Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Adobe Photoshop CC - The Alternatives  (Read 16711 times)
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3021


« Reply #40 on: September 17, 2013, 04:27:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Anyone using or tried Qimage Ultimate for raw? It has a raw converter nowadays.

Hi,

Qimage Ultimate's Raw conversions are quite decent, and Qimage also has a library/catalog functionality with useful search options. It would be adequate for a lot of people, but I do not use it for that. I prefer the control and quality of Capture One for my Raw conversions. For printing, Qimage is hard to beat though.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 378



WWW
« Reply #41 on: September 17, 2013, 03:38:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I stumbled onto this from another forum, have not downloaded but it looks interesting and open source too.

http://lightzoneproject.org/

Alan
Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


WWW
« Reply #42 on: September 17, 2013, 04:25:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Lightzone is a very interesting tool. Completely different approach than anything else, but you can get some really nice results if you're willing to go through the tutorials. I also like that it is essentially the product of a very small group of people, meaning it's not likely to get watered down trying to be everything for everybody.
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 429


« Reply #43 on: September 17, 2013, 04:48:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Lightzone - never realised this still existed !

If I'm not mistaken it began life with great promise, was based on the paradigm of Ansel's zone system (and was created by two Italians, if I remember correctly, a big IF). Was not free but I guess that in the end, attractive as it was, it couldn't compete with the front runners. Wouldn't count on the RAW part but I think it can import TIFF and JPEG.
Logged
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 429


« Reply #44 on: September 18, 2013, 03:35:19 AM »
ReplyReply

One thing I really like is that PhotoLine is so efficiently coded that it can live on a USB stick and work on any computer I plug it into.

Thanks for the heads-up, Gary.

I hadn't noticed or even thought of the advantages until you pointed them out. Even if PhotoLine isn't a full alternative as it stands now, but it has great potential. Having been so spoilt by the Adobe interface over the years, it does take some getting used to - and I'm not doing so well ! Nevertheless this would seem like an ideal project to further, perhaps with some KickStarter funding ?

What we need to do today is find the development of the alternatives we will need in a few years.
My recommendation is not to waste time using alternatives, it is just to buy licenses to support those companies.

Assume you meant 'fund the development' that we may need.

It may need a bit more than just purchasing the odd licence. Adobe is a billion dollar behemoth, it'll need more than a few odd licences to develop a viable alternative. Personally, would have thought that those candidates with good potential, such as PhotoLine, would benefit from user input and encouragement to fund further development - KickStarter could be ideal for such candidates.

As it stands today, there are several RAW converter alternatives, a bevy of 'as good' if not 'better' plug-ins which many of us already own. So to avoid 'reinventing the wheel' a candidate should ideally be win/mac compatible and support PS plugins. Small playing field so far.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2013, 04:22:39 AM by Manoli » Logged
dds
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18


« Reply #45 on: September 18, 2013, 12:49:06 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm interested in PhotoLIne too. From reading the manual, it can do pretty much everything I do in Photoshop. I'm curious about how interoperable it is with other software.

A couple of question to those who have tried it: are PhotoLine layers interchangeable with Photoshop layers? Can I open a layered TIFF created in Photoshop and edit the layers? Can I open a layered TIFF made in Photoline and edit the layers?

Also, can a RAW file edited in ACR, Lightroom, C1 or Iridient Developer be viewed in PhotoLine's browser as edited?

Thanks for any info.
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3078



WWW
« Reply #46 on: September 18, 2013, 01:36:02 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm interested in PhotoLIne too. From reading the manual, it can do pretty much everything I do in Photoshop. I'm curious about how interoperable it is with other software.

A couple of question to those who have tried it: are PhotoLine layers interchangeable with Photoshop layers? Can I open a layered TIFF created in Photoshop and edit the layers? Can I open a layered TIFF made in Photoline and edit the layers?

Also, can a RAW file edited in ACR, Lightroom, C1 or Iridient Developer be viewed in PhotoLine's browser as edited?

