What is the best way to create a website layout? Corel or Photoshop?

Question

User interface

At work, the designer creates layouts in CorelDraw, and then translates them into Photoshop for layout. It seems to me that this is an irrational waste of time, or am I mistaken? Please write the comparative advantages of these programs in the context of creating layouts for layout.
UPD. It's about HTML layout. And the meaning of my question - what's the point of making a picture in a vector, if then everything should be given to the layout designer in PSD, broken down by layers. Therefore, I believe that Corel is not needed to create site layouts.

Answer 1

The site can be made without a layout. From the head or pre-draw on paper to make it easier to typeset. If you are a beginner, and judging by the post it is, then start (and continue) making layouts in Photoshop, since there are a bunch of instructions and manuals on the net.
Ps forget about the existence of CorelDraw

Answer 2

Typesetting from Photoshop is definitely more convenient. There are special tools for selecting layout fragments and saving them as an image with different quality settings. In Korel, those who work with printing mainly draw.

Answer 3

Comparative advantages of a raster photo and image editor and even a vector editor, but sharpened for printing, in the context of website design? nuuu...
It is necessary to typeset in a vector, but it is desirable not in Korel. Illustrator, Sketch or whatever. Photoshop is needed for pictures that will be raster images on the site.
You can do it in Photoshop and this has been happening for many years, but now the trend has finally begun to move away from this disgrace.

Answer 4

The age old question about tools.
A lot has been said about this already, and the answers always boil down to the fact that you can create the visual part of the design in the tool in which it works best. Yes, CorelDraw is more "sharpened" for printing, but if a person knows the tool perfectly, he is comfortable working in it, he gets a good design - why not?
I myself work in Photoshop, I know people who make the web in Illustrator and even Indesign, they have excellent results.
I can’t comment on the organization of the process with the transfer from Corel to Photoshop, I don’t know the intricacies of working with Corel. I can only intuitively assume that this is not necessary for layout, especially since Photoshop is not a layout tool.

Answer 5

A lot of designers work this way, because CorelDraw has a lot of features for drawing, and Photoshop really makes it easier to typeset. But it all depends on the practice of the designer. There are those who draw in Photoshop right away.

Answer 6

Then the same Indesign or Illustrator is more adapted to creating interfaces, at least there you can set up a masterpage, batch save graphics and a library of inherited elements. In general, vector programs have another advantage over Photoshop: you can see all the screens at the same time and easily switch between them. At the same time, there are the same layers and groups.
By the way, instead of redrawing from Corel to Photoshop, you can immediately make a competent specification, for example, in PDF. So the layout designer will be able not only to see the sizes and distances, but also to copy the names of styles and colors.

Answer 7

And in which case is it easier and faster for a layout designer to stretch a layout onto a future site template?