Corel intros Painter 2020 for Mac with speed & interface upgrades

AppleInsider

Corel on Tuesday launched Painter 2020 for macOS and Windows, concentrating upgrades to the Photoshop-compatible illustration suite mostly on interface enhancements, including better brush performance.

A new "Brush Accelerator" automatically optimizes settings with GPU acceleration, which Corel claims can "significantly" boost speed and responsiveness. To go with these Corel has added two new "Fast" brush categories -- with 26 brushes in all -- plus five new Expressive brushes in Watercolor and Digital Watercolor.

The interface as a whole has been redesigned to put important controls closer at hand, and save desktop space by way of consolidated Library panels. Other changes include faster access to previous brushes, a new Temporal Color Wheel, six new Color Harmonies, and minimized lag on dodge, burn, clone, and eraser tools.

Layer workflows have been streamlined in both contextual and high-level menus, particularly in respect to actions like locking, collapsing, selecting, and pasting.

Painter 2020 costs $429 new, or $229 as an upgrade from any previous version. People can also try out the software via a free 30-day trial. Mac users must be running macOS 10.13 or later.

In the past few months Corel has regained a more prominent place in the Mac sphere, mainly by updating CorelDRAW on the Mac for the first time in years, and in December buying out Parallels -- well-known for its Mac virtualization software.

hodar

Painter 2020 costs $429 new, or $229 as an upgrade from any previous version. Seems to me that many folks would chose Corel, if it was more practically priced. Decades ago, I worked for Motorola, and the company used Macs for practically everything. I used MacDraw II, and it was one of the best drawing programs I have come across. But, at $429; I don't see how the average user can justify that kind of cash outlay, for a program that won't be used full time. Pity, as Corel is one of the better software providers.

MacPro

As I have mentioned before I am sure, I have a soft spot for Corel as they bought out a software company I owned for the code specifically for Painter.  Not that I have ever used the program.

urahara

We haven’t crossed even the middle of 2019. And the Painter 2020 is here. I never could understand why the marketers do so (of course to sound more modern, but I mean I feel resentment to such naming).
Why not just call it even better - Painter 2025 or Painter 3000. /s 

sflocal

hodar said:

Painter 2020 costs $429 new, or $229 as an upgrade from any previous version. Seems to me that many folks would chose Corel, if it was more practically priced. Decades ago, I worked for Motorola, and the company used Macs for practically everything. I used MacDraw II, and it was one of the best drawing programs I have come across. But, at $429; I don't see how the average user can justify that kind of cash outlay, for a program that won't be used full time. Pity, as Corel is one of the better software providers.

Which is why Adobe is killing it in the graphics suite.  Many folks won't shell out $429 at once for a piece of software, but they can definitely swallow $10/month for Lightroom/Photoshop.  It will take 3.5 years to pay the equivalent of $429 and three years later, one is on the most current release of Photoshop.  By then, Corel Painter is the same 3.5 year old software and 3.5 years is an eternity.

dysamoria

sflocal said:

hodar said:

Painter 2020 costs $429 new, or $229 as an upgrade from any previous version. Seems to me that many folks would chose Corel, if it was more practically priced. Decades ago, I worked for Motorola, and the company used Macs for practically everything. I used MacDraw II, and it was one of the best drawing programs I have come across. But, at $429; I don't see how the average user can justify that kind of cash outlay, for a program that won't be used full time. Pity, as Corel is one of the better software providers.

Which is why Adobe is killing it in the graphics suite.  Many folks won't shell out $429 at once for a piece of software, but they can definitely swallow $10/month for Lightroom/Photoshop.  It will take 3.5 years to pay the equivalent of $429 and three years later, one is on the most current release of Photoshop.  By then, Corel Painter is the same 3.5 year old software and 3.5 years is an eternity.

Adobe is losing market share in the hobbyist and small business arena because people don’t want to (or cannot afford to) add to their monthly bills.

I personally still manage to save money for a few months at a time to buy useful tools that cost hundreds (Painter is a fantastic tool), and I’m in poverty. I will never subscribe to software, even if I somehow get out of poverty. Companies like Adobe are all too happy to abuse consumers with these market-gentrifying behaviors. 

The math has been done. The software subscription model is entirely designed to squeeze more money out of saturated markets by forcing those who cannot go without to perpetually pay (and pay more) for their software. There is no savings to customers, but there is more money handed to companies, for less value returned.

