I haven't seen a roadmap on the Pixelmator site, I just read blog comments saying that Save for Web was supposed to be coming and then follow ups saying it wasn't in the release. Good to hear about the plan.
Is there any news on where CMYK fits into the roadmap? That's important to my workflow.
I understand your frustration with such types, but my understanding is that Pixelmator is being pitched to the photo enthusiast/prosumer crowd, not generally the iPhoto target market. This category would be heavily weighted toward Web Designers and Print Designers.
The former would tend to see Save for Web as a big deal, the latter CMYK. I can understand why either category would hesitate to adopt a photo editor without their biggest 'needed feature'.
My understanding is that it's not being pitched as such.
That said, *I'm* pitching it as such because it is clear that this product will soon become as good or better than Photoshop because it's a small, flexible application designed by a small, flexible team of, if I'm not mistaken, 2 people: one brother does all the coding and the other is the GUI designer and PR guy.
Let's face it, this two-person team has done more in the last year than a team of 200+ has done in the last decade.
Sure this has something to do with being able to leverage built-in OS X 10.4 and 10.5 frameworks and other open-source code as well as some custom code but there's no rule against that. This means any improvements to CoreImage by Apple will trickle into Pixelmator. Any new CoreImage filters designed by Apple or anyone can be used by Pixelmator. These improvements are free and will require no development time for the Pixelmator team allowing them to focus on other features.
Photoshop is almost 20 years old (if you don't count its previous incarnations)...and has a 19 years head start on Pixelmator...yet Pixelmator only seems perhaps 3 years behind Photoshop.
And just today I read that an engineer at Adobe is downplaying the GPU as a new way to increase image rendering performance. You can be sure that if he really means what he's saying, it won't be long before competitors leapfrog Adobe.
Adobe is safe though. Photoshop will continue to be used for years to come even if its not the best tool for the job.
Yes, what the Pixelmator guys have done is amazing.
I'm personally anxious for CMYK, because it is the only feature that is keeping me with Photoshop.
I have no idea about how frameworks work. But if Apple can roll some helpful CMYK support in with Snow Leopard, and the Pixelmator team follows through with Save for Web as planned, the next update will see a LOT of switchers.
If Lineform and iStudio Publisher continue their improvements as well, the Mac design biz will get the kind of innovation that hasn't been seen since Quark and Pagemaker went head-to-head in the 80's and early 90's.
Photoshop is almost 20 years old (if you don't count its previous incarnations)...and has a 19 years head start on Pixelmator...yet Pixelmator only seems perhaps 3 years behind Photoshop.
And just today I read that an engineer at Adobe is downplaying the GPU as a new way to increase image rendering performance. You can be sure that if he really means what he's saying, it won't be long before competitors leapfrog Adobe.
Adobe is safe though. Photoshop will continue to be used for years to come even if its not the best tool for the job.
AI posted a story about a Photoshop CS4 update three days ago. Not a single person has commented.
That's got me thinking about whether Photoshop is getting anyone excited anymore.
Even image pros are now splitting their time between Photoshop and either Lightroom or Aperture.
I've also been thinking about my reluctance to switch to Pixelmator without CMYK, and other Pro features.
Learning new things is a way of life. Perhaps Pixelmator can't work for me alone.
But Pixelmator is CAN$75., and Aperture is CDN$199. Together, they're about the same price as the CS4 upgrade (and hundreds of dollars cheaper if you're just starting out and don't have a Photoshop license.)
Is there anything Pixelmator and Aperture together can't do for image pros that the regular Photoshop (not Extended) can?
AI posted a story about a Photoshop CS4 update three days ago. Not a single person has commented.
That's got me thinking about whether Photoshop is getting anyone excited anymore.
People were just speechless in awe. Seriously though, once apps reach a certain plateau of development, there's little to talk about because they just do the job. The comments on other apps like Pixelmator are concerns over whether or not they can do the job. It's not so much interest as concern. With major apps, you just expect them to do whatever you need as they are industry standard tools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777
Even image pros are now splitting their time between Photoshop and either Lightroom or Aperture.
Photographers will in order to pick a photo from a shoot but they will then use Photoshop for airbrushing and complex manipulation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777
But Pixelmator is CAN$75., and Aperture is CDN$199. Together, they're about the same price as the CS4 upgrade (and hundreds of dollars cheaper if you're just starting out and don't have a Photoshop license.)
