Pixelmator Pro coming on November 29 for introductory $59, new Vectormator app teased

Posted:
in Mac Software
The Pixelmator developers have turned to Apple's CoreML machine learning toolset, and are releasing image editing suite Pixelmator Pro on November 29 for an introductory price on macOS of $59, with an iPad version coming soon.




Announced in September, The new Pixelmator Pro has a redesigned interface and look. The older version's floating tool palettes are gone, in favor of expanded sidebar selections, and a new tab feature allows to switch between versions of the active image as work progresses.

A series of new tools allows the user to design layouts, and create vector graphics like Adobe Illustrator as well. Retouching images, and digital painting remain at the core of the app, and have been improved with the new version.

Pixelmator Pro retains nondestructive image editing, like its predecessor. A new Recipes feature allows users to save developed effects, use them in other images, and share them with other users.



Also added are custom key layouts for the MacBook Pro's Touch Bar, iCloud sync between iOS and Mac, and split-screen multitasking on the iPad.

Apple's CoreML is utilized for a repair tool to remove and replace aspects of a photo. CoreML also facilitates a new quick selection tool, label layering based on content, and automatic image straightening based on horizon detection.




Pixelmator will still be maintained after Pixelmator Pro's release. Pricing for the Mac version will climb to a one-time $99 after the introductory $59 price ends.

The launch pricing continues until the company ships free updates to the suite that are not yet announced. Coming soon are Pixelmator Pro for the iPad, as well as the as-yet formally announced Vectormator.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    Pixemator, Affinity Photo, Affinity Designer, Vectormator? Finally real, true competition for Adobe’s bloated and overpriced offerings? I’VE NEVER FELT SO ALIVE!!!
    SpamSandwichEric_WVGGrepressthiswilliamlondonentropyspscooter63jony0bshankksec
  • Reply 2 of 20
    Still not quite up to the level of being fully competitive (feature-wise) with Adobe’s Photoshop and Illustrator combo, but they’re making serious headway.
    repressthisdysamoriajony0tallest skil
  • Reply 3 of 20
    Perhaps a touch (barely) behind feature-wise, but far beyond for performance and stability. 

    My 2018 resolution is to leave Illustrator behind. This is fantastic news.
    repressthisbloggerblogjony0bshank
  • Reply 4 of 20
    Looks great! Will definitely be buying it.
    repressthis
  • Reply 5 of 20
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,765member
    But can you work in CMYK? It seems really odd that 'Pro' imaging software doesn't mention this at all in its list of features.

    Especially since almost every blog post for the first year after Pixelmator was released was filled with comments asking for CMYK.
  • Reply 6 of 20
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,013member
    I dabbled in Pixelmator way back when they first released it. I really liked it, but I too found it lacking when compared to photoshop. I'm a heavy Lightroom / photoshop user and but I'm just disenchanted with Adobe and how slow Lightroom runs on my 5K iMac. I think it's time to revisit this software. I just loved the fact that is a native Mac binary. Looking forward to seeing the performance improvement on it!
    pscooter63jony0
  • Reply 7 of 20
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,504member
    Any upgrade perks/discounts for us standard Pixelmator users? :)
  • Reply 8 of 20
    rob53rob53 Posts: 1,799member
    mazda 3s said:
    Any upgrade perks/discounts for us standard Pixelmator users? :)
    You're complaining about paying $59? Come on ....
  • Reply 9 of 20
    rob53rob53 Posts: 1,799member
    I don't want to start a war but I've been seeing articles that talk about designing in RGB and only converting to CMYK when sending to a printer. With the reduction in printed material, I wonder why so many people continue to demand CMYK editing when most of the output is for web and photographic printing. I spent 30 years in the publication business so CMYK was in my vocabulary on a constant basis but times have changed so I'm not so sure complaining about a lack of CMYK by Pixelmator is valid anymore. The last time I had to deal with printed output, our designers were designing in RGB because they needed to include computer readable (PDF) output as well as printed output. Maybe it's time to think a bit differently and adjust your production methods. Right before I left the publishing department, we had changed to direct-to-plate technology (it's actually been 12 years since that happened) and it was up to the post-processing capability of the platemaker to produce the best RGB to CMYK (or CMYKOG, look it up!) output for the type of paper being used. Let's see how close Pixelmator Pro is to producing fantastic artwork before we complain about everything we think it needs; using something you used 10-20 years ago.
  • Reply 10 of 20
    I do little print work, but when I do, CMYK is still needed. I've made Pixelmator's and external tool conversion work though... but would rather have it be native. But, I agree, it's not a big deal for the majority of users... which is why they've gotten away without it.