As for the FOMO of “out of date” software... much of the software I use is “out of date” and works fine. Even better: it only cost me money one time per version. Paying on MY time scale matters far more to me than being “up-to-date”. If I don’t need what’s marketed in the “latest” version, I don’t want to throw money at it just to satisfy the greed of developers. Often, the value in “upgrades” is minimal and skipping versions makes an upgrade far more valuable later, for many users.

SpamSandwich

Painter is having its hat handed to it by iOS apps like Procreate, SketchClub and Art Set.

sflocal

dysamoria said:

sflocal said:

hodar said:

Painter 2020 costs $429 new, or $229 as an upgrade from any previous version. Seems to me that many folks would chose Corel, if it was more practically priced. Decades ago, I worked for Motorola, and the company used Macs for practically everything. I used MacDraw II, and it was one of the best drawing programs I have come across. But, at $429; I don't see how the average user can justify that kind of cash outlay, for a program that won't be used full time. Pity, as Corel is one of the better software providers.

Which is why Adobe is killing it in the graphics suite.  Many folks won't shell out $429 at once for a piece of software, but they can definitely swallow $10/month for Lightroom/Photoshop.  It will take 3.5 years to pay the equivalent of $429 and three years later, one is on the most current release of Photoshop.  By then, Corel Painter is the same 3.5 year old software and 3.5 years is an eternity.

Adobe is losing market share in the hobbyist and small business arena because people don’t want to (or cannot afford to) add to their monthly bills.

I personally still manage to save money for a few months at a time to buy useful tools that cost hundreds (Painter is a fantastic tool), and I’m in poverty. I will never subscribe to software, even if I somehow get out of poverty. Companies like Adobe are all too happy to abuse consumers with these market-gentrifying behaviors. 

The math has been done. The software subscription model is entirely designed to squeeze more money out of saturated markets by forcing those who cannot go without to perpetually pay (and pay more) for their software. There is no savings to customers, but there is more money handed to companies, for less value returned.

As for the FOMO of “out of date” software... much of the software I use is “out of date” and works fine. Even better: it only cost me money one time per version. Paying on MY time scale matters far more to me than being “up-to-date”. If I don’t need what’s marketed in the “latest” version, I don’t want to throw money at it just to satisfy the greed of developers. Often, the value in “upgrades” is minimal and skipping versions makes an upgrade far more valuable later, for many users.

No they are not.  Adobe's own financials shows the contrary of what you're saying.

I get that many folks (particularly old-schoolers) hate the subscription model, but it works in certain areas.  I used to pay thousands of dollars for a single license of Photoshop back in the early 2000's, only to have to upgrade every few years to use all the new tools.  

Your situation is a typical example of that belief where if it's right for you, hence it should be for everyone else.  For many, there is value in this model for what we do.  Great that you found an alternative.  You don't speak for many of us who's needs do not reflect yours.  I myself save more money on this method than I had buying software.  My math for my situation has been done and works.

fastasleep

dysamoria said:

sflocal said:

hodar said:

Painter 2020 costs $429 new, or $229 as an upgrade from any previous version. Seems to me that many folks would chose Corel, if it was more practically priced. Decades ago, I worked for Motorola, and the company used Macs for practically everything. I used MacDraw II, and it was one of the best drawing programs I have come across. But, at $429; I don't see how the average user can justify that kind of cash outlay, for a program that won't be used full time. Pity, as Corel is one of the better software providers.

Which is why Adobe is killing it in the graphics suite.  Many folks won't shell out $429 at once for a piece of software, but they can definitely swallow $10/month for Lightroom/Photoshop.  It will take 3.5 years to pay the equivalent of $429 and three years later, one is on the most current release of Photoshop.  By then, Corel Painter is the same 3.5 year old software and 3.5 years is an eternity.

Adobe is losing market share in the hobbyist and small business arena because people don’t want to (or cannot afford to) add to their monthly bills.

I personally still manage to save money for a few months at a time to buy useful tools that cost hundreds (Painter is a fantastic tool), and I’m in poverty. I will never subscribe to software, even if I somehow get out of poverty. Companies like Adobe are all too happy to abuse consumers with these market-gentrifying behaviors. 

The math has been done. The software subscription model is entirely designed to squeeze more money out of saturated markets by forcing those who cannot go without to perpetually pay (and pay more) for their software. There is no savings to customers, but there is more money handed to companies, for less value returned.

As for the FOMO of “out of date” software... much of the software I use is “out of date” and works fine. Even better: it only cost me money one time per version. Paying on MY time scale matters far more to me than being “up-to-date”. If I don’t need what’s marketed in the “latest” version, I don’t want to throw money at it just to satisfy the greed of developers. Often, the value in “upgrades” is minimal and skipping versions makes an upgrade far more valuable later, for many users.

