CC3 vs Photoshop

[waldronate]

There is no intuitive interface, not even the nipple. It's all learned. - Bruce Ediger

In any skill-driven activity, you tend to prefer the first way you learned it. For example, is the correct way to remove an object to select the objects and then select a modify attributes command, to select a modify attributes command and select objects to modify, or to type in a command that has all of the parameters needed to perform the command? The first is the object verb paradigm ("files delete"), the second is the verb object paradigm ("delete files"), and the last is the way of the command-line elders ("rm *"). Each is appropriate to its audience and context.

On the subject of value for the dollar, if my employer gives me a copy of Photoshop and pays me to use it, then that beats the heck out of having to do my own tech support for a "free" product with a user interface rather unlike the company-standard software applications I use every day.

[NeonKnight]

Funny, I would say the same thing moving from GIMP to Photoshop. I find the weird interface completely counter-intuitive, and feel like the I am fighting the software to do what I know how to do so well in Gimp....

Guess it is little thing called perspective (You wouldn't believe the MDI/SDI holy wars, with both sides arguing valid points...)

And if you want to compare getting what you pay for, the cost to feature ratio makes Gimp the hands down winner

-Rob A>

LOL! That's my Feeling with regards to CC3 and things Like GIMP and Photoshop.

I know to do things in CC3 but find the simple thing like drawing and filling a BOX or Circle in Photoshop/GIMP to be impossible!

[Nomadic]

Funny, I would say the same thing moving from GIMP to Photoshop. I find the weird interface completely counter-intuitive, and feel like the I am fighting the software to do what I know how to do so well in Gimp....

Guess it is little thing called perspective (You wouldn't believe the MDI/SDI holy wars, with both sides arguing valid points...)

And if you want to compare getting what you pay for, the cost to feature ratio makes Gimp the hands down winner

-Rob A>

Except I have never had any problem picking up and running with any other graphical based software before. GIMP is the absolute only program that I failed at learning. The interface is so mucked up for me that I can't even figure out how to do simple things.

As to your last comment the ease of use interface is the extra you get that more than justifies the cost. You are the only person I have ever heard that had trouble with it and I have known technophobic people that have given it a try. I am guessing this is due to your learning on GIMP as opposed to any other of the more standardized programs and then sticking with it and its very different interface.

At any rate I agree with waldron on the concept of nothing being intuitive. There's just different degrees of learning curve. For the majority in my experience photoshop has a much shallower curve due to its much larger support base and well designed layout. Thats not to say that GIMP isn't great for those without the cash, but for those that can afford it, PS is an excellent first choice for photo manipulation.

[ravells]

I started with Paintshop Pro and moving to Photoshop and getting comfortable with it took me the best part of a year. Now I am, I've forgotten all the PSP conventions. It all depends on what you're used to.

I've got Illustrator - never use it. I know it's more powerful than the budget equivalent I do use (Drawplus) but Drawplus is one of the most intuitive applications I have ever used.

I think once you get get stuck to something it's difficult to move. I don't have CC3, but I have CC2, but it was too limited for me once I discovered Drawplus, PSP and Photoshop.

For me, (and apologies to the CC users out there) CC is a complex interface you have to get used to in order to get to use the lovely symbols. My problem with the symbols is that they they kill any individuality of mapping....but they do mean you can produce great looking maps and fast.

[Kingbreaker]

There is no intuitive interface, not even the nipple. It's all learned. - Bruce Ediger

In any skill-driven activity, you tend to prefer the first way you learned it. For example, is the correct way to remove an object to select the objects and then select a modify attributes command, to select a modify attributes command and select objects to modify, or to type in a command that has all of the parameters needed to perform the command? The first is the object verb paradigm ("files delete"), the second is the verb object paradigm ("delete files"), and the last is the way of the command-line elders ("rm *"). Each is appropriate to its audience and context.

