Inkscape vs Illustrator

Friendly warning.

Take it down a notch or I’ll close this.

Forum Rules

Sorry for the anticorporatistic kick its not at all somehow personal, I really cant say Illu is dull but to me sacks however subjective stance is this, which regularly pops up when someone is bashing Inkscape as tool for amateurs, no You are expert if You can workout miracles even with no’tool yet Inkscape is way more just than vector tool, its somehow smooth altho I dont like the last version filters and how one can experiment back and forth with them, so its far from perfect and yes not mainstream trend among studios, hm compare it eg. in the 3d realm with MoI and Rhino or in the video realm with Vegas and Premiere etc. still cant say what is when more important simply that is subjective … finally just wanted to share the video reasoning of ChrisR, still nice debate popped up!!!

I think you are assuming a bit too much though …

No one is bashing Inkscape … some have even said they use it occasionally. But, for the most part, for what they do it simply can’t do what is needed. That is not a slam … just a note that it isn’t the correct tool.

If you have found that it works better for you then by all means use it and enjoy it.

1 Like

lets say Inkscape is something as middleman between Illustrator and Affinity, the last one is fluffy the middleman smooth and the corpoNo.1 an crisp software in historical chase with the corpoNo.2 known also as CorelD …

in this next comparison I’ll say shadows and possibilities around them in Inkscape are infinite when they are tweaked in different layers … yet one advantage over is that Illu Layers as Shapes can be instantly used in AFX [1]

this last point sums it up all for me, extra fast when working with massive files and compositions, on top all that with extra effects filled, simply AIL cant get close to it in this respect!

somehow I am in love with their shaders … here is older nice overview , but I’ll say again experiment with them along the scripts and enjoy the ride …

also when I’ll take some traced 3d obj files all those bezier lines inbetween are easily smoothed with second layer of some of the filters etc. etc. and only thing that still is not doable in it is smooth animation (tho didnt try and think its not easy as SMIL or Javascripting CSS etc.) like the next one …

maybe this could be now easily dont in AFX with ai. shapes, but lets hope David Dailey will be from help to the Inkscape community if we know he has extra anticopyright mindset [1]

All of that may or may not be fact, or may or may not be a valid opinion, but it falls at the first hurdle for many of us, as it doesn’t handle CMYK. There is little point owning a Ferrari without a steering wheel.

1 Like

100% agree. Just even a car without a steering wheel.

My experiements with print ready items direct from Inkscape are a complete disaster, and I’ve been preparing files for print for 25 years.

I’m sure inkscape has advantages and upturns to illustrator - as illustrator has to inkscape.

If all software was the same - what would the point be.

@Smurf2 @sprout I respect You addiction to AI but that is no excuse for prejudice! the same as I said is more suitable to crafstmen while Inkscape is smooth tool for artists, saying cmyk is problem is like saying artists cant be craftsmen, no its vice versa :slight_smile:

again … focus first on creativity, then use the Ghostscript to export cmyk, or You can reproof it through Scribus … … also do bother to check eventual reset of the profile on every new output, guess clipping can popup some time, but making fuzz why cmyk exporter still is not embedded in Inkscape is exactly lazy consumeristic excuse :slight_smile:

now even for sRGB, as pointed in the video, yes every printshop should have separation engineer/s for the films, so its their laziness (and not efficiency) to match the output to the offset press if You handle them unseparated file, also not rarely people print small editions and as pointed by @PrintDriver think in that case is better to go with sRGB and laser prints … dont know just when an smooth pipeline will popup for 3d prints :slight_smile:

sRGB sucks. Its gamut doesn’t cover the entire CMYK gamut like Adobe RGB does, True there are fewer outliers, but why constrict your gamut like that. The only reason it’s out there is to make file size smaller (that’s just IMO)

Walls of text (TLDR) We get it, you like this software. Not everyone else does, though some people have used it. And car analogies don’t work. When something is broken in a car, I’d much rather pay for the repairs on a Ford than on a Ferrari, IOW, if the software is not the right tool for the job, it can be costly on output.

I don’t particularly care what you use. With the only caveat being, and bearing in mind my print field, if you send me a PDF thing out of any of the non-Adobe softwares, you get what you get. If I see something in pre-flight that’s gonna goes toes up, I will tell you, and quite possibly bounce the file (meaning you lose your print slot and possibly your deadline.)

If you are just using this for web, more power to you. That is probably more what it was aimed at when it was built anyway.

Otherwise a tool is a tool. Proselytizing any one tool over another eventually gets as boring as Mac vs PC arguments. Don’t care. (shrug)

Why would I bother doing any of that when I do it with Illustrator natively.

and there’s no addiction - what does that asinine comment mean, again with this?

I use the tools that are right for my job.
That’s it.

Refrying files through different software is not a good idea anyway.

Whatever works for you.

Inkscape doesn’t work for me.

Again, benefits of Inkscape (for me) = 0.

@PrintDriver @Smurf2 as I said the freedom of juggling with layers effects and intuitive gui workflow makes InkS light years ahead of AIL for me, even tho AIL has monopoly in the press proof trends till now …

… now I must admit Your addiction has point around the output when compared sRGB vs AdobeRGB gamut, not to talk about metallic pantone which even with Adobe is issue [1] so I wont negate that the market is hijacked in some way by mainstreamers, but Ghostscript should be to some extent useful, above all what I am pointing is that some things are way more doable as art and speed in Inkscape …

~ sRGB vs CMYK vs Adobe RGB in Film Production - Postpace Blog

the question is when the offset printing will become history, due to introduction of nanopigments and nanodyes …


anyway till then also one can reconvert an InkS svg files through AIL in the end, if the printshop engineers are lazy, altho need to point THINK in case of Inkscape Art that is stuffed with extra amount of transparencies and colors that can be suppose problem (I’ve didnt try) … probably with less colours the AIL pipeline of conversion of sRGB to CMYK or Pantone would be not too mess on the output side …

as I can see through Scribus one cant push through transparencies in CMYK, thus not doable completely like that, as pointed bellow AD also has issue … need to check the KRITA option to save it as TIFF cmyk but probably this also has issue with transparencies too?


really not sure if AffinityD pipeline can be workaround, but its corporate software, thus Ghostscript should be only way out of this for now …


… and we are done here.

@NIK … this is the last time I’m going to tell you to knock it off. I was nice yesterday and today I’m not in the mood. Any more personal jabs and you’re done.

I hope that is crystal clear now.

©2021 Graphic Design Forum | Contact | Legal | Twitter | Facebook