This has been a running theme for a while amongst a few designers and developers.
I would like to point out that – like others – these are just my opinions, but they are opinions based on the following experience:
- 12 years experience using Photoshop (from version 4.0 – on OS7 when MACs were built by 3rd party companies – to CS3)
- 10 years experience using Adobe Illustrator (version 6 to CS3)
- 5 years experience using Fireworks to layout out websites and produce web based layout graphics (version 4 to CS3)
I think a few designers – because they are used to the ‘one-stop-shop’ nature of Photoshop – think that FW is the Macromedia version of PS – an ‘either/or’ situation. This is not the case. It is not the same situation as ‘Freehand’ and ‘Illustrator’ that were very similar in terms of their intended use and output (you will note that freehand has been justifiably binned by Adobe, they would have done the same with FW had they been viewed as equivalents I’m sure)
If you were to compare the 2 thoroughly, they are vastly different in terms of what they actually do and what they actually are as applications:
Photoshop
Photoshop began life as a photo manipulation application, hence the name. It then adapted to become a Graphic Design tool (when there was only print as an output). Finally it added it’s web design arm.
It is an excellent and justifiably leading Graphic Design application with good web design tools and features.
I have used Photoshop to: aid with my printed illustration work, to design logos, layout magazine spreads, editorial designs, produce typographical and graphical designs, and also to layout websites.
Fireworks
Fireworks is an excellent web layout design tool with good and appropriate graphic design capabilities, i.e. it is not trying to be Photoshop. It knows what its main function is and is built specifically for that purpose.
Photoshop can do everything that Fireworks can do in terms of web layout design and image preparation and optimisation (and all that gubbins), it is just that Fireworks does it better (that last sentence, again, based on 12 years of experience using these applications).
I think that many who believe Photoshop to be a better web layout tool believe so solely because they are used to the PS environment. But I also believe that many are directly comparing the 2 as if equivalent applications. STOP IT. Basically.
Perhaps one day adobe will combine the 2 applications. But, in theory, they could combine AI with PS and FW also. Heck, why not throw in a word processing app as well! They could call it ‘Adobe Photoshopping Precinct’ (or ‘Adobe Mall’, for any American readers). I don’t believe they should.
I like having specialist applications for specialist areas. I like having powerful professional tools for creating graphical elements (logos, illustrations, processed photos, graphical artwork, complex vector artwork). But I also like having a dedicated environment for laying out these elements pixel perfect ready for building. And I believe there is no better application than Fireworks for handling that stage of the process.
COMMENTS
Couldn’t agree more.
I’ve switch from Photoshop to Fireworks for web design about 6 months ago. The feature I like the most is the master page instead of using lots of Layers or Layer Comps. There is more flexibility with slices because the pages have their own slices folder and slices are actually layers. The style palette is great too and will be even better in Fireworks CS4.
Good post.
@Benoit: Thanks for your comments on the features. I didn’t discuss features in the post and just kept it to each applications overall purpose, so if any others have any comments on features (web design related) ...
I would also say that Fireworks can optimisation images to a small file size whilst maintaining excellent quality, more so than Photoshop as of this post, and I also find the way you can handle vectors and bitmaps on screen perfect for web design purposes.
While I agree that Fireworks is often better at the web production side of things – I find it optimises JPEGs better than Photoshop – I still can’t bring myself to adopt it for more work as the performance is so bad: Trying to rotate an image from my digital camera by a few degrees to straighten it is enough to send Fireworks into deep thought for 10 seconds or so, while Photoshop can do it without breaking a sweat. Filters like levels and curves can’t be dragged with a live preview – I have to wait for Fireworks to catch up.
@Matthew: What size is the photo you are trying to rotate? If it’s like 3000px wide then you have a fair point and I don’t disagree that Photoshop is the correct tool. The filters and and options on photoshop are also superior for adjusting levels and colours etc. Then you can resize the image, save it as a .psd and then open it in FW for applying to your web visual ;)
Thank you! I have been saying this for years to every web / print designer that always asks “why are you using Fireworks to design? Photoshop is much better”
I have always said that Photoshop is great, second to none. But in what it was designed for, Photo editing not as a layout package. That’s not layout for just web, but as a layout package full stop. I have seen designers from all medias use it for this. Photoshop is a great package when used in conjunction with other software, when needed. I have used photoshop many times when I need to do some complex “touch ups” etc
I am a keen photographer, and I take many digital photos. When it comes to editing them I don’t use fireworks as its not the right tool for the job I wish to use it for. I use Photoshop as that’s what it is for.
I think it comes down to the right tool for the right job. With that in mind Fireworks will always be (for me at least, and those I can educate) the best tool to use for web design.
Well, i’ve used both and what strikes me is that for exporting images (gif & jpg, especially jpg files), the “export” engine works so much better with FW. At least until version 8, that i still use. Files exported with photoshop, for some reason, are much heavier.
Anyway, sorry for my bad english
_Well, I’m a Fireworks CS3 user. I use it for all my web design features. Unless i have to use the occasional brush etc. That would be the only time i would use PS
But I look at PS as a Photoshop…. as you say “photo manipulation application” which it is. I don’t look at it as a Graphic Design program in any way. Because it takes so long to create a graphic in it! It’s not even a joke. This i made in Fireworks….FULLY: http://jakekimpton.deviantart.com/art/iTunes-Miniplayer-PSD-and-PNG-87586314
Now this may look like a long project but it only took about 1 hour to make. In Photoshop i would be looking at at least 3 hours…. That’s insane! 3 times the normal design time of Fireworks.
But don’t get me wrong in any way. Photoshop is a good application. However Fireworks is supreme for Graphic Design which is faster the produce with just the same effect.