On the subject of value for the dollar, if my employer gives me a copy of Photoshop and pays me to use it, then that beats the heck out of having to do my own tech support for a "free" product with a user interface rather unlike the company-standard software applications I use every day.

I'm hosed then - I am most confortable with the Macromedia Freehand interface

[waldronate]

I'm hosed then - I am most confortable with the Macromedia Freehand interface

I hear they have support groups.

[Nomadic]

I hear they have support groups.

But ever since adobe bought them out you have to have acrobat to read their newsletters.

[huishou]

Campaign Cartographer is a CAD engine that has been repurposed to provide mapping functionality. It also has many style packs in the form of its annuals and huge numbers of symbols via its symbol packs. Some folks find the learning curve steep, but there are many video tutorials and training materials available.

If you have some drawing skills and are expecting to make your maps from scratch, go with Photoshop (or GIMP)!! I believe they can produce superior results, though I have't used Campaign Cartographer but I've seen many maps on these forums. I use an older version of photoshop with XP-Pen Artist 12 Pro drawing tablet with screen and I love it! I find that most of the stunning maps on these forums are made with Photoshop, GIMP or a program like that.

[damonjynx]

Well as others have pointed out there are a number of things to consider:

1. Budget
2. Purpose
3. Artistic skill

1. The all important $$. Personal opinion aside, if 'free' is your only option, GIMP or KRITA are probably going to be your choices. I tried running the latest version of GIMP on a brand new Mac with OS Catalina and the performance was woeful, it drove me insane. On my work PC I was able to figure out how to recreate (more or less) my Photoshop workflow for Dungeon and Hex maps (for using on my home Mac which no longer runs Adobe CS4). KRITA works much better on my Mac and what I'll be using when needed. CC3+ is reasonably priced and you can get some good deals. I just bought the Humble Bundle for $51AUD which came with 3 core programs; CC3+, City & Dungeon Designer and a host of other stuff. As others have mentioned, you are limited by the art packs you have unless you have the skill to create your own. Then we have Adobe, I prefer this over the free programs as its more what I'm used to but I refuse to pay a subscription for essentially an update to a program I already own. Unless you can generate a reasonable income from it or use it for business purposes (to receive tax benefits - depending on how that works in your locale) I would suggest the other options.
2. If you want to create truly unique, artisitic maps, that are 100% your own, an image editing program is what you need. If, on the other hand, you want to produce quality maps quickly, in a wide range of styles for gaming purposes, whether for VTTs or print media, then I think CC3+ is a good choice and why I decided to go that route. Using Crossover (a paid WINE utility) I am able to run CC3+ on my Mac natively without having to install Windows #.
3. If you've no artistic skill, like me, then CC3+ is definitely a must have. If the reverse is true one of the image editing software programs will probably be more to your taste.

Either way, all packages have a learning curve. I tried the demo version of CC2 I think it was, back in the early 2000's and I couldn't get my head around it (not much internet support, tutorials etc around back then) so I bought Dundjinni and only used when necessary so I never got proficient with it. Now I find myself looking forward to getting down with CC3+.

[Mark Oliva]

Well as others have pointed out there are a number of things to consider:

1. Budget
2. Purpose
3. Artistic skill

Sure. But the comparison basis is wrong. This isn't really a question of a choice between Photoshop and CC3+, which always will be an apples and oranges comparison. The issue really is the question of whether one wants to make one's own maps from bottom up with programs such as Photoshop, the GIMP, etc., or whether one wants to use a cartographic tool like CC3+, Dundjinni, Other World Mapper, MapForge, FM8, etc.

They're two different worlds of cartography. Some live more comfortably in one, some more comfortably in the other, and some even go back and forth between both. By and large, one will find that the fastest maps were made with one of the cartographic applications, and the best maps in most cases were made with one of the graphical applications ... although I certainly acknowledge that there have been Dundjinni and MapForge maps posted here that reach Photoshop/GIMP quality levels. I can't says the same for CC3+, FM8 or OWM maps ... which are the tool category that I use personally.

Servus,