Is there anything Pixelmator and Aperture together can't do for image pros that the regular Photoshop (not Extended) can?
I still don't get why people are comparing Pixelmator to the regular version of Photoshop. Elements doesn't support CMYK, same as Pixelmator, no pen tool, no HDR, no channels, no recording actions for batch processing, no color balance, no layer masks, no smart objects, no vanishing point tool, no text paths, no layer styles, no web stuff like rollovers/slicing (save for web is there though), no custom tool presets, shortcuts.
Some of this stuff in Elements you can add with add-ons:
but the point is that it's a completely false comparison to looks at PS with all it's pro features and the price difference and skip over Elements, which Pixelmator does compete with and shares most of its flaws.
Asking should I buy Pixelmator instead of PS is the same as should I buy PS or Elements. The answer to both is that if you need the above features, get PS, otherwise the question becomes should I buy Elements or Pixelmator.
Then, as I pointed out above, you are comparing apps that are close features-wise and price-wise but I would still go with Elements as it has save for web and actions that can add some of the built-in features it lacks.
People were just speechless in awe. Seriously though, once apps reach a certain plateau of development, there's little to talk about because they just do the job. The comments on other apps like Pixelmator are concerns over whether or not they can do the job. It's not so much interest as concern. With major apps, you just expect them to do whatever you need as they are industry standard tools.
Photographers will in order to pick a photo from a shoot but they will then use Photoshop for airbrushing and complex manipulation.
I still don't get why people are comparing Pixelmator to the regular version of Photoshop. Elements doesn't support CMYK, same as Pixelmator, no pen tool, no HDR, no channels, no recording actions for batch processing, no color balance, no layer masks, no smart objects, no vanishing point tool, no text paths, no layer styles, no web stuff like rollovers/slicing (save for web is there though), no custom tool presets, shortcuts.
Ok...lay down the crack pipe and make sure that some of this stuff isn't really available in Pixelmator before you shoot your mouth off.
No color balance? No layer masks? No shortcuts? No recording actions for batch processing? And in about 2 months, you will be able to scratch 'web stuff' (as you call it) off your list.
I think you should refrain from comparing Pixelmator until you actually download the fucking thing and try it out. You can do it for free and it'll only take 2 minutes of your precious, precious time.
I still don't get why people are comparing Pixelmator to the regular version of Photoshop...
Because it's the only Mac app on the market that has a chance of competing with Photoshop at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol
Ok...lay down the crack pipe and make sure that some of this stuff isn't really available in Pixelmator before you shoot your mouth off...
Ouch.
By the way, it looks as though my Pixelmator+Aperture idea is dead, since it's been pointed out to me that the supposedly pro-level Aperture doesn't have CMYK image conversion either.
No color balance? No layer masks? No shortcuts? No recording actions for batch processing?
Those are partly missing from Elements - the comparison at the start of the list was for CMYK only. I knew that some things in the list were also missing from Pixelmator but didn't pick them out individually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol
And in about 2 months, you will be able to scratch 'web stuff' (as you call it) off your list.
Save for web and image slicing at least I would hope and Gif export if it doesn't have it already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol
I think you should refrain from comparing Pixelmator until you actually download the fucking thing and try it out. You can do it for free and it'll only take 2 minutes of your precious, precious time.
Already tried it out. I already have PS and I use the CMYK support, pen tool, channel editing, 16-bit editing and the web stuff though (and the cursor icons are handy too) so I'm not interested in switching - I'm just pointing out that for people who use these features, there's not much point in suggesting Pixelmator will save a lot of money when it doesn't have these things.
Similarly Elements doesn't have these things so it's a better comparison. That's what I'm saying. I can't really see why people are so uptight about me suggesting that two programs that compete on features and on price are more appropriate for comparison than a much more expensive package with features neither apps have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777
Because it's the only Mac app on the market that has a chance of competing with Photoshop at all.
I understand why people want Pixelmator to be more than it is just like people want HTML5 + CSS to take down Flash. A world without a dependence on Adobe at least gives people more options and competition is good. It can at times be a little misguided however.
Pixelmator is a good app and I'm sure it will develop to a point where it can rival PS but it has a long way to go. Adobe still has an entire graphics suite that is integrated together.
Comments
I haven't seen a roadmap on the Pixelmator site, I just read blog comments saying that Save for Web was supposed to be coming and then follow ups saying it wasn't in the release. Good to hear about the plan.
Is there any news on where CMYK fits into the roadmap? That's important to my workflow.
I understand your frustration with such types, but my understanding is that Pixelmator is being pitched to the photo enthusiast/prosumer crowd, not generally the iPhoto target market. This category would be heavily weighted toward Web Designers and Print Designers.
The former would tend to see Save for Web as a big deal, the latter CMYK. I can understand why either category would hesitate to adopt a photo editor without their biggest 'needed feature'.
My understanding is that it's not being pitched as such.
That said, *I'm* pitching it as such because it is clear that this product will soon become as good or better than Photoshop because it's a small, flexible application designed by a small, flexible team of, if I'm not mistaken, 2 people: one brother does all the coding and the other is the GUI designer and PR guy.
Let's face it, this two-person team has done more in the last year than a team of 200+ has done in the last decade.
Sure this has something to do with being able to leverage built-in OS X 10.4 and 10.5 frameworks and other open-source code as well as some custom code but there's no rule against that. This means any improvements to CoreImage by Apple will trickle into Pixelmator. Any new CoreImage filters designed by Apple or anyone can be used by Pixelmator. These improvements are free and will require no development time for the Pixelmator team allowing them to focus on other features.
Photoshop is almost 20 years old (if you don't count its previous incarnations)...and has a 19 years head start on Pixelmator...yet Pixelmator only seems perhaps 3 years behind Photoshop.
And just today I read that an engineer at Adobe is downplaying the GPU as a new way to increase image rendering performance. You can be sure that if he really means what he's saying, it won't be long before competitors leapfrog Adobe.
Adobe is safe though. Photoshop will continue to be used for years to come even if its not the best tool for the job.
I'm personally anxious for CMYK, because it is the only feature that is keeping me with Photoshop.
I have no idea about how frameworks work. But if Apple can roll some helpful CMYK support in with Snow Leopard, and the Pixelmator team follows through with Save for Web as planned, the next update will see a LOT of switchers.
If Lineform and iStudio Publisher continue their improvements as well, the Mac design biz will get the kind of innovation that hasn't been seen since Quark and Pagemaker went head-to-head in the 80's and early 90's.
Photoshop is almost 20 years old (if you don't count its previous incarnations)...and has a 19 years head start on Pixelmator...yet Pixelmator only seems perhaps 3 years behind Photoshop.
And just today I read that an engineer at Adobe is downplaying the GPU as a new way to increase image rendering performance. You can be sure that if he really means what he's saying, it won't be long before competitors leapfrog Adobe.
Adobe is safe though. Photoshop will continue to be used for years to come even if its not the best tool for the job.
AI posted a story about a Photoshop CS4 update three days ago. Not a single person has commented.
That's got me thinking about whether Photoshop is getting anyone excited anymore.
Even image pros are now splitting their time between Photoshop and either Lightroom or Aperture.
I've also been thinking about my reluctance to switch to Pixelmator without CMYK, and other Pro features.
Learning new things is a way of life. Perhaps Pixelmator can't work for me alone.
But Pixelmator is CAN$75., and Aperture is CDN$199. Together, they're about the same price as the CS4 upgrade (and hundreds of dollars cheaper if you're just starting out and don't have a Photoshop license.)
Is there anything Pixelmator and Aperture together can't do for image pros that the regular Photoshop (not Extended) can?
AI posted a story about a Photoshop CS4 update three days ago. Not a single person has commented.
That's got me thinking about whether Photoshop is getting anyone excited anymore.
People were just speechless in awe. Seriously though, once apps reach a certain plateau of development, there's little to talk about because they just do the job. The comments on other apps like Pixelmator are concerns over whether or not they can do the job. It's not so much interest as concern. With major apps, you just expect them to do whatever you need as they are industry standard tools.
Even image pros are now splitting their time between Photoshop and either Lightroom or Aperture.
Photographers will in order to pick a photo from a shoot but they will then use Photoshop for airbrushing and complex manipulation.
But Pixelmator is CAN$75., and Aperture is CDN$199. Together, they're about the same price as the CS4 upgrade (and hundreds of dollars cheaper if you're just starting out and don't have a Photoshop license.)