Would definitely have to agree with Jake and of course the others who have chosen FW over PS for web design work. and the most obvious reason has already been stated, Why use PS and turn a 1hr job into a 3hr job! FW works is just perfect for laying out web pages and is much more powerfull and robust than most heavey PS users would admit! I also love photoshop for Image manipulation and well just about any digital photography as to me that is really what it is ment for and was from day one so I am certainly not knocking it, but saying that I don’t think I ever have or would use it for web work! It just makes sense, the quicker you work the more money you make…right?
Yep i also agree.
Im currently only using Photoshop for Illustrations, i use Fireworks for my web work.
AI – Typography, print work (generally), logos, layouts
PS – Artwork & photos
Agree with everything that’s been said already. I don’t have any experience with Freehand or Fireworks and don’t feel the need to have really. I can always do everything I want to with AI and PS.
I am having trouble importing my PSD file into Fireworks. I usually use PS for my web design, but after reading how better FW is better for web design I decided to give it a try. I ws think it will dead easy to import, but the psd file gets into FW, it just goes crazy. no a single button in FW is active! When I try to save as a png then work on it, I get a message saying I need an active document. Is this because I am using FW CS4 and PS CS3?
@Nicky : Hmm, I’m not sure tbh. I know that FW to PS is reasonably painless. As mentioned, I tend to stick to PS for creating graphics (be them for web or print), or manipulating / adjusting photos. I then lay out web pages in FW, pulling in any graphical elements from PS that I need (logos etc.).
If you save any design work in PS as a .psd file and as a merged single image on a transparent background, you can then open it in FW and place it into your layout as easy as pie.
This is very interesting. I've always had a snobbish attitude to FW and have been designing loads of site with PS. I'm intrigued about what everyone is saying about FW here.
It's great it's bundled in with CS so I can have a look at it from time to time.
I used it the other day for making animated GIFs because I couldn't work out how to do that in PS.
Thanks for the post.
@ Rob : You're right with 'snobbish attitude'.
I hear complaints from PS users, and also from FW users, and it often comes down to the fact that users get comfortable with programs, and therefore anything they can't do as quick as they can in the program of their choice makes it 'bad / worse'.
As mentioned, I use PS more as a graphic design tool, then lay web things out in FW. If you know your way around both programs then that is a good use for them, IMO.
Thanks for this article/blog. I'll give Fire Works a chance!
The vision of Adobe is that you hop around between programs as if it were one ... and with a properly fast computer this will work. Having said that, the hopping around is a work in progress on their part. Mordy Golding, the former head of Illustrator, has published a lot on this theme and it's to his credit he advocates this hopping around in spite of being obviously into Illustrator.
I think it speaks well for this blog that everyone is open. I think that the real problem is that people don't create vector graphics enough compared to raster; that is the real discussion. With increasing use of XML and dynamically created pages, graphics increasingly need to be vector based, as under the dynamic model they could either end up on a cell screen or the new NEC 48 inch monitor.
Vector's do that well. Photoshop is the raster tool; Fireworks and Illustrator both do vectors. Of course, Photoshop does vectors but not as fluidly as Illustrator.
For now, the power designer just has to use all of them; with a fast machine you can run Adobe Bridge to hold image assets between apps.
This is a great discussion!
Great post. I switched to Fireworks about 2 years ago and haven't looked back.
I agree that Fireworks is king for website design as it's much easier to slice things up when its time to build.
Also, I don't like Photoshop for the fact that you can't just click and select something on the canvas, you need to find it in the layers panel - what a pain!
Actually you put it very straightforward without any doubt. It's the best piece I've ever read on the comparison of the two products. I can be only jealous that I didn't come up with it first :)
Good points Kev!
I am using Fireworks for design for screen / web for more than 5 years already. I also use bits of Illustrator and PhotoShop, but rarely.
I would say (speaking from my personal experience) that Fireworks is the tool for screen graphics and graphics, destined for Web use. Its interface is also much more intuitive than Ps's, IMHO.
In Fireworks, you click on an object and it's instantly selected, you can see all of its properties in the Property Inspector panel, you can add/remove/edit Live Effects, you edit the objects' properties from the same panel (all in *one* place!) - width, height, roundness of corners (if it's a rectangle), fill/stroke color & other properties, etc.
In Ps / Ai, various object properties are scattered in quite a few panels.
Fireworks is quite good with both vectors and bitmaps. Ai excels with vectors only, and Ps excels with bitmaps. For me, Fireworks is great as a "Swiss knife tool", as long as I do screen/Web design. For print, use Ai and/or Ps. But for screen, Fireworks is excellent, powerful and easy to use.
I just hope that in the future, it will be even easier to go between Fw Ai/Ps ...
Good article! It says something that I think more people should be aware of.
Update : I've added a couple of related links to this post - One by Jon Hicks, the other by Nick La over at www.webdesignerwall.com.
http://hicksdesign.co.uk/journal/a-big-assed-post-about-fireworks
and
http://www.webdesignerwall.com/general/fireworks-vs-photoshop-compression/
Everything depends on the type of work that we are going to carry out. If it is a web project I advise to using Fireworks for its multiple tools and the close relation with Dreamweaver. But, if it is a project for impression I would use Photoshop.
Great article. I find fireworks more appropriate for web design. Having the vectors on tap I find I'm using them far more and getting better results in return. Now I just dip into PS when I want to manipulate a bitmap.
I did not like Fireworks because of bad text capabilities. But text on web is one of main things. Photoshop is bad at text too. InDesign is best, but I can not find a way to import InD text with all styles and formatting into; Ps or Fw.