Image software

Hello,

Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital
photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a
cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is
cheap(er)?

Thanks,

Oaf

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:50:49 -0800, wrote:

Hello,

Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital
photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a cheaper
alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is cheap(er)?

Thanks,

Oaf

Yes. Gimp has the major functionality and is free (Open Source). I use
ufraw to do my conversions from raw and find that it meets most of my
needs. On occasion I massage further with Gimp.

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:50:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

Hello,

Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital
photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a
cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is
cheap(er)?

Photoshop Elements is a scaled-down version of the full Photoshop.
For the average to even the above-average user, it's more than
adequate. The missing features are not critical to any but the more
advanced users with the exception of "Curves". There are adequate
work-arounds in Elements, though. It has some features not found in
the full version that make it advantageous to some.

It runs about $80 retail, but can be obtained for less. The current
version is 6.0, but the 5.0 version is almost the same package and
goes for much less.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

wrote:
Hello,

Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital
photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a
cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is
cheap(er)?

Thanks,

Oaf

You could try Paint Shop Pro.

David

wrote:
Hello,

Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital
photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a
cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is
cheap(er)?

Thanks,

Oaf

Give GIMP a try, you will be pleasantly surprised. It is free and open
source.
http://gimp.org/

-HS

H.S. wrote:
wrote:
Hello,

Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital
photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a
cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is
cheap(er)?

Thanks,

Oaf

Give GIMP a try, you will be pleasantly surprised. It is free and open
source.
http://gimp.org/

-HS
I use it. I like it. I only recommend it to very few people. Here is why.

It is not too user friendly. It is a diamond in the rough. It does not
have a good built in browser organizer. I does not seem to follow
standard windows (not MS Windows but windows ) conventions. It is
difficult to use. In Linux the printer dialogs are sort of convoluted
and you really need to spend time and money (print photo testing) to
know what you are doing. The crop tools and layers are no where as good
as Photoshop since you cannot go back and edit a layer.

The new versions do not come out frequently so it will be some time
before it begins to catch up. There are very few books on it and the
help system has no features. In HELP there is not search function, no
bookmarks and no way to change the print size. It is very rudimentary.

With all of that going against it the price (free) is right and it will
do the basic stuff. Once you bite the bullet and read the PDF manual
and spend a lot of time playing with it I think it is very good for
photo editing and it is my choice. I am hoping it just gets better.

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:10:45 -0800, measekite wrote:

H.S. wrote:
wrote:
Hello,

Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital
photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a
cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is
cheap(er)?

Thanks,

Oaf

Give GIMP a try, you will be pleasantly surprised. It is free and open
source.
http://gimp.org/

-HS
I use it. I like it. I only recommend it to very few people. Here is
why.

It is not too user friendly. It is a diamond in the rough. It does not
have a good built in browser organizer. I does not seem to follow
standard windows (not MS Windows but windows ) conventions. It is
difficult to use. In Linux the printer dialogs are sort of convoluted
and you really need to spend time and money (print photo testing) to
know what you are doing. The crop tools and layers are no where as good
as Photoshop since you cannot go back and edit a layer.

I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use
- it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic
operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was
interested in. Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not
going to be overly concerned about playing with layers.


The new versions do not come out frequently so it will be some time
before it begins to catch up. There are very few books on it and the
help system has no features. In HELP there is not search function, no
bookmarks and no way to change the print size. It is very rudimentary.

The online tutorial "Grokking the GIMP" seems to cover most of the bases,
though I'm not sure it's been updated for the latest version. I've also
found several good books on using GIMP.


With all of that going against it the price (free) is right and it will
do the basic stuff. Once you bite the bullet and read the PDF manual
and spend a lot of time playing with it I think it is very good for
photo editing and it is my choice. I am hoping it just gets better.

Out of curiosity, are you using the latest release? I understand it has
changed somewhat.

On 16 Feb 2008 23:23:04 GMT, ray wrote in
:

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:10:45 -0800, measekite wrote:

It is not too user friendly. It is a diamond in the rough. It does not
have a good built in browser organizer. I does not seem to follow
standard windows (not MS Windows but windows ) conventions. It is
difficult to use. In Linux the printer dialogs are sort of convoluted
and you really need to spend time and money (print photo testing) to
know what you are doing. The crop tools and layers are no where as good
as Photoshop since you cannot go back and edit a layer.

I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use
- it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic
operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was
interested in.

My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than
Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease.

Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not
going to be overly concerned about playing with layers.

Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

In article , John Navas
wrote:

I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use
- it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic
operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was
interested in.

My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than
Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease.

photoshop's interface is the result of years of input from actual
users, from graphic designers to photographers to prepress users. the
interface works and it works well. gimp's ui is whatever a bunch of
programmers thought up, and it shows.

Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not
going to be overly concerned about playing with layers.

Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing.

very much so, and gimp lacks one of the most useful form of layers,
adjustment layers. that alone is a very serious omission.

John Navas wrote:

On 16 Feb 2008 23:23:04 GMT, ray wrote in :



On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:10:45 -0800, measekite wrote:







It is not too user friendly. It is a diamond in the rough. It does not have a good built in browser organizer. I does not seem to follow standard windows (not MS Windows but windows ) conventions. It is difficult to use. In Linux the printer dialogs are sort of convoluted and you really need to spend time and money (print photo testing) to know what you are doing. The crop tools and layers are no where as good as Photoshop since you cannot go back and edit a layer.



I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in.



My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease.


I have used both and now use only Gimp.  I agree with the above statement but Gimp has an upgrade path (upgrades not too frequent) that does not cost anything and Photoshop upgrades can cost the price of a DSLR and if you continue with it the lenses that go with it.

Eventually Gimp will improve (it needs the ability to edit layers and get the more advanced photo tools of PS) and hopefully the interface will get better.






Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers.



Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing.