Pro/Apple Pencil and a Surface Pro tablet, and a Wacom Cintiq. They are not all the same.
Click to expand...

I don't entirely agree with that. 

You can give someone all the best brushes, paints and canvas, but they won't produce anything more 'artistic' than they would using materials a lot cheaper.


----------



## NoXid

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> In the real world, the concept of better and worse tools is not controversial. Artists know that there are high quality brushes, inks, papers, and poorer quality versions. The same rules apply with digital tools. It shouldn't be controversial. We know that great art can be created with basic tools. We also know that better things can be done with better tools. A good example is a piece of specialized software like Rebelle.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvL7hVvA7bs
> 
> You're not going to do this with MS Paint or Gimp, or even Photoshop. Artist understand the difference between the different tools that they use, just as creators do in every pursuit. Carpenters know the difference between a hammer and a nail gun. Musicians know the difference between the guitar they perform with on stage and the one they bought for their 5 year old. If software is just a tool to assist artists in making art then it shouldn't be controversial to suggest that there are better quality and lesser quality software. Or just different kinds of software made to achieve different kinds of art, digitally. And hardware also. There's a difference between an iPad Pro/Apple Pencil and a Surface Pro tablet, and a Wacom Cintiq. They are not all the same.


Art often has much to do with the limitations imposed by the medium, and how one works around those, or exploits them. To _some_ extent, the more capable and unlimiting something is, the less it contributes to the final result, as it itself imposed little upon the work, and required little of the artist in return. But that's _art_.

If what one wishes to accomplish is bold white Arial text that says something along the lines of, "Truck Frump," then one need not worry much about how exactly it gets done or with what. 

Probably of more relevance to most looking at this thread is the ability to transform a poopy customer provided jpg into a nice looking logo printed on a shirt. Beyond considering the relative merits of working in vector vs raster, the precise tool(s) chosen are probably far less important than ones knowledge of how to use them.


----------



## into the T

ProSeparatorNJ said:


> You're not going to do this with MS Paint or Gimp, or even Photoshop. Artist understand the difference between the different tools that they use, just as creators do in every pursuit. Carpenters know the difference between a hammer and a nail gun. Musicians know the difference between the guitar they perform with on stage and the one they bought for their 5 year old. If software is just a tool to assist artists in making art then it shouldn't be controversial to suggest that there are better quality and lesser quality software. Or just different kinds of software made to achieve different kinds of art, digitally. And hardware also. There's a difference between an iPad Pro/Apple Pencil and a Surface Pro tablet, and a Wacom Cintiq. They are not all the same.


no, here is what you said



> I would love to see the artist that says, "I don't need all that fancy smancy Corel Painter, whatever nonsense, I'm going to create this fantastic, realistic water color painting with MS Paint because....... the painting is going to come from my mind.....watch and learn!". LOL


i showed you the artists who did say that and did it, and a video that you could indeed 'watch and learn'

i am a builder/carpenter as well, and i use my hammer more than my nail gun
one of the people i have met in that genre was a swede who only used a handsaw and a hammer to build homes,
and they commanded top-dollar 

what you seem to be missing is that what a tool is capable of in the right hands,
and what tool is incapable no matter the hands

comparing a les paul to a dollar store plastic guitar, is not remotely similar to a hammer and a nail gun
(or comparing mspaint to photoshop/corel, as i have already proved to you)


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

into the T said:


> no, here is what you said
> 
> 
> 
> i showed you the artists who did say that and did it, and a video that you could indeed 'watch and learn'



You quoted me perfectly, but somehow you missed the part about "realistic water color painting" even though you quoted it. Point to the example you posted that is remotely water color, let alone realistic. It's not there. You posted examples of people creating random, (very nice) art which doesn't resemble water color in any fashion. That's why I posted a link to a video of Rebelle to show you the difference. But because you are missing the point, you think you've made your point. You haven't. We can both easily agree that if you give a pencil and paper to a good artist, you'll get a good result. Likewise, the same artist can create good work with MS Paint, even surprisingly good work. But MS Paint still has it's limitations. It shouldn't be controversial. And to say that an artist will overcome that limitation no matter what is little more than a romantic notion. I don't believe it works that way, and you have certainly not shown that it does.




into the T said:


> i am a builder/carpenter as well, and i use my hammer more than my nail gun



This comment suggests that you recognize that a hammer and a nail gun both have their uses. Simultaneously you argue that the equivalent tools in software form do not have their specific uses. You're saying that when it comes to software, it wouldn't matter which tool you use. It seems to be a contradiction.





into the T said:


> one of the people i have met in that genre was a swede who only used a handsaw and a hammer to build homes,
> and they commanded top-dollar



The purpose of the nail gun is speed. Speed is how the top dollar is acquired. The more speed, the more top dollar acquired. If money earned is a point we're concerned with, (and I definitely am), then it is a good point in favor of specialized tools, ie the nail gun, Photoshop, Rebelle, etc.




into the T said:


> what you seem to be missing is that what a tool is capable of in the right hands,
> and what tool is incapable no matter the hands



What you seem to be missing is that we are not at all talking about the hands, we're talking only about the tools. On the one hand (no pun intended), you say that hammers and nail guns make a difference, because you're finding a need for both. On the other hand, you're saying that the same logic doesn't apply for software tools. So you actually have a problem with your reasoning and argument.






into the T said:


> comparing a les paul to a dollar store plastic guitar, is not remotely similar to a hammer and a nail gun
> (or comparing mspaint to photoshop/corel, as i have already proved to you)



Once again you recognize that tools in the real world are actually different and make a difference in the job their used for, while arguing that software tools make no difference, apparently because the artist is all that matters. Photoshop, Coreldraw, and MS Paint are all essentially equal.


----------



## ProSeparatorNJ

NoXid said:


> Art often has much to do with the limitations imposed by the medium, and how one works around those, or exploits them. To _some_ extent, the more capable and unlimiting something is, the less it contributes to the final result, as it itself imposed little upon the work, and required little of the artist in return. But that's _art_.



That's a perfectly fine point to make and one that I would not disagree with. What I said though is that an artist doesn't pick up MS Paint and proceed to produce a realistic water color painting. It is the wrong tool for the job. I think people get caught up on the cost of things. They want to celebrate the cheap/free stuff and rail against the expensive stuff. For illustration work, digital painting, etc there is a ton of excellent software for very low cost. I believe that Rebelle, the software I linked to as an example costs about $89.00.




NoXid said:


> If what one wishes to accomplish is bold white Arial text that says something along the lines of, "Truck Frump," then one need not worry much about how exactly it gets done or with what.



If you're only typing 2 words, that's probably true. But if you look at the Jurassic Park example posted that was done with MS Paint, it has a lot of text. If time is a factor, then MS Paint would be the wrong tool for creating text.





NoXid said:


> Probably of more relevance to most looking at this thread is the ability to transform a poopy customer provided jpg into a nice looking logo printed on a shirt. Beyond considering the relative merits of working in vector vs raster, the precise tool(s) chosen are probably far less important than ones knowledge of how to use them.



You can't have one without the other. You need both knowledge and the correct tools. For example, you can't do color seps in Photoshop if you don't know the color separation process. But more to the point, you'll waste endless amounts of time trying to force a tool to do something it's not designed to do. ie, Get MS Paint to create a realistic water color painting.


----------



## Fiza

There are many t shirt designer software are available in the market. one of them is : Online t shirt designer


----------



## mariah1902

If you want high end editing and professional edges, always use illustrator or Photoshop. Do not go for other softwares as you will gather some skills but will never be fully satisfies with the result. So as sooner or later you will end up using Illustrator why not from the beginning?.


----------



## leunam12

mariah1902 said:


> If you want high end editing and professional edges, always use illustrator or Photoshop. Do not go for other softwares as you will gather some skills but will never be fully satisfies with the result. So as sooner or later you will end up using Illustrator why not from the beginning?.


Well I haven't used Illustrator in years, other software can do the work perfectly.


----------



## amycooper

These are some of my suggestions Adobe Illustrator, InkScape and CorelDraw.


----------



## tshirt7962

CorelDraw,Photoshop,AI etc.


----------

