Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe Photoshop CC - The Alternatives  (Read 16317 times)
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #80 on: September 27, 2013, 03:20:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Can we STAY ON TOPIC PLEASE ?

This thread is supposed to be looking at alternatives to Photoshop CC.
NOT whether Photoshop is the best image editor, nor whether subscriptions services are a good thing. There are many other threads to discuss this.

Come on folks, exercise a bit of self discipline here.
Logged
Benny Profane
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #81 on: September 27, 2013, 07:20:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Ok then, there are none. Sorry, but, the only "alternative" to Photoshop is either Lightroom or Aperture, the latter your best choice outside of Adobe. That's it. Sure, go ahead and spend hours learning some glitchy, not so well thought out software developed by a company that may very well not be around in a few years, or, is swallowed up by another company and changes it's culture and relationship to you on a dime. Trust me, the other software ditties mentioned in this thread are not even considered by pros, and pros are the market any developer develops for. Unfortunately, we are, and always have been, a small market, not profitable enough to warrant the investment by more than one company to compete. Even then, Adobe is always trying to grow into Microsoft or something, just trying to keep up with their Ferrari driving brethren in the Valley when it comes to stock price, by finding "business solutions". That's what it's all about, you know. The stock price. You don't really matter.
Logged
LesPalenik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 379


WWW
« Reply #82 on: September 28, 2013, 12:13:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
OK, lemme s'plain.
Most posters don't complain about $120 cost per year, but about being bullied into the subscription model.
Furthermore, so far Adobe didn't add much to the Photoshop features since they announced their watery invention. Whatever found its way into PS CC, is not even worth $10.
Can you please elaborate what the differences are between PS CC and PS6? If you don't know, how can you tell they are worth $10?

Good question, since we don't hear about any significant features that were added. I looked it up for you, here is the official link:
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/whats-new.html

I didn't see there anything that would help me to be more productive. The last substantial addition to the Photoshop (at least in my experience) was the Content Aware Fill in CS5. That was definitely worth the price of the upgrade. Maybe once they get the Camera Shake Reduction right, it might be worthwhile to upgrade again. 

Logged

stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2390


« Reply #83 on: September 28, 2013, 03:13:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Can we STAY ON TOPIC PLEASE ?

This thread is supposed to be looking at alternatives to Photoshop CC.
NOT whether Photoshop is the best image editor, nor whether subscriptions services are a good thing. There are many other threads to discuss this.

Come on folks, exercise a bit of self discipline here.

You stated in an other thread that you didn't like winding people up? You can't discuss alternatives without emphasising how good Photoshop is. It has to be stated how good it is before comparisons can be made. Huh
Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #84 on: September 28, 2013, 01:24:47 PM »
ReplyReply

It has to be stated how good it is before comparisons can be made. Huh
Just read the original first post;
"a thread where members can exchange their views, experiences (both pro & con) on the alternatives."

It's not about comparisons, it's about what's out there and what it can do.


Logged
ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #85 on: September 28, 2013, 01:56:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Ok then, there are none.

Wile I agree, there are currently no other options that equal Ps in total capabilities. Though, I don't think a viable alternative actually needs to match Ps point for point on each and every function that Ps can offer. Considering that Ps has been a classic example of bloatware for quite some time, and the average photographer does not need, require or even utilize probably 80% of what Ps can do ... all we need is something is an alternate source for a finite list of widely used core functionality. After all ... didn't very well-connected insiders tell us that Photoshop was never "intended" for photographers ... Well, I for one, have learned my lesson.

Since the advent of Lr and Aperture, less than 5% of my images ever see Ps. There is no need to use it for each and every image. The only functions I need Ps for that can't be accomplished by Lr or Aperture is for compositing multi-image designs with text for posters, book covers and special projects. I do utilize Batch Processing from time to time, but I likely could accomplish that using scripting with another app. I also offer CMYK conversions for a few clients who request that service for the images I provide them. Give me layers, layer styles, good masking with a Refine Edge type control ... and I'm good to go  ... I don't need, want or really care if an alternate option can't do ALL of what Ps can do ...

Even though some folks may think this discussion is an exercise in futility, and who would rather we all shut up and get in line for CC, are overlooking the possibility that perhaps an enterprising entrepreneur will stumble across our concerns in a web search, read the discussion and start the ball rolling for something that can fill our needs.

I don't need an alternate option today. CS6 is working just fine. Fortunately, it doesn't have an expiration date set in stone. There is time for other developers to step up and take a swing and see what transpires.
Logged
smthopr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #86 on: September 28, 2013, 02:17:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Ironically, for moving images there are many choices. For a professional app, the price range is free(resolve light-max res 1920x1080) to $10,000+.

If any company could create an alternative, it would be these guys!

But note: none are as well designed as Photoshop Smiley
Logged

Bruce Alan Greene
www.brucealangreene.com
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2390


« Reply #87 on: September 29, 2013, 03:29:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Just read the original first post;
"a thread where members can exchange their views, experiences (both pro & con) on the alternatives."

It's not about comparisons, it's about what's out there and what it can do.




To evaluate the alternatives comparisons must be made, the strengths and weaknesses? It isn't enough to give a laundry list of them and leave it at that. The posters clearly don't agree with your narrow definition, hence the debate and imo a reasonable one.
Logged

Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #88 on: September 29, 2013, 05:25:17 AM »
ReplyReply

To evaluate the alternatives comparisons must be made, the strengths and weaknesses? It isn't enough to give a laundry list of them and leave it at that. The posters clearly don't agree with your narrow definition, hence the debate and imo a reasonable one.

Well , it has little to do with comparisons, and even less of a 'narrow definition'.

Rhossyd is entirely correct when he says that this thread is 'about what's out there and what it can do'. At least that was the intention of the OP.  As I'm the OP, I should know.

This thread was started with the hope that it could be somewhere that forum members could exchange their views and experiences, good, not-so-good, strengths & weaknesses, in both using alternatives and on how best to substitute Ps.

Photoshop is a huge program, representing many things to many people.  Very few need all the capabilities all of the time, whilst no-one is disputing it's 'leader-of-the-pack' status -  many, myself included, use a variety of plug-ins to supplement Ps. It is about how best to combine other alternatives, and how suitable these alternatives are to each one's varying needs.

Jeff Schewe started a thread some time ago entitled “ If Thomas designed a new Photoshop for photographers now … “ 
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=78240.msg627797#msg627797

In the same vein, this thread could be entitled “ How best to make do without Photoshop … (for photographers)“

It is not about Photoshop v Others.
It is not about about perpetual v subscription.
It is not about whether or not Photoshop is currently the only realistic option.

Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #89 on: September 29, 2013, 06:50:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I've recently downloaded GIMP 2.8.6 – haven't had much time to explore it's capabilities or otherwise, but a few things impressed.

New interface, customisable toolbar ( satisfies my addiction to a minimalist layout) , dockable panes (dialogs in gimp-speak), curves, layers, quick mask & layer masks, enough blending modes, ability to import a sequence of photographs as layers – plus a menu layout that is logical and I like !

I'm running OS X – no need to install, just drag the icon to Applications or simply click on the 'Gimp'. Footprint is small, you can keep it on a USB stick - 99 mb .dmg that expands to 275 mb.

It seems an excellent adjunct to Lr - providing the 'layer' support that Lr is lacking.
Logged
StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #90 on: September 29, 2013, 06:53:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I went through this search and whatever the other products, I always stumbled on the problem of having layered files understood by LightRoom, ACDSee or Capture One. I could live with either of those 3 RAW developer/cataloguer combinations, but none of them supports anything but PhotoShop files! None of them will support Photoline files and none of them will support PaintShop Pro files.

I could live with either Photoline or PaintShopPro.

The major problem with the alternatives is the lack of inter-operability between them. It is just as if they could not see they are overlooking the one point that gives Adobe such an advantage. Capture One will not even support DNG! They have the right not to like DNG, of course. But ignoring the fact that many people now have lots of DNG files only negates them any chance to win those people over as customers.

So the problem for the lack of competition is not an evil plan from Adobe. It is more due to the competitors' stunning lack of vision.
Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #91 on: September 29, 2013, 06:55:29 AM »
ReplyReply

I've recently downloaded GIMP 2.8.6 – haven't had much time to explore it's capabilities or otherwise, but a few things impressed.

Wait until you try to use adjustment layers in Gimp.
Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #92 on: September 29, 2013, 07:25:21 AM »
ReplyReply

I always stumbled on the problem of having layered files understood by LightRoom, ACDSee or Capture One ... The major problem with the alternatives is the lack of inter-operability between them.

