For one thing, InDesign was born to do layout, and it excels in layout. InDesign may be useless when it comes to removing pimples from your photos or adding a certain look to your artwork, but it’s certainly not useless in every way.
That’s because InDesign was created for other purposes. You won’t find anything about photo editing in InDesign tutorials. InDesign has almost no photo editing capacities, even less than Illustrator. There’s no question that it will win in that department in almost every way. Photoshop was born and bred for photo editing, hence the name. The liquidation tool, for distorting images.The burn and dodge tools, for shading images.Just a few of the specialized tools for image editing which Photoshop has and InDesign conspicuously lacks include: Photoshop has nearly all the benefits when it comes to image editing, because that’s what the program’s designed for. In a competition based on the editing of rasterized images, who will win between the two programs? Spoiler alert, it’s Photoshop. InDesign vs Photoshop for Rasterized Editing In this blog post, I take these two great Adobe programs, InDesign and Photoshop, and see which one wins. What’s the point of learning a whole new program, following InDesign tutorials and reading up about InDesign, when you already know a great program like Photoshop? Is InDesign that much better than Photoshop and will it save you enough time to make the process of following InDesign tutorials worth it? To answer those questions, we have to take a closer look at the two programs.