Thanks for any info.
I would imagine if you save your files as layered TIFFs/PSDs then you'll be able to then edit your layers in any software that opens layer Tiffs/PSDs.
What you won't be able to tweak is layer types that are features of one type of software and not another. For example adjustment layers, smart objects that work fine in PS may not function in Photoline if it doesn't have those exact same capabilities.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
dds
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18


« Reply #47 on: September 18, 2013, 02:51:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, jjj. I'm not too worried about smart objects, but I would like to be able to revisit basic adjustment layers--curves, hue/sat, etc. I suppose that's too much to ask. Do those just get flattened into the TIFF when moving from one program to another?
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7528



WWW
« Reply #48 on: September 18, 2013, 03:20:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Assume you meant 'fund the development' that we may need.

It may need a bit more than just purchasing the odd licence. Adobe is a billion dollar behemoth, it'll need more than a few odd licences to develop a viable alternative. Personally, would have thought that those candidates with good potential, such as PhotoLine, would benefit from user input and encouragement to fund further development - KickStarter could be ideal for such candidates.

As it stands today, there are several RAW converter alternatives, a bevy of 'as good' if not 'better' plug-ins which many of us already own. So to avoid 'reinventing the wheel' a candidate should ideally be win/mac compatible and support PS plugins. Small playing field so far.

Yes, a Kickstarter project is something I have suggested several times here, but it is not something I can start on their behalf.

Buying a license is something we can all do today, hence my recommendation.

Very small companies use money tens of times more efficiently than large corporations like Adobe. A few thousands of licenses extra of Photoline would enable them to hire one or two top talent developers in the coming weeks and that will make a huge difference in 6 months to one year.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3078



WWW
« Reply #49 on: September 18, 2013, 05:48:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, jjj. I'm not too worried about smart objects, but I would like to be able to revisit basic adjustment layers--curves, hue/sat, etc. I suppose that's too much to ask. Do those just get flattened into the TIFF when moving from one program to another?
Try it and see.  Smiley
Oh and smart object are awesomely useful.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 429


« Reply #50 on: September 19, 2013, 02:09:56 AM »
ReplyReply

A few thousands of licenses extra of Photoline would enable them to hire one or two top talent developers in the coming weeks and that will make a huge difference in 6 months to one year.

Regrettably, it seems that the duo owner/programmer team of PhotoLine are not interested in expanding their development team nor attracting any more funding. As they put it, " .. we are working on PhotoLine for about 20 years now. Our plans for the future are to do this for the next years the same way :-) "
Logged
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3021


« Reply #51 on: September 19, 2013, 03:13:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Regrettably, it seems that the duo owner/programmer team of PhotoLine are not interested in expanding their development team nor attracting any more funding. As they put it, " .. we are working on PhotoLine for about 20 years now. Our plans for the future are to do this for the next years the same way :-) "

Hi,

They probably won't mind selling some more licenses though, and it will keep their dedication focused on further development. They've chosen for a lean team, low cost, direct communication lines, and they produce a Photoshop plugin aware tool with an amazingly small memory footprint.

Cheers,
Bart
« Last Edit: September 19, 2013, 04:06:34 AM by BartvanderWolf » Logged
Wayland
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74



WWW
« Reply #52 on: September 19, 2013, 04:19:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Unfortunately it will not do a full read of layered TIFF files written by PhotoShop because apparently PS embeds a PSD into the TIFF to carry over the full information.

It reads it as a flat file but that is not ideal.

Ironically, PL seems to read PSD files better that PS TIFF files.

File transfer is still going to be an issue whichever alternative we go for.
Logged

Wayland.
aka. Gary Waidson
Enter theWaylandscape...
kkopchynski
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #53 on: September 25, 2013, 02:16:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

I have been using Picture Window Pro for many years for advanced photo editing.  I did buy a copy of PS 5 when it had a deep discount just to see if I was missing anything, but I don't use it.  I recently started to use Lightroom for basic edits, and PWP for advanced masking work.  I also have the Nik/Google plugins for LR which are very handy.  I also use PanoTools Assembler, SNS-HDR, and TuFuse Pro for panos, focus stacking, and HDR work. I had seen PhotoLine mentioned in other forums and I intend to have a look soon.  As a previous poster noted, the workflow isn't quite as smooth (although I bet all the mentioned programs except LR could be opened in the time that it takes PS to open), but one can obtain quality results.

Best regards,
Kevin
Logged
GrantLB
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #54 on: September 25, 2013, 10:30:47 PM »
ReplyReply

OK I admit it, I don't get it. You've got the best photo editing software on the planet with Lightroom and Photoshop CC and you guys are looking for alternatives? I guess you're not that interested in getting the best from your images. Seriously, $10 a month and you cry fowel. Give me a break. Does anyone remember shooting Kodachrome at $15-20 a crack and for only 36 exposures and you had to wait maybe a week to 10 days to see your results. Please! You were spending more than that in chemistry, film and paper.

Give your heads a shake. People spend more than $10 a month on coffee. Everyone had the chance (and still does) to develop something equal to or better than either LR or PS, but they haven't.

You guys have lost it.

Maybe you should just be playing checkers in the park... that's free. Not supporting any BIG CORPORATIONS then, the big meanies.
Logged
LesPalenik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 380


WWW
« Reply #55 on: September 26, 2013, 12:24:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
OK I admit it, I don't get it. You've got the best photo editing software on the planet with Lightroom and Photoshop CC and you guys are looking for alternatives? I guess you're not that interested in getting the best from your images. Seriously, $10 a month and you cry fowel. Give me a break.

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.


Logged

ButchM
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


« Reply #56 on: September 26, 2013, 06:22:36 AM »
ReplyReply

OK I admit it, I don't get it. You've got the best photo editing software on the planet with Lightroom and Photoshop CC and you guys are looking for alternatives?

Well ... how would this all work if there were only one option for cameras, lenses, flash, printers, computers, etc., etc., etc. .... Would we be better off if there was only Canon, or only Nikon? Who benefits more from the lack of a viable competitor? ... The virtual monopolistic software developer ... or their customers? Once everyone is locked in to a subscription plan, don't you think you would benefit from a competitor to keep Adobe engineers on their toes driving them to innovate faster and further and to force the executives to keep prices reasonable? Celebrating a temporary, affordable monthly stipend may not be wise for the long haul ... for once you board the train and there are no other options to complete your journey via other means ... who suffers most from a lack of competition?

The most popular does not always equate with being the "best." While Ps and Lr do some things extremely well, there are areas where they really may not be the "best" options ... if they were, how do you explain the thriving plugin industry? ... Also there are a few other areas in PS and Lr where there are dismal failures. You only have to look at them with open eyes to see where the flaws may be. Adobe is by no means pure perfection.

Does anyone remember shooting Kodachrome at $15-20 a crack and for only 36 exposures and you had to wait maybe a week to 10 days to see your results. Please! You were spending more than that in chemistry, film and paper.

Yes, I remember that era all too well ... and your example is exactly why I was ecstatic when Kodak made E-6 chemicals readily available so we did not have to be chained to their Kodachrome lab and could turn around Ektachrome or Fujichrome in under an hour. Viable options benefit everyone and are liberating for the marketplace. Opportunity, such as the one that Adobe presented to their competition on May 6 opened the door for some folks who firmly believed there was no such opening to attract customers away from the "best" ... I for one hope they do venture forth in a meaningful way.

I guess you're not that interested in getting the best from your images. Seriously, $10 a month and you cry fowel. Give me a break.

Give your heads a shake. People spend more than $10 a month on coffee. Everyone had the chance (and still does) to develop something equal to or better than either LR or PS, but they haven't.

