Top 10 Photo Enhancement Tools

Top 10 Photo Enhancement Tools
Inorder to improve the quality of your clicked photographs,you can use
these tools :
http://www.techten.blogspot.com

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 23:31:47 -0500, RockyZ
wrote:

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:50:25 -0700, Stella
wrote:

Top 10 Photo Enhancement Tools
Inorder to improve the quality of your clicked photographs,you can use
these tools :
http://www.techten.blogspot.com

You missed a good one. Zoner Photo Studio 9. I'd say it's almost on par with
PSP. Better in some ways, lacking in a few others. Not as bug-ridden as the new
releases of PSP from Corel. It's nowhere near as capable as PhotoLine 32 but
still worth looking at if you want some alternatives.

The only drawback is that full 16-bit support is only available in the highest
priced version of Zoner 9. But otherwise it's a very capable editor and
organizer that's not well known yet.

Serif PhotoPlus 11 is also almost as good as those. It has some features that I
wish the others had. Its curve tool needs help though.

If you're going to list the overpriced last-century's programming and bloatware
called PhotoShop, then you might at least list Canvas X for half the price of
PS. It does more than most any editor but it's not for any kind of novice, nor
is it just for photos.

You should include one or more decent panorama tools too. Like Hugin (freeware)
and PTGui or Panorama Factory.

Look at those other programs before locking yourself into that top-10.

Also missed were Photofiltre (freeware and shareware versions) and
Photoshop Elements ($100+/-) among others.

Bill

Stella wrote:
Top 10 Photo Enhancement Tools
Inorder to improve the quality of your clicked photographs,you can use
these tools :
http://www.techten.blogspot.com


I would really like someone to tell me what I get for $649 that I don't
get with say PSP or my PhotoPlus 9 that go for 1/6 the price or less. I
would like PhotoPlus 11 for better crop options but until Serif give me
one of their $19.95 upgrades I'll live with sizing to a ruler and doing
my own math with a calculator.
Virtually any time any one in this group mentions and editor it's PS. Am
I the only one working to a budget.
Dave Cohen

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 15:33:38 GMT
Dave Cohen wrote:

I would really like someone to tell me what I get for $649 that I
don't get with say PSP or my PhotoPlus 9 that go for 1/6 the price or
less. I would like PhotoPlus 11 for better crop options but until
Serif give me one of their $19.95 upgrades I'll live with sizing to a
ruler and doing my own math with a calculator.
Virtually any time any one in this group mentions and editor it's PS.
Am I the only one working to a budget.
Dave Cohen

I am retired and therefore on a pension so cannot afford stuff like
PSP, I use linux so the programmes I use are Gimp and Rawstudio; both
give me the results I like and of course they are free. I used to use
PhotoPlus when it split off from PagePlus and it took me 5 years or so
to get Serif to stop phoning to get me to upgrade PagePlus, DrawPlus and
PhotoPlus.
--
Neil
Reverse ie and delete l for email.

Dave Cohen wrote:

Stella wrote:
Top 10 Photo Enhancement Tools
Inorder to improve the quality of your clicked photographs,you can use
these tools :
http://www.techten.blogspot.com


I would really like someone to tell me what I get for $649 that I don't
get with say PSP or my PhotoPlus 9 that go for 1/6 the price or less. I
would like PhotoPlus 11 for better crop options but until Serif give me
one of their $19.95 upgrades I'll live with sizing to a ruler and doing
my own math with a calculator.
Virtually any time any one in this group mentions and editor it's PS. Am
I the only one working to a budget.
Dave Cohen


Hello, Dave:

I'm with you, man! Paint Shop Pro 7 does most of what I want, and is
very easy to use.


Cordially,
John Turco

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:47:30 GMT, DaveB
wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 15:33:38 GMT, Dave Cohen wrote:

Stella wrote:
Top 10 Photo Enhancement Tools
Inorder to improve the quality of your clicked photographs,you can use
these tools :
http://www.techten.blogspot.com


I would really like someone to tell me what I get for $649 that I don't
get with say PSP or my PhotoPlus 9 that go for 1/6 the price or less. I
would like PhotoPlus 11 for better crop options but until Serif give me
one of their $19.95 upgrades I'll live with sizing to a ruler and doing
my own math with a calculator.
Virtually any time any one in this group mentions and editor it's PS. Am
I the only one working to a budget.
Dave Cohen

I have no budget. In fact, unopened PS suites are often given to me to
evaluate. Guess where they all go? Directly in the trash. I don't think PS is
even good enough to give away for free. I wouldn't dare burden someone that I
liked with Adobe's bloated, limited, last-century garbage. You can't even do
any resizing, rotations, scaling, and other manipulations with anything better
than bicubic interpolation in PS. What good is that? For that reason alone PS
should be thrown out. I laugh every time I know that someone has used PS to
edit their images because they have deliberately destroying their image quality
by using bicubic interpolation in all their tools. If your editor does not give
you a Lanczos-8 interpolation option then dump it and find one that does. This
is just one of hundreds of limitations that is built into the foundations of
PhotoShop and will never change. People just won't wake up to the fact that
they are being taken for fools by Adobe. And why? Because some self-proclaimed
"pros" (stifled laughter) tell others to keep using it. The brainless sheep
keep getting in line for the slaughter. Nothing less than a simple case of the
blind leading the blind.

The popularity of PhotoShop can be summed-up in 2 quotes:

"If even 5 billion people are believing and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

and

"Never underestimate the stupidity of humanity."

Photoshop is expensive, no doubt, but your assessment of it is
extremely naive. Fact is, it is the best overall image editing
program available, bar none. Some people think the learning curve is
too high and then dismiss it as "bloatware." But there is a reason
why it is the standard for true graphics and photo professionals. Not
"so called" professionals, but real professionals who rely on it every
day for their livelihood.

PhotoPlus lets you click a button and become an "instant artist."
Yeah, right.

If you prefer a cheaper program that is aimed at amateurs and has
certain fun features you prefer, then go for it. But that's no reason
to dismiss PS as junk. You truly don't know what you're talking
about. By your own admission you've never evaluated it.

The final say is image quality. People who know what they are doing
swear by Photoshop. If it didn't deliver the goods it wouldn't be the
overwhelming choice of professional photographers. Professional
photography is an incredibly competitive business. If a $79 program
gave them better results than a $650 program, they would jump to it in
droves.

Even better for photographers is Adobe's Lightroom. It is a wonderful
program, but mostly useful only for people who have the smarts to
shoot RAW files. If you are shooting jpegs and editing them in PSP or
PhotoPlus, then you have already destroyed more image quality than you
accuse PS of doing with its bicubic interpolation.

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with the programs you use.
They do 80%-90% of the job for most people, are more than what most
casual snapshooters need. If you don't need the power and quality of
a program like Photoshop, then there is no need for you to spend the
money on it.

Steve

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:39:42 GMT, DaveB
wrote:

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:21:57 -0400, smb wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:47:30 GMT, DaveB
wrote:

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 15:33:38 GMT, Dave Cohen wrote:

Stella wrote:
Top 10 Photo Enhancement Tools
Inorder to improve the quality of your clicked photographs,you can use
these tools :
http://www.techten.blogspot.com


I would really like someone to tell me what I get for $649 that I don't
get with say PSP or my PhotoPlus 9 that go for 1/6 the price or less. I
would like PhotoPlus 11 for better crop options but until Serif give me
one of their $19.95 upgrades I'll live with sizing to a ruler and doing
my own math with a calculator.
Virtually any time any one in this group mentions and editor it's PS. Am
I the only one working to a budget.
Dave Cohen

I have no budget. In fact, unopened PS suites are often given to me to
evaluate. Guess where they all go? Directly in the trash. I don't think PS is
even good enough to give away for free. I wouldn't dare burden someone that I
liked with Adobe's bloated, limited, last-century garbage. You can't even do
any resizing, rotations, scaling, and other manipulations with anything better
than bicubic interpolation in PS. What good is that? For that reason alone PS
should be thrown out. I laugh every time I know that someone has used PS to
edit their images because they have deliberately destroying their image quality
by using bicubic interpolation in all their tools. If your editor does not give
you a Lanczos-8 interpolation option then dump it and find one that does. This
is just one of hundreds of limitations that is built into the foundations of
PhotoShop and will never change. People just won't wake up to the fact that
they are being taken for fools by Adobe. And why? Because some self-proclaimed
"pros" (stifled laughter) tell others to keep using it. The brainless sheep
keep getting in line for the slaughter. Nothing less than a simple case of the
blind leading the blind.

The popularity of PhotoShop can be summed-up in 2 quotes:

"If even 5 billion people are believing and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
foolish thing."

and

"Never underestimate the stupidity of humanity."

Photoshop is expensive, no doubt, but your assessment of it is
extremely naive. Fact is, it is the best overall image editing
program available, bar none. Some people think the learning curve is
too high and then dismiss it as "bloatware." But there is a reason
why it is the standard for true graphics and photo professionals. Not
"so called" professionals, but real professionals who rely on it every
day for their livelihood.

Pro "Fools" is what you meant to say, admit it. PhotoShop has a steep learning
curve? What's your IQ? 85? I can show you 5 other graphic editing programs that
you wouldn't even be able to open let alone use if you think lame PhotoShop has
a steep learning curve. I'm surprised you can even get on the net if you think
PS has a steep learning curve.


Yes, many people DO think Photoshop has a steep learning curve. Now,
pay attention. For the basics, Photoshop is quite easy to use. The
steep learning curve is for the real horsepower that is under the
hood. There is an entire industry based on using all the power in
that program, for goodness sake.




PhotoPlus lets you click a button and become an "instant artist."
Yeah, right.

If you prefer a cheaper program that is aimed at amateurs and has
certain fun features you prefer, then go for it. But that's no reason
to dismiss PS as junk. You truly don't know what you're talking
about. By your own admission you've never evaluated it.

I never said that. I throw out any that are handed to me BECAUSE I have
evaluated them all. I've not seen one single worthwhile advancement in PS since
v5.5. Other programs for 1/10th the price now beat PS's capabilities ten-fold
for the last 5-7 years.

It's obvious that you have strong opinions about that.




The final say is image quality. People who know what they are doing
swear by Photoshop. If it didn't deliver the goods it wouldn't be the
overwhelming choice of professional photographers. Professional
photography is an incredibly competitive business. If a $79 program
gave them better results than a $650 program, they would jump to it in
droves.


And I'll laugh at all those self-declared "Pros" every time you have to level or
resize an image with bicubic resampling in PhotoShop. Some "pro" YOU are. Using
destructive algorithms from last century to edit all your photos just because
some "Pro" with an IQ of a snail told you that's what "Pro's" use. You are
purposely ruining every photo that you run through PhotoShop. But you're such a
PRO-****ing-idiot that you don't even realize it.

My goodness, you do have some kind of personality problem, don't you?
Or is it the anonymity of the net that makes you think you can say
such dumb things without being "caught?"

Your meaningless rants aside, the fact remains that Photoshop is still
the defacto standard in the graphic arts / photography industry. If
what you said were true, it wouldn't have that position. No
professional would purposefully ruin their images based on loyalty to
a particular piece of equipment or software. What you say is just
venom-filled lunacy.


You are only to laugh at.

Why are you so filled with angst? Your anti-Adobe prejudice has
blinded you to the point that you must try to throw lame insults at
people who don't agree with you.



Even better for photographers is Adobe's Lightroom. It is a wonderful
program, but mostly useful only for people who have the smarts to
shoot RAW files. If you are shooting jpegs and editing them in PSP or
PhotoPlus, then you have already destroyed more image quality than you
accuse PS of doing with its bicubic interpolation.

Freeware "RAW Therapee" beats Lightroom hands-down in what it can do. I just
uninstalled Lightroom v1.1 tonight because it was just more of Adobe's
overpriced bloated crap. Someone gave me a copy to evaluate, it joined its lame
Adobe relatives in the garbage.

Not so by a long shot. That "experimental" program along with a host
of others can be shown to be "better" at certain aspects of RAW
conversion than LR or any other individual program. Even so, much of
those differences are subjective and a matter of opinion. That isn't
the point. For instance, Nikon's Capture NX is by far the best RAW
converter out there if you shoot Nikon. But it is too slow to use
with more than a few images at a time. LR's genius is in its workflow
approach and sorting capabilities along with being a very capable RAW
converter.

