Apple News, Analysis and Podcasts

There are many good applications for digital painting on the Mac and Pixelmator and Photoshop are just two of them. Both offer the core tools needed for digital painting. Digital painting used in many areas like 3D surfacing, story boarding, concept art, and matte painting.

In this, my fifth and final comparison between Photoshop and Pixelmator, I will compare Photoshop and Pixelmator for digital painters and see if an other applications might be better suited. I will also give my conclusions on comparing Pixelmator to Photoshop.

Pixelmator 2.0 will bring several new tools to enhance digital painting in Pixelmator. The smudge and sponge tools are two of the main tools, but dodge and burn, which are more photography tools, can also improve digital painting. Digital artists, who are using Pixelmator should really be looking forward to version 2.0.

For painting, Pixelmator 2.0 stacks up pretty well against Photoshop. However, Adobe did introduce some new natural brush technology in Photoshop CS5, which raises the bar. These new brushes, when used with a tablet, can mimic real world brushes pretty well. Beyond these new brushes, Pixelmator does not have any significant draw backs for painting.

If painting is a main task, two other programs may be better suited. Sketchbook Pro is a dedicated painting / drawing program for the Mac and has many natural brushes to choose from. It is in the Mac App store and usually is $60, but can be found on sale for as low as $25. At these prices, both Sketchbook Pro and Pixelmator are still significantly cheaper than Photoshop. The second painting application to look at is ArtRage. It has an impressive set of natural brushes and realistic tools. It is sold through their web site, ranging in price from $20 to $80 depending on which version one wants to buy.

In conclusion, the current version of Pixelmator 1.6.5 offers a great set of core image editing tools. Version 2.0 builds on that core set and offers a great application for the price. It really narrows the gap between itself and Photoshop. Looking beyond 2.0, the developers need to still work on a few key features and they are:

1. Layer Styles: Layer styles greatly improve the workflow speed and image editability on tasks that otherwise require several step to complete.
2. 16-bit Image Processing: To turn Pixelmator into a professional image editor, 16-bit image processing is needed.
3. Improve Text Control: Depending on what is in the new Text Tool, to catch up to Photoshop, more work may be needed. The current version is pretty lacking.
4. Better Filters: Better filters are needed to give photo editors more control over the editing process.
5. Liquify: Adding liquify tools into the core set of features would really help Pixelmator to stand out as an image manipulator application. Currently, Photoshop’s liquify tool is a separate filter built on to Photoshop.
6. History Panel: While lower on the list, a history panel of some sort would also be a welcomed feature for Pixelmator users.

Photoshop is still the got to application for full-time image editing professionals. Yet, for those who just need a great set of core tools, Pixelmator offers an impressive set for the price. Those who don’t spend all day in front of their image editor will find Pixelmator a better choice. It’s lower learning curve and simpler interface can help users get down to business instead of being bogged down in the interface and feature set.

Related Articles:

• Examining Pixelmator vs Photoshop Part I
• Examining Pixelmator vs Photoshop Part II: Graphics
• Examining Pixelmator vs Photoshop Part III: Photography
• Examining Pixelmator vs Photoshop Part IV: Print
• From Pixelmator to Photoshop

1 Comment

1. Peter Brown ~ November 16, 2011 01:32
   The article about Pixelmator is interesting but there are too many typos and grammatical errors throughout it, e.g." Photoshop is still the got to application for full-time...". That is pure gobbledegook and ought to have been corrected before going to print. This tutor says, "Could do better if he tried harder".

Leave your reply