You don’t need Creative Cloud. I do, and pay for my subscription with less than half an hour of billable work each month. The subscription model is great compared to the miserable Creative Suite cycle of years past, and a bargain price-wise. It’s a no brainer for people like myself who work in Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, etc. The Master Collection used to cost $2600.

Photoshop and Lightroom at $10 a month is a steal. You know what Photoshop used to cost? $699. The Extended version was $999. 

These are professional tools for people who make a living using them. Apparently, you’re a hobbyist. You should buy Photoshop Elements at $99 or any of the cheaper competitors available that do similar things. 

davidmalcolm

I’d be interested in checking it out, but I do most of my drawing on the iPad Pro these days. Not to mention I’ve pretty well switched over completely to the Affinity Suite if apps. 

foregoneconclusion

fastasleep said: Photoshop and Lightroom at $10 a month is a steal. You know what Photoshop used to cost? $699. The Extended version was $999. 

$10 is the price if you commit to paying $120 for the full year. $20 is the price if you really want it to be "monthly", i.e., you can end the subscription at any time without further commitment. On top of that, you have to consider that what you're paying for is just access, not a guarantee that Adobe will add major features that will be useful to you. They might. They might not.

And the reality is that people who really need more than a single app are being steered towards paying $636 per year for annual bulk access to Adobe's apps. At $1272 every two years, that actually ends up being more expensive than the CS era, where you might pay $1200 for the CS Standard Edition and then pay a discounted upgrade price two years later for the new release...or do what a lot of people did and skip generations that didn't have compelling new features. 

fastasleep

foregoneconclusion said:

fastasleep said: Photoshop and Lightroom at $10 a month is a steal. You know what Photoshop used to cost? $699. The Extended version was $999. 

$10 is the price if you commit to paying $120 for the full year. $20 is the price if you really want it to be "monthly", i.e., you can end the subscription at any time without further commitment. 

No, it’s $9.99/month.

On top of that, you have to consider that what you're paying for is just access, not a guarantee that Adobe will add major features that will be useful to you. They might. They might not. 

And the reality is that people who really need more than a single app are being steered towards paying $636 per year for annual bulk access to Adobe's apps. At $1272 every two years, that actually ends up being more expensive than the CS era, where you might pay $1200 for the CS Standard Edition and then pay a discounted upgrade price two years later for the new release...or do what a lot of people did and skip generations that didn't have compelling new features. 

I would agree that the biggest problem is with use cases where maybe someone only needs 2 or 3 apps — there’s no equivalent to the various in-between CS packages that used to exist, it’s either all or one/two (PS/Lightroom). As a former Master Collection owner who actually uses 6-8 apps, it’s a bargain. Not as much so if you only need Photoshop and Illustrator, but again, if you can’t pay for the subscription in an hour or two of billable work per month, perhaps you don’t really need them and should be looking at the myriad competing apps out there that largely do similar things. These are professional tools for people who make a living using them.

Do you know what an AutoCad license costs? $1600 a year. Nuke? $1600 a quarter! Creative Cloud as a whole is a bargain for what you get. 

As as far as adding features, I can say they’ve been fixing bugs and adding features MUCH more rapidly with the CC model. You used to have to wait a year to hope for a crippling bug to be fixed, ensuring that you’d have to upgrade every year in some cases. I’m super happy with it. 

SpamSandwich

foregoneconclusion said:

fastasleep said: Photoshop and Lightroom at $10 a month is a steal. You know what Photoshop used to cost? $699. The Extended version was $999. 

$10 is the price if you commit to paying $120 for the full year. $20 is the price if you really want it to be "monthly", i.e., you can end the subscription at any time without further commitment. On top of that, you have to consider that what you're paying for is just access, not a guarantee that Adobe will add major features that will be useful to you. They might. They might not.

And the reality is that people who really need more than a single app are being steered towards paying $636 per year for annual bulk access to Adobe's apps. At $1272 every two years, that actually ends up being more expensive than the CS era, where you might pay $1200 for the CS Standard Edition and then pay a discounted upgrade price two years later for the new release...or do what a lot of people did and skip generations that didn't have compelling new features. 

And that is why I hate rentware. The new apps are not for me... and thankfully I have less need for them these days.

What I’d really like to happen is for Apple to buy up the top competitors to Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign and have them get a complete polish and unification of UI.