Is there anything Pixelmator and Aperture together can't do for image pros that the regular Photoshop (not Extended) can?
I still don't get why people are comparing Pixelmator to the regular version of Photoshop. Elements doesn't support CMYK, same as Pixelmator, no pen tool, no HDR, no channels, no recording actions for batch processing, no color balance, no layer masks, no smart objects, no vanishing point tool, no text paths, no layer styles, no web stuff like rollovers/slicing (save for web is there though), no custom tool presets, shortcuts.
Some of this stuff in Elements you can add with add-ons:
http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/pse...p_Elements.htm
http://www.cavesofice.org/%7Egrant/C...ls/HowtTo.html
but the point is that it's a completely false comparison to looks at PS with all it's pro features and the price difference and skip over Elements, which Pixelmator does compete with and shares most of its flaws.
Asking should I buy Pixelmator instead of PS is the same as should I buy PS or Elements. The answer to both is that if you need the above features, get PS, otherwise the question becomes should I buy Elements or Pixelmator.
Then, as I pointed out above, you are comparing apps that are close features-wise and price-wise but I would still go with Elements as it has save for web and actions that can add some of the built-in features it lacks.
People were just speechless in awe. Seriously though, once apps reach a certain plateau of development, there's little to talk about because they just do the job. The comments on other apps like Pixelmator are concerns over whether or not they can do the job. It's not so much interest as concern. With major apps, you just expect them to do whatever you need as they are industry standard tools.
Photographers will in order to pick a photo from a shoot but they will then use Photoshop for airbrushing and complex manipulation.
I still don't get why people are comparing Pixelmator to the regular version of Photoshop. Elements doesn't support CMYK, same as Pixelmator, no pen tool, no HDR, no channels, no recording actions for batch processing, no color balance, no layer masks, no smart objects, no vanishing point tool, no text paths, no layer styles, no web stuff like rollovers/slicing (save for web is there though), no custom tool presets, shortcuts.
Ok...lay down the crack pipe and make sure that some of this stuff isn't really available in Pixelmator before you shoot your mouth off.
No color balance? No layer masks? No shortcuts? No recording actions for batch processing? And in about 2 months, you will be able to scratch 'web stuff' (as you call it) off your list.
I think you should refrain from comparing Pixelmator until you actually download the fucking thing and try it out. You can do it for free and it'll only take 2 minutes of your precious, precious time.
I still don't get why people are comparing Pixelmator to the regular version of Photoshop...
Because it's the only Mac app on the market that has a chance of competing with Photoshop at all.
Ok...lay down the crack pipe and make sure that some of this stuff isn't really available in Pixelmator before you shoot your mouth off...
Ouch.
By the way, it looks as though my Pixelmator+Aperture idea is dead, since it's been pointed out to me that the supposedly pro-level Aperture doesn't have CMYK image conversion either.
No color balance? No layer masks? No shortcuts? No recording actions for batch processing?
Those are partly missing from Elements - the comparison at the start of the list was for CMYK only. I knew that some things in the list were also missing from Pixelmator but didn't pick them out individually.
And in about 2 months, you will be able to scratch 'web stuff' (as you call it) off your list.
Save for web and image slicing at least I would hope and Gif export if it doesn't have it already.
I think you should refrain from comparing Pixelmator until you actually download the fucking thing and try it out. You can do it for free and it'll only take 2 minutes of your precious, precious time.
Already tried it out. I already have PS and I use the CMYK support, pen tool, channel editing, 16-bit editing and the web stuff though (and the cursor icons are handy too) so I'm not interested in switching - I'm just pointing out that for people who use these features, there's not much point in suggesting Pixelmator will save a lot of money when it doesn't have these things.
Similarly Elements doesn't have these things so it's a better comparison. That's what I'm saying. I can't really see why people are so uptight about me suggesting that two programs that compete on features and on price are more appropriate for comparison than a much more expensive package with features neither apps have.
Because it's the only Mac app on the market that has a chance of competing with Photoshop at all.
I understand why people want Pixelmator to be more than it is just like people want HTML5 + CSS to take down Flash. A world without a dependence on Adobe at least gives people more options and competition is good. It can at times be a little misguided however.
Pixelmator is a good app and I'm sure it will develop to a point where it can rival PS but it has a long way to go. Adobe still has an entire graphics suite that is integrated together.