Again, if you are using PhotoPlus or any other non-RAW workflow to
edit jpegs or tifs, you are ALREADY destroying more image quality than
what you accuse Adobe of doing regardless of any resizing algorithms
they use.





Having said that, there is nothing wrong with the programs you use.
They do 80%-90% of the job for most people, are more than what most
casual snapshooters need. If you don't need the power and quality of
a program like Photoshop, then there is no need for you to spend the
money on it.

I need MORE than the lack of power and lack of quality of pro-loser's
last-century PhotoShop, that's why I don't use it and found software that's ten
times better.

You impress me as someone who sits behind a computer all day and
throws stones at things he really doesn't understand. Are you a
photographer or just some guy who criticizes things? Let's see some
examples of your work and how it needs more "power" than what you
think "pro-losers" need. Show us the proof that Photoshop has ruined
an image while your choice of software makes it a stellar work of art.


May you become such a "Pro" one day that you realize you've been played for a
fool all these years by the other "Pros" who clearly have their head up their
ass this whole time. But you'll never realize that, you're such an intelligent
"Pro" after all because you think PhotoShop has a steep learning curve.

If you want a steep learning curve, boot up Canvas X sometime. You'll run crying
to your mommy. PhotoShop is child's play, and you, the child that doesn't even
realize it.


Have you seriously considered therapy for this apparent disorder that
makes you want to try to mock people when they say things you
obviously don't understand?

Look, choice of software is a personal thing, but you are truly a fool
if you think somebody else's choice makes them a "loser." You are the
true loser if that's your approach to life.


Steve

"smb" wrote in message
...

steep learning curve is for the real horsepower that is under the
hood. There is an entire industry based on using all the power in
that program, for goodness sake.



There's an entire industry today based on the amazing horsepower that
was under the hood of the Model-T Ford.

There are much better programs (and cars) and companies that make them
today.

Many of us didn't blind ourselves by keeping our nose stuck in one
book or one program because we were told to by someone with a
less-experienced and self-serving agenda. We also stopped buying only
Ford brand automobiles long ago.


the fact remains that Photoshop is still
the defacto standard in the graphic arts / photography industry.

The Model-T Ford was a defacto standard at one time too.

I like the line that the OP used,

"If even 5 billion people are believing and doing a foolish thing,
it remains a
foolish thing."

That describes your Photoshop "defacto standard" perfectly.

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:32:54 GMT, "Zach G."
wrote:


"smb" wrote in message
.. .

steep learning curve is for the real horsepower that is under the
hood. There is an entire industry based on using all the power in
that program, for goodness sake.



There's an entire industry today based on the amazing horsepower that
was under the hood of the Model-T Ford.

There are much better programs (and cars) and companies that make them
today.

Not a fair comparison. Look at Photoshop as an SUV, and some of the
newer ones as subcompacts. Both will get you where you're going, and
each offers its own advantages. If you think Photoshop is outdated
and useless technology, you just don't know what you're talking about.


Many of us didn't blind ourselves by keeping our nose stuck in one
book or one program because we were told to by someone with a
less-experienced and self-serving agenda. We also stopped buying only
Ford brand automobiles long ago.

That isn't the case at all. Nobody is forcing you to use Photoshop.
But the fact is that it IS the standard, like it or not. And it
didn't get there or stay there because it is a Model T.




the fact remains that Photoshop is still
the defacto standard in the graphic arts / photography industry.

The Model-T Ford was a defacto standard at one time too.

The difference is that Photoshop still is the standard. If you don't
like it, nobody is forcing you to go that route.


I like the line that the OP used,

"If even 5 billion people are believing and doing a foolish thing,
it remains a
foolish thing."

That describes your Photoshop "defacto standard" perfectly.

Why such hostility over what program people choose to use?

I'll ask the same thing I asked your buddy -- prove how Photoshop is
inadequate to the task compared to other programs. Don't just quote
marketing literature or opinions, let's see the substance.

People need to be less obsessed with the tools and spend more energy
on using them rather than flaming other people's choices.

Steve