    This does raise a question for me though. It seems just from the few comments here that my impression has been accurate. Adobe for features and compatibility. Competitors for speed, less bloat, newer methods, etc. Compatibility, and sometimes a certain feature are important.... but:

    What are the opinions here in terms of Adobe suite vs a piecemeal approach to picking best/favorite apps for each of Adobe's tools?

    If you work for someone or too closely with someone (in workflow) who uses Adobe, the answer is kind of set. But, if you're a free-lancer or run your own gig, it's a whole different situation.
  • Reply 11 of 20
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,354member
    First I heard of Vectormator.    Probably still not what I'm looking for though.    I really want something that can do CAD quality drawings with the ease of use similar to the Pixelmator offering.    Far too many CAD programs seem to be stuck in the dark ages when it comes to ergonomics and an easy to understand interface.
  • Reply 12 of 20
    rob53 said:
    I don't want to start a war but I've been seeing articles that talk about designing in RGB and only converting to CMYK when sending to a printer. With the reduction in printed material, I wonder why so many people continue to demand CMYK editing when most of the output is for web and photographic printing. I spent 30 years in the publication business so CMYK was in my vocabulary on a constant basis but times have changed so I'm not so sure complaining about a lack of CMYK by Pixelmator is valid anymore. The last time I had to deal with printed output, our designers were designing in RGB because they needed to include computer readable (PDF) output as well as printed output. Maybe it's time to think a bit differently and adjust your production methods. Right before I left the publishing department, we had changed to direct-to-plate technology (it's actually been 12 years since that happened) and it was up to the post-processing capability of the platemaker to produce the best RGB to CMYK (or CMYKOG, look it up!) output for the type of paper being used. Let's see how close Pixelmator Pro is to producing fantastic artwork before we complain about everything we think it needs; using something you used 10-20 years ago.
    A tool made for real-world graphic design must have a CMYK option, at the bare minimum. Yes, it's true—things are still made for manufacturing and printing.
  • Reply 13 of 20
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,765member
    rob53 said:
    I don't want to start a war but I've been seeing articles that talk about designing in RGB and only converting to CMYK when sending to a printer. With the reduction in printed material, I wonder why so many people continue to demand CMYK editing when most of the output is for web and photographic printing.

    Probably because print isn't going anywhere. (Daily newspapers will largely die though, probably within the next 5-8 years.)
    Which is where the 'print is dying' meme comes from.

    Just about everything you buy - whether from retail or online - comes in a package or has a label, and those things get printed on a press. Usually a CMYK press.

    If they are just building imaging software for web and photographic markets, they could have just upgraded Pixelmator.
    Using the 'Pro' moniker would generally imply more than casual use in corporate/industrial environments, ad agencies, print shops etc.

    Printed material has seen a reduction. But walk into a Walmart or your grocery store and count how many products have printed labels, signs and packaging.

    Oh yeah, that's pretty much everything in the place. Much of it designed on Macs, by professionals, for a CMYK press.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 14 of 20
    sergiozsergioz Posts: 196member
    Love it, can’t wait 👍
  • Reply 15 of 20
    My graphics editing needs are fairly light.  I currently use Pixelmator exclusively. There is no way photoshop would ever be worth the expense for me. 

    I’m pretty pleased to see Pixelmator Pro. I would definitely consider stepping up to it from the regular Pixelmator. Especially if it gave just a few more features that I’d find useful. But I’m certainly not looking at this on a point by point comparison with Photoshop, and thank god. Photoshop just boggles my mind with its professional-grade feature set. 
  • Reply 16 of 20
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 950member
    wizard69 said:
    First I heard of Vectormator.    Probably still not what I'm looking for though.    I really want something that can do CAD quality drawings with the ease of use similar to the Pixelmator offering.    Far too many CAD programs seem to be stuck in the dark ages when it comes to ergonomics and an easy to understand interface.
    Check out ViaCAD or SharkCAD (if you need more power): http://www.punchcad.com

    I've used this product since the mid-late '90s and I suppose whether it's easy to use is a big subjective, but it's easier than any other CAD product I've tried (while still being insanely powerful). It was initially Ashlar's 3D solids product, then broke off to a company owned by it's creator called CSI, and now is owned by Punch (but still developed by the same industry leader/innovator).
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 17 of 20
    tmaytmay Posts: 2,489member
    wizard69 said:
    First I heard of Vectormator.    Probably still not what I'm looking for though.    I really want something that can do CAD quality drawings with the ease of use similar to the Pixelmator offering.    Far too many CAD programs seem to be stuck in the dark ages when it comes to ergonomics and an easy to understand interface.
    Autodesk Fusion 360 is slightly odd and a bit complex, but there are a ton of users with tutorials and videos, and the capabilities are broad, including CNC programming and output, analysis, simulation, and sheetmetal. Autodesk has a very aggressive enhancement program, so lots of user requests become features, and quite rapidly at times.

    Keep an eye out for deals and you can get it for less than the normal $300 a year subscription and it runs on a Mac.

    cgWerks said:
    wizard69 said:
    First I heard of Vectormator.    Probably still not what I'm looking for though.    I really want something that can do CAD quality drawings with the ease of use similar to the Pixelmator offering.    Far too many CAD programs seem to be stuck in the dark ages when it comes to ergonomics and an easy to understand interface.
    Check out ViaCAD or SharkCAD (if you need more power): http://www.punchcad.com

    I've used this product since the mid-late '90s and I suppose whether it's easy to use is a big subjective, but it's easier than any other CAD product I've tried (while still being insanely powerful). It was initially Ashlar's 3D solids product, then broke off to a company owned by it's creator called CSI, and now is owned by Punch (but still developed by the same industry leader/innovator).
    I started out with MacDraw, them MacDraft, moved to MiniCAD/VectorCAD, then Vellum, GibbsCAM, Pro E, SolidWorks, SharkCAD and am finally with Autodesk Inventor HSM, since I program machine tools. Vellum and SharkCAD are both great programs, especially for the ease of use of surfaces, but just aren't cost effective for my broader needs. There's another package that I had for awhile, which was actually pretty good, but only runs on PC's, https://www.alibre.com.

    Solidworks Premium, and I had Premium Simulation, is by far my favorite MCAD package, but I passed on maintenance for awhile and they changed their renewal policy, i.e., 100% back maintenance. I still use it, but it's stuck at version 2015.
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 18 of 20
    There are plenty of solid alternatives to both Photoshop and Illustrator now, but not for InDesign. 
  • Reply 19 of 20
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,765member
    There are plenty of solid alternatives to both Photoshop and Illustrator now, but not for InDesign. 

    Pixelmator and the others get great press, but it looks to me that it is really Apple that has provided much of the built-in functionality to take down the Adobe behemoth. Core Image, ColorSync etc. are what allow some of these Adobe alternatives to code their way into a feature set comparable to Photoshop.

    By comparison, Apple doesn't seem to have pushed out similar frameworks to enable these guys to attack InDesign.
    E.g. Affinity Publisher will launch without multi-line composition.
  • Reply 20 of 20
    May I speak to the CMYK concerns, as someone who consults on best practices for these workflows regularly?

    Best practice for almost all workflows is to retouch in the original (almost always) RGB color space, and only convert to CMYK at the end of the process. The reason for this?

    In a contemporary workflow, the final destination for this carefully retouched file will, in fact, be multiple destinations, some of them RGB, some of them various flavors of CMYK. For way too long, retouchers would routinely convert their original files to whatever default setting their copy of Photoshop  was using for CMYK. Very frequently, this setting was a serious mismatch for the CMYK that was actually going to be used to print, so the color conversion created multiple problems through out the workflow, even when only CMYK was used for output.

    A standard response to hearing people say that they work in CMYK is to ask "Which one?", since each combination of press, ink and paper is going to be a different flavor of CMYK. 

    Ah, but you say, I need to see how it's going to convert in order to retouch it correctly. If you're working in Photoshop, you can preview how it's going to look in different flavors of CMYK with a keystroke or two, comparing how it will look in CMYK for newsprint, for example, against how it will look in CMYK for a glossy fashion magazine, versus a large banner, versus how it will look in RGB prepared for the internet. 

     Then, when the editing/retouching is all finished, the quality of the original image has been preserved, and can be correctly converted for each destination device's best color. Converting to CMYK at the front end of the process is a guaranteed way to settle for lowest-common-denominator color. Why would you want that in 2017 and beyond when it is so easy to do it correctly?

    In 2017, anyone who's converting files to CMYK at the front of the workflow is settling for less than they could have, instead of going for maximum quality, and should seriously rethink their approach. 

    Should you want to use Pixelmator Pro, and it turns out not to convert to CMYK, multiple conversion tools exist to convert your file quickly and easily, some built into your Mac already...


    YvLy
Sign In or Register to comment.