[cmoses]

I was wondering if anyone would post their Illustrator file for their poker chips? I have been using Photoshop to play around with some designs for both chips or lables. But it is clear that Illustrator is the preffered program. I downloaded the trial from Adobe's site, but am lost. It looks like Photoshop but does not act like it. I was hoping that if I could see the makings of a chip then I could start there and see how it is broken down and created. I was able to do something similar when I first started with Photoshop. I think it was a template from Daper Dan that I used to learn. Anyone that could provide any assistance would be appreceiated.

Thanks
Clayton

[yster]

Pretty sure you're sorely confused as to what these two programs are...

Photoshop is a primarily bitmap oriented software. It's geared to create digital art, edit pictures, and paste your buddy's head on inappropriate bodies.

Illustrator is a primarily vector graphic oriented software, which means it's friendly towards scalable images and shapes. It's suited for creating company logos and other branding, and graphics that can be blown up to poster size and beyond without turning into a nasty image with jagged edges.

Illustrator and Photoshop can be used on equal footing when creating tiny little images for poker chips. In fact, I'd say you'd want to flesh out the designs in Photoshop, personally. That's what I did

[puzzlemonkey]

Originally Posted by yster

Pretty sure you're sorely confused as to what these two programs are...

Photoshop is a primarily bitmap oriented software. It's geared to create digital art, edit pictures, and paste your buddy's head on inappropriate bodies.

Illustrator is a primarily vector graphic oriented software, which means it's friendly towards scalable images and shapes. It's suited for creating company logos and other branding, and graphics that can be blown up to poster size and beyond without turning into a nasty image with jagged edges.

Illustrator and Photoshop can be used on equal footing when creating tiny little images for poker chips. In fact, I'd say you'd want to flesh out the designs in Photoshop, personally. That's what I did

While it's definitely true that Photoshop is the program to use for bitmap editing, it's not necessarily true that you'll automatically want to use it for your chip design.

Image size is not the concern here. If your design is text intensive, Illustrator's going to be much easier to use. But more importantly, if by chance you're designing yourself a set of Chipcos, you'll have to deliver it as an Illustrator file (with very specific color requirements), and it will make delivery time faster and possibly improve the image quality if you're able to generate all of your images in Illustrator.

[wolispenok]

Hello

I have just designed custom labels and ASMs inlays and guess what? The best thing is to go with vector software (I am with Corel).

I have draw all the elements such as circles, text, Japanese crests, ideograms and flames on CorelDraw and they look perfect there but one thing I was missing was to see the inlay or label combined with the chip.

So I have gone to the ASM color sim and captured some screen shots and played with them in Photoshop (only resizing and cleaning - and any bitmap software will do for this). From there I would export these to CorelDraw where I could see my inlays or labels 'on' the chips. And it made a damn difference.

I cant imagine when you would touch Photoshop on a custom as you would have to deal with an image generated by yourself or have rights from third party stuff. I have recently tried to tweak designs with bitmap filters but I really cant express how disgusting they become.

[circlencircle]

Originally Posted by wolispenok

I cant imagine when you would touch Photoshop on a custom as you would have to deal with an image generated by yourself or have rights from third party stuff. I have recently tried to tweak designs with bitmap filters but I really cant express how disgusting they become.

Personally I use Photoshop for almost all my work and supplement with Illustrator... That’s just me.. I am very familure with it and I can work quickly. Particularly now with the new CS2 version and the use of Smart Objects in PS, I have no problems maintaining image quality. I probably use PS 75% and Illustrator 25%...

Vector images generally speaking are going to be better for the scale we are talking about but you can still use bitmaps in some situations and particularly with some more advanced techniques vectors may not even be suitable for your project...

Additionally, Photoshop and Illustrator have become the true standard in most cases and by learning how to use them well you can open many doors in the graphic design world...

[yster]

Originally Posted by wolispenok

Hello
I have just designed custom labels and ASMs inlays and guess what? The best thing is to go with vector software (I am with Corel).

Guess what? I just designed 2000 chips worth of custom ASMs with Photoshop. You're not making any point here. If it makes a damn difference what software you're authoring your images in if you're trying to do the same exact thing in each, I'd figure you don't know what you're doing in at least one of those programs. circlencircle makes the most sense to use both where needed and applicable...

I'm not sure if this is actually news, but just because huge blown up picture examples of your chips made in [whatever vector program] look great does not mean that they look any better shrunk down onto your inlay design. When you use a graphics program to generate images at the maximum resolution the printing equipment can use, then you're fine... even possibly doing yourself a favor since you're looking at the sample that will be fed into production. Using vector images makes no difference at this stage, they're rendered at the same quality and fed through the same way.

To the comment that about text intensive designs, I'm curious to know why Illustrator is going to be any easier to use. I see Illustrator as being without the ability to easily apply the robust layer effects PS is able to give, and overall as long as you know what you're doing as per the above paragraph, with the amount of vector driven stuff in Photoshop CS it's really the ideal choice, or like I said, it was for me. I'm quite proud of my custom ASM design; I challenge one to show me where AI would have done the job better. My art is free to see. The only very specific color requirements that make any sense at all is to use CMYK, and frankly you should expect that or get someone with more experience to do the art with/for you.

Rehashing my original statement through this noise, the decision to make should specifically be based on the comfort level amongst the software, and [quite obviously] the demands on the format by the vendor. If Chipco insists on .AI images, then that's that, but it would make things harder for the uneducated since AI is largely more complicated to use. Pen tool bad, mmkay?

[circlencircle]

Originally Posted by yster

Guess what? I just designed 2000 chips worth of custom ASMs with Photoshop. You're not making any point here. If it makes a damn difference what software you're authoring your images in if you're trying to do the same exact thing in each, I'd figure you don't know what you're doing in at least one of those programs. circlencircle makes the most sense to use both where needed and applicable...

I'm not sure if this is actually news, but just because huge blown up picture examples of your chips made in [whatever vector program] look great does not mean that they look any better shrunk down onto your inlay design. When you use a graphics program to generate images at the maximum resolution the printing equipment can use, then you're fine... even possibly doing yourself a favor since you're looking at the sample that will be fed into production. Using vector images makes no difference at this stage, they're rendered at the same quality and fed through the same way.

To the comment that about text intensive designs, I'm curious to know why Illustrator is going to be any easier to use. I see Illustrator as being without the ability to easily apply the robust layer effects PS is able to give, and overall as long as you know what you're doing as per the above paragraph, with the amount of vector driven stuff in Photoshop CS it's really the ideal choice, or like I said, it was for me. I'm quite proud of my custom ASM design; I challenge one to show me where AI would have done the job better. My art is free to see. The only very specific color requirements that make any sense at all is to use CMYK, and frankly you should expect that or get someone with more experience to do the art with/for you.

Rehashing my original statement through this noise, the decision to make should specifically be based on the comfort level amongst the software, and [quite obviously] the demands on the format by the vendor. If Chipco insists on .AI images, then that's that, but it would make things harder for the uneducated since AI is largely more complicated to use. Pen tool bad, mmkay?

Thanks for all the information here. I am just learning and have been self taught over the last few months. I have often wondered about some of the things you mentioned but I was never sure what the right answer was. Thanks again for affirming some of my thoughts.

[wolispenok]

First of all I don't want to start a forum war or anything like this. I am on the side of people who believe you can get something from Internet communities.
I also respect your point of view (and I am still wondering if your avatar -yster - is someone famous or if it´s you posing for a conference picture).

So let´s go back to the designing stuff.

Let´s take the American Beauties chips. You get very good images as you have the rights for these. You go to PS cuts the pinup from the background and start tweaking colors and all. Then what? Well you go to any vector software such as AI for the borders.
Ah... the same for the Egyptians...

The Classics design from ChipCo is one example where vector software was the only tool needed.
Ah... The Vineyard family is also the same... And the Suits...

And some clays also go this way such as the Mardi Gras and 9 out of 10 designs ASM prints.

And for a grand finale: 'dice' chips pattern has probably been first drawn as vectors.

Bottom line is that if you don´t own an image you cant go scanning and you will have to draw something similar. Best place for drawings? Vector software.

PS may work as the most important tool for the main portion of the chip like the American Beauties. But again we are talking about images people got the right to use.

If you are not going this way you should really consider vector.

PS: I have just remembered a PS only chip design: a Marvel Chipco set with images only. Well you need the rights for these too.

[OnTheButton]

As a veteran graphic designer I will offer up some possible answers here.

Photoshop is a bitmap program, used for photo editing. Think of working in Photoshop as filling in the squares on a piece of graph paper with different colored squares. Once you enlarge the graphic if you don't have enough PPI (pixels per inch, think of the pixels as the squares on the paper) you will start to see these 'squares" in the grid of the design. Photoshop is what is considered "resolution dependant" wherein you have a limitation on the physical enlargement of the file based on the PPI of the file.

Illustrator is vector based, used for creating "hard edged" graphics. Think back to geometry where you would plot two or more points on a graph and draw a line between them. Objects created in Illustrator (or a vector based program) can be designed the size of postage stamp and the mathematics of those points and lines allow you to output it at the size of a billboard and they will reproduce clearly. Vector based graphics are "resolution independant."

I own a large format (banners, trade show booths, presentation boards) and these two file formats come into a great deal of play against each other when the original file is supposed to be printed 10 feet high.

If it does not have the proper resolution, a Photoshop file will look like "floor tiles" when enlarged, and and illustrator file will still have sharp clean edges.

But... You can't (or should not) edit a 'raster' based file (aka photograph) in Adobe Illustrator, nor (if possible) should you set text in Adobe Photoshop.

They are two totally different graphics applications, designed to work side by side to produce two totally different desired results.

In relation to a 2" chip design however, this is ALMOST a moot point, as the resolution of the file even if high (say 500-600 PPI) will still produce a small enough file that is reasonable to work with, and will probably not produce a noticeable difference when it comes to working with it or processing it to a print of some kind.

Adobe Illustrator is a wonderful program but is it NOT a substitute for Adobe Photoshop. They are designed to work hand in hand to accomplish two separate tasks in the design world.

If you have any specific questions about either of them, I've taught semimars on them both, and will be happy to try and answer them for you.

[yster]

yeah. that's a bit of a restatement. "floor tiles" is a good way to explain things.

My avatar is Wink Martindale.

Not sure about the Chipco designs, but ASM inlays are 150dpi. I set my text without any complaints from anyone in Photoshop.

Enough of this. My challenge is on the table, and we don't need any further knucklehead remarks. If someone can show me how AI would have done a better job with my inlays, then I'm all ears. Otherwise, I reckon we can file this and move on.