That's no major surprise, Stephane. It's a given that layered files contain proprietary technology which will not / cannot necessarily be read by other (competing) programs. Lightroom, though has no problem reading my CS6 layered files.

Reference your comment about Gimp adjustment layers, the only one I've checked, and probably the only one I'll ever need to use are Curves. It works. Perhaps not as 'glitzy', but perfectly usable. There is a 16-bit version of GIMP under development.

The big advantage, as I see it, is that you can export multiple copies from say Lightroom and import them in 'one go' into gimp for blending, dodging, burning etc. Obviously not parametric and not layered - you'll export them as flattened tiff's. But it does give Lightroom, and others, a (destructive) layer functionality that has been missing.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2013, 08:04:55 AM by Manoli » Logged
StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #93 on: September 29, 2013, 11:27:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Reference your comment about Gimp adjustment layers, the only one I've checked, and probably the only one I'll ever need to use are Curves. It works. Perhaps not as 'glitzy', but perfectly usable.

That's surprising since Gimp does not have adjustment layers.

There is a 16-bit version of GIMP under development.

That was already the case in 2001. Don't hold your breath.
Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #94 on: September 29, 2013, 11:58:27 AM »
ReplyReply

That's surprising since Gimp does not have adjustment layers.

Are you sure you know what you're using - GIMP v2.8.6 ?
Have you actually used it or are you simply spouting ... ?
Either way, irrelevant - GIMP most definitely does have adjustment layers.
It would be more helpful if you commented on software you've actually used.
Screenshot attached.

« Last Edit: September 30, 2013, 03:27:23 AM by Manoli » Logged
Wayland
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74



WWW
« Reply #95 on: September 29, 2013, 04:54:01 PM »
ReplyReply

It sounds to me as if the people spouting nonsense and trying to run this thread off the rails have not even tried looking at the alternatives.

If you can't add anything useful to this thread why not go and troll in some other thread instead.
Logged

Wayland.
aka. Gary Waidson
Enter theWaylandscape...
Benny Profane
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #96 on: September 29, 2013, 07:56:10 PM »
ReplyReply


Even though some folks may think this discussion is an exercise in futility, and who would rather we all shut up and get in line for CC, are overlooking the possibility that perhaps an enterprising entrepreneur will stumble across our concerns in a web search, read the discussion and start the ball rolling for something that can fill our needs.

Well, listen. Adobe isn't dumb, in this regard. They'll just market all sorts of packages for various levels of the market. You know, like a Porsche Cayman vs a Porsche Carrera 4S. The possibilities are many.

Gimp. Who in the world would name their product Gimp?
Logged
StephaneB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


WWW
« Reply #97 on: September 30, 2013, 02:02:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Are you sure you know what you're using - GIMP v2.8.6 ?
Have you actually used it or are you simply spouting ... ?
Either way, irrelevant - GIMP most definitely does have adjustment layers.
It would be more helpful if you commented on software you've actually used.
Screenshot attached.


The screen shot you show has nothing to do with adjustment layers. You seem to mix up layers, adjustments and adjustment layers. Three different things.

If all you want is an alternative to PhotoShop and you do not use LightRoom, then PhotoLine is great. It is an excellent program, very rich with relevant features like adjustment layers, actually more developed than PhotoShop in that area.

Yes, I have used Gimp.
Logged


Stéphane

My Webpage

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1862


WWW
« Reply #98 on: September 30, 2013, 02:32:59 AM »
ReplyReply

That was already the case in 2001. Don't hold your breath.
There's no rush. Our existing perpetual  licences will still work for many years before a replacement for PS is needed.
It is at least in beta now from what I can see.

Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


« Reply #99 on: September 30, 2013, 03:44:21 AM »
ReplyReply

The screen shot you show has nothing to do with adjustment layers.

My original post simply stated

New interface, customisable toolbar, dockable panes (dialogs in gimp-speak), curves, layers, quick mask & layer masks, enough blending modes, ability to import a sequence of photographs as layers ...  It seems an excellent adjunct to Lr - providing the 'layer' support that Lr is lacking.

The emphasis was as an adjunct to Lightroom
I inferred (from your reply #93) that you were commenting on my curves post above.

Photoline is a good program but has been discussed previously
( http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=81795.msg664986#msg664986 )
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad