For you who's reading this, it's in reference to the previous blogpost "Circular/Curves Text"
You might be thinking why I used Photoshop and not Illustrator, when paths and shapes in the latter is like their bread and butter.
This brings me back to the time when I was working as a producer under this New Yorker called Alex. He wasn't the nicest person or boss, but he was a good friend, and I learnt a lot about commercial staging and framing from him. However I left due to major creative differences, and of course personal reasons such as his bad temper.
One of the things he taught me was,
"Use the most appropriate tool for the most appropriate matter."
It was quoted from the previous' producer dude Christian, who left(properly the same reasons as me, as what I've heard), and I found that quote to be very interesting, and adapted that quote as a basis for my future practical setup in my work-life, regardless it's in shooting or editing.
In a nutshell, it means that you can only use one thing at a time for one event, indirectly pretty much like the famous saying, "Too many cooks spoil the broth".
Let's put it to a fact.
There are so many editing, grading, coloring softwares that sometimes even the best will get confused while doing back to back projects.
For coloring, there's Davinci Resolve, Adobe Speedgrade, After Effects.
Video editing; Final Cut Pro, Avid, Vegas, Premiere Pro
Mograph; After Effects, Motion
Tracking; PFtrack, 3DEqualizer, Mocha, Matchmover
3D; Maya, 3DMax, 4Dcinema, Houdini, Blender, and about 349++ others from dubious forums
I don't even wanna start on the photo editing side, the free ones are practically all over the Internet.
Which brings me back to the illustrator Photoshop thing.
Why did I chose Photoshop to do such a bothersome thing when it was so much easier in illustrator. I could just probably spend another 9.99 USD for the illustrator, and claim it through some productivity claim it will be like only 4 bucks.
Reason was simple.
I was more comfortable in Photoshop than anywhere else for doing 2D/Graphic Design/Photo works.
It was my digital medium for my concept art paintings, conceptual photographs back during grad school.
I'm used to the interface, the hotkeys, my Wacom shortcuts, menu locations, masking, layers, where all the keys are, basically everything.
And PSD files are so flexible with After Effects and FCPX, when I'm doing Mograph or adding lower thirds to videos. Not that AI files are not, but I did had couple of incidents with it before, and it was a horrible thing.
There's always this Lightroom/Photoshop debate too, but I don't really find it more challenging than explaining it from the design Point-of-view.
Firstly, Photoshop can't really handle batch photos, even if it can, I wouldn't do that.
The layout is just too weird.
So in terms of events or travel journalism photography, or any photos I've got to process in batches, Lightroom is da' man.
But when it comes to dodging/burning, layering and curves, saving in different formats, creating posters, there is no other program than Photoshop that does it better for me, Lightroom doesn't cut it.
Secondly, batch processing.
I can just throw 200 photos on Lightroom, add on a preset from VSCO, shadows highlights here and there, apply to all, render.
Ten minutes later it will be done.
I can do the same for Photoshop's RAW opener, but it's just not the same speed and viewport to preview the files as Lightroom.
Lastly, Photoshop and Lightroom come in a Adobe CC set. What's there to hate?
So in a way,
Lightroom = Batch Processing multiple photographs
Photoshop = Carefully treating one photograph by photograph
However, it's not the same for Photoshop/Illustrator debate, because both are almost similar in a lot of ways. Which of course PS will lose in terms of vectors and shapes, but I find it much enjoyable for me.
Even tracking programs can be annoying to choose from. I personally would prefer 3DEqualizer, but it's too goddamn expensive and majority of the jobs don't require much intense Matchmove. I use a free 3D software called Matchmover instead, for 2D it's Mocha, inbuilt with After Effects.
Same thing applies for FCPX and Premiere Pro. People I've followed, one for example the famous Philip Bloom, uses Premiere Pro as his main. For me I'm versatile in both, but I prefer FCPX because of the hipster(sorry that's the only word I could think of) interface.
It looks like iMovie but with FCP7's features + more.
And the fact that Apple updates FCPX regularly via App Store got me sold.
Of course there are the pros and cons in whether you choose for your main, just like how Canon is full of shit but I still depend on it for a living.
Scottie Lim CY will probably have a few comments with me at the end of the day, because I think he fell in love with Illustrator during his Vector module in SCAD.
Ultimately at the end of the day, it's what that works most comfortably and smoothly for you, and get things done, is the best.
Henry is a film-maker, photographer, VFX artist, animator living in Singapore.
Inspired by the works of Hayao Miyazaki, Mamoru Hosoda, and the late Satoshi Kon, he pursued a career in 3D Animation, but somehow landed in Double Negative and ended up working on Hollywood feature films as a FX artist.
His hobbies include molesting his cameras, his girlfriend and his cats.
He also enjoys cooking Japanese dishes, however the Japanese groceries cost a bomb in the country he is living in.
He is an avid lover of coffee, cheese, chocolate and cigarettes, and is usually found at firstname.lastname@example.org