For me it isn't, nor has it ever been, about the price ... but whether the investment of that price will enhance my bottom line. That is the rule I apply to any purchase I make for my business. Photoshop CC does not have one new feature or enhancement that would contribute to the cause. Yet Adobe has set up a structure that not only insists I reward them for their efforts, they also place a set-in-stone expiration date on the deal. It's about much more than the price of entry alone. Adobe no longer wishes to be rewarded based upon merit, but for time in service. That is a recipe for complacency that is only exacerbated in the absence of a  legitimate competitor. In that case we all lose.

You guys have lost it.

I'm not quite sure about that ... Wouldn't it make more sense to have options? ... Would you show up to a paid job with only one camera, one lens, one flash, one memory card? Or do you keep some redundant backup options handy in case of trouble? ... Why shouldn't we do that with our software solutions as well? Wouldn't that be the intelligent method of conducting business? Or is it more wise to advise your fellow photographers to "shake their head" and board the bus like lemmings?
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2401


« Reply #57 on: September 26, 2013, 06:46:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote GrantLB Reply#54

Give your heads a shake. People spend more than $10 a month on coffee. Everyone had the chance (and still does) to develop something equal to or better than either LR or PS, but they haven't.


Unquote

A lot of people don't pay anything for PS as it is so an outlay of 10 dollars is an increase? Wink
Logged

kkopchynski
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #58 on: September 26, 2013, 07:00:05 AM »
ReplyReply

OK I admit it, I don't get it. You've got the best photo editing software on the planet with Lightroom and Photoshop CC

Not that I've seen.  I tried merge to HDR and photostitching in PS, and it could not equal the results I get with HDR Efex 2, Photomatix, SNS, or PT Assembler.  It is very good software, but equal results can be had with others, and I AM getting the best from my images without it.  It always has been grossly overpriced.  None of the options I mention are free, but they are reasonably priced, perform well, and do not try to permanently siphon money from you.

"Only $xx a month" is a primary cause of so many families being financially stressed.  Too many people say that too many times a month.  This is a hobby, not a business, to most people and I think it is very appropriate that people are drawing the line on this on principle.  At any price, this would be one of the worst cases of vendor lock-in ever.

Thanks,
Kevin
Logged
Benny Profane
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #59 on: September 26, 2013, 07:03:54 AM »
ReplyReply

OK I admit it, I don't get it. You've got the best photo editing software on the planet with Lightroom and Photoshop CC and you guys are looking for alternatives? I guess you're not that interested in getting the best from your images. Seriously, $10 a month and you cry fowel. Give me a break. Does anyone remember shooting Kodachrome at $15-20 a crack and for only 36 exposures and you had to wait maybe a week to 10 days to see your results. Please! You were spending more than that in chemistry, film and paper.

Give your heads a shake. People spend more than $10 a month on coffee. Everyone had the chance (and still does) to develop something equal to or better than either LR or PS, but they haven't.

You guys have lost it.

Maybe you should just be playing checkers in the park... that's free. Not supporting any BIG CORPORATIONS then, the big meanies.

Hey, I'm no big fan of monopolies, but, I agree with your sentiment here. The protesters are going to find it to be quite a futile exercise trying to find an alternative. Maybe amateurs can convince themselves that some cheap, poorly engineered software package can replace their Adobe programs, but, as a pro, I don't see it. It is unfortunate, in a way, because our tech industry out there in the valley is full of really smart people who seem to have access to hundreds of billions of dollars of private capital for a startup, but, all we get out of it is crap like Facebook and Groupon and stupid apps that tell the already wealthy how to find the coolest bar and coffee shop around the corner, or even schedule a private jet (I kid you not).

I am working for a manager who is a tad intellectually challenged, and more than once he has mentioned alternatives to Photoshop. I have told him in no uncertain terms that I am gone if that ever happens. It's really for his own good. Imagine the costs and hassles if he switched, just to save a few bucks and stick it to the man. Or, quite simply, how would he find good retouchers? It's already difficult right now.

Sorry, but they have us firmly by the you know whats, and, you should get comfortable with the grip. It ain't going away soon.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad