Are there any downsides for using illustrator rather and photoshop for paintings? I know illustrator is good for simple things that can be scaled infinitely.
don't be so butthurt anon. i advised on learning the difference between pixel and vector, so the OP would know what to expect from different programs.
you can hardly actually paint in Ai but that desn't mean you can't create good art with it.
I am a freelance graphic artist (layouts not logos) and I use both for the "art" that I create. Learn to use both. There are some things Ai does really well but you can always start something in Ai and then bring it into Ps to finish. Textures for instance are a lot easier to work with in Ps after you complete a vector piece.
Yes I know it's shit, and there is a reason I do layout vs anything that requires real talent. Bottom line is Ai can make some dope shit if you learn to use it and remember that Ps is also powerful when combined with Ai.
They're both good programs in what they do, but each program was developed with its own goal in mind and as such the way they work is fundamentally different. It's a bit like comparing painting in gouache with crafting paper cut-out collages.
You're not going to get a brushy/painterly effect with Illustrator, but if you're going for a look with sharp edges and very consistent/even flats and gradients it'd be quite suitable.
If the scaling is that big a factor, there's actually decent third-party software that lets you paint in vector like you would in bitmap, such as Mischief and Black Ink. But working at a high resolution (300-600dpi) in a raster-based program and scaling down before upload would be a perfectly sensible solution too.
Did you not read my post? To be fair I did fuckup calling myself a graphic artist vs a designer which is what I really am, but I did clearly state I do layouts not logos or any real "art". Layouts is mostly drawing boxes and lines and listening to client's say, "It needs more pop!"