Photo-Editing Software

[googlit]

If you do any post-processing, what do you use and why? I'm trying to get a feel for what's most prevalent.

I use Photoshop PS2. Photoshop is what I grew up with, and it's what I know really well.

If you want to get into Photoshop, Elements is a good place to start. It doesn't have as many features as the full version, but most people don't need all the bells and whistles.

[ron.richardson]

i use photoshop, and are actually installing cs2 as i type this. i have been using cs for the past year or so.

i also have heard that elements is well worth it. especially for photographers.

[Merlyn]

Download Adobe Lightroom Beta 4.1 It's free. The way to go for the final finish of a photo prior to printing or being sent to a lab. Unlike PS CS2, no gimmicks for photo tricks just what you need for working a photo after the PS edits. Nice program. Give it a try and I believe you will be impressed.

[lisa nolan]

I've found that nearly everything I ever want to do regarding post-processing can be done with Adobe Lightroom. (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom/) <Free beta version.

I really am liking Lightroom. It's very user-friendly, especially for people like me who were just floundering around in Photoshop CS2, rather overwhelmed. Lightroom has one-button adjustments for white balance, exposure, contrast, etc., and also more fine-tuning controls for tonal curves, split-toning, sharpening, etc. It also keeps my pics organized, and is fairly easy to export from. (And did I mention it's free?!)

I did also pick up a book from the library recently, though, to learn GIMP. Open-source software makes my eyes tear up in gratitude.

[lisa nolan]

Merlyn - great minds think alike ;)

[leight]

Yeah I use Photoshop too :) I use it to edit my RAW files at the moment. I downloaded a trial of Apple's Aperture to run on my iMac, however since my Fujifilm S9500's RAW files aren't supported (or even when converted from PS), I'll be sticking with Photoshop for now :)

I also use Apple's iPhoto if it's a quick fix (red eye, change some basic stuff) because it's very easy seeing as I use iPhoto to store all my photos :)

- leighton

[Merlyn]

leight,
Just a quick note, Adobe Lightroom works with both Mac and PC. The controls are very similar to Adobe Raw in PhotoShop. The program treats jpeg and raw files the same. It just imports a copy of your photo and never uses the original. Try and see if you can work your cameras raw files with it. I am curious about that myself.

[Richard_Cocks]

I use photoshop for most adjustments, although resizing I use Image Magick so I can batch process folders at a time.

[EricF]

I use Photoshop CS2 for most adjustments, but have started using Adobe Photoshop Lightroom to get a good "digital negative" from RAW files rather than using the Adobe Raw Converter.

[davidcwalls]

I noticed that the Lightroom website says to download now because the 4.1 beta expires on February 28, 2007. It makes me wonder if they are getting ready to release (and charge for) a production version.

I have been using Google's Picasa for organizing and viewing photos on my computer. It does have a few features for cropping, straightening, color temperature, etc. But I haven't taken the time to use them since a) I don't know much about photo processing, and b) I know how to use GIMP or an old version of Photoshop (5) for making the primitive adjustments that are in my repertoire. Does anyone have an opinion about whether it is worth it to learn more about Picasa?

[jhawksley]

I have been using PS for several years, but I have begun to use Lightroom as I recently purchased a Rebel XT. For batch processing, Lightroom can't be beat IMHO. However, I feel a lot more at home in PS, and all my images seem to end up in it at one point or another. While I'm still getting used to Lightroom, PS has more advanced controls and plugin support, and until Lightroom incorporates some of these features, PS will stay a part of my normal processing.

[tyrithe]

In my case, I do most of mine in lightroom (for the basic adjustments) and then Gimp for fine tuning. (Artistic effects such as selective colorization, and touch up work such as red eye reduction.) Wasn't really impressed with photoshop elements, and don't have the cash to spend on CS2 right now, so I use what I've got.

[wulf]

I use the GIMP - it is not the most intuitive system out there but it is powerful, free and I have been using it for years so am not so stumped by the learning curve.

Wulf

[EntityDesigns]

I have been a Photshop user since 3.0, :p and for RAW processing I like RAW Shooter Essentials (Since It was free but is no longer upgradable since adobe bought it out), Adobe Lightroom (At first I didn't like it but I am enjoying it very much), aslo I use DPP (Digital Photo Professional) from Canon.

[testmonkey]

I find myself using iPhoto more and more. I know that sounds like a real newb thing to say, but I'm a Photoshop power user who has taught college courses on Photoshop for a while. However, tapping into a few of the 'hidden' options in iPhoto's equivalent to the healing brush, as well as the standard crop and edit tools, is quickly becoming my de facto workflow for shots going to print. For a decently composed shot, what more do I really need?

Now I just need to try out Aperture.

[Fraggleroxer]

I find myself using iPhoto more and more. I know that sounds like a real newb thing to say, but I'm a Photoshop power user who has taught college courses on Photoshop for a while. However, tapping into a few of the 'hidden' options in iPhoto's equivalent to the healing brush, as well as the standard crop and edit tools, is quickly becoming my de facto workflow for shots going to print. For a decently composed shot, what more do I really need?

Now I just need to try out Aperture.

you got to be carefull when using iphoto with jpegs. every little change u make in iphoto compresses your image and you loose data. i photo is great for orgenization, but so is bridge. for touch ups, there is nothing like photoshop.

and as for lightroom, it is a great little program for presentation. i like to pull up clients portraits on it, and you can show them sepia, b/w, etc on the fly. it really helps keep pics organized also.

[testmonkey]

you got to be carefull when using iphoto with jpegs. every little change u make in iphoto compresses your image and you loose data. i photo is great for orgenization, but so is bridge. for touch ups, there is nothing like photoshop.

True, but with a catch: iPhoto always keeps a copy of your original. At any time you can back out by opting to 'Revert to Original' via a simple right-click. It adds to the overhead of the library, but is well worth it due to the ability to start back at square one if needed.

[Fraggleroxer]

True, but with a catch: iPhoto always keeps a copy of your original. At any time you can back out by opting to 'Revert to Original' via a simple right-click. It adds to the overhead of the library, but is well worth it due to the ability to start back at square one if needed.

right right.

im addicted to raw, so i always have an original.

its just so common for people to use a program like iphoto and competly kill their files. EVERYTIME YOU HIT SAVE ON A JPG, YOU KILL YOUR IMAGE.

iphoto is sweet for sorting and workflow.

[testmonkey]

EVERYTIME YOU HIT SAVE ON A JPG, YOU KILL YOUR IMAGE.

Breathe, buddy. I'm not arguing with you in the least on this point.

[Joshua Schroeder]

Be careful about getting too attached to Lightroom. I'm certain it's only free as long as it's in beta. When Adobe has a final release, they'll start charging for it. The free beta was a way to get photographers involved in the development process.

Anyone have any experience or comments on Aperture? I've been itching to try it out.

[Fraggleroxer]

Breathe, buddy. I'm not arguing with you in the least on this point.


lol. sorry if i came across that way. some people never get this point. it was in caps so everyone could see... ;)

anyways, i think that color and file management should be a topic here.

[EricF]

Be careful about getting too attached to Lightroom. I'm certain it's only free as long as it's in beta. When Adobe has a final release, they'll start charging for it. The free beta was a way to get photographers involved in the development process.

Anyone have any experience or comments on Aperture? I've been itching to try it out.

I would have liked to have tried Aperture, but my 1GHz Dual G4 is not supported by the software (actually, I think my graphics card is too lightweight). Lightroom, on the other hand, works just fine. True, it won't be free forever, but someone from Adobe was hinting at the price point, which I of course can't remember, but I think it will be in the same ballpark as Aperture.

I was kind of miffed at Apple for cranking up the requirements for Aperture so high... oh well...

[EntityDesigns]

Be careful about getting too attached to Lightroom. I'm certain it's only free as long as it's in beta. When Adobe has a final release, they'll start charging for it.

You mean people actually pay for software? ;)

[Fraggleroxer]

You mean people actually pay for software? ;)


*whistles to self and looks away*

[Bail]

As for RAW Image processing. I've grown accustomed to Bibble Pro W/ Noise Ninja. Plus bibble has videos on their site to help you with the program.

Http://www.bibblelabs.com

[Fraggleroxer]

As for RAW Image processing. I've grown accustomed to Bibble Pro W/ Noise Ninja. Plus bibble has videos on their site to help you with the program.

Http://www.bibblelabs.com

good stuff.

[Lynette 77]

I currently use Photo Explosion Deluxe Version 2 and so far I've been really happy with it. It's easy to use and satisfies any crafty urges I have.

I've always wanted Photoshop but the price puts it out of my reach. Maybe one day I can save up enough money and spoil myself.

[Joshua Schroeder]

I would have liked to have tried Aperture, but my 1GHz Dual G4 is not supported by the software (actually, I think my graphics card is too lightweight).

Same deal with my 12" PowerBook. I can't even give the demo version a test drive for that reason. I definitely like the looks of it, but I just wish I could play around with it and see if I would actually get my money's worth out of it. It looks to me like it's a great way to integrate one's workflow.

[Amigone201]

I currently use Photo Explosion Deluxe Version 2 and so far I've been really happy with it. It's easy to use and satisfies any crafty urges I have.

I've always wanted Photoshop but the price puts it out of my reach. Maybe one day I can save up enough money and spoil myself.

Yeah, seriously. This is where I'm coming from too. I use Photoshop Elements 4, because it was in my price range.

Where do you guys get all your money? :D 900 dollar SLRs, plus the cost of the lenses, tripod, flash, carrying cases, and who knows what else? What's that, 300 dollars more? Plus 600 dollars for Photoshop CS2. And then if I had all that, I'd need a better computer to run it, so I'd have to plunk down around 1200 for that. I'm looking at 2 grand right there.

If I spent $2,000 on equipment, I'd have to give up eating for a few weeks!

[Bail]

Where do you guys get all your money? :D 900 dollar SLRs, plus the cost of the lenses, tripod, flash, carrying cases, and who knows what else? What's that, 300 dollars more? Plus 600 dollars for Photoshop CS2. And then if I had all that, I'd need a better computer to run it, so I'd have to plunk down around 1200 for that. I'm looking at 2 grand right there.

If I spent $2,000 on equipment, I'd have to give up eating for a few weeks!

I have this thing called a "JOB". That's where I have to get up at 5am, somewhat dress, drive to dunkin donuts, grab a coffee then head to this place called hell (in which I mean work). Then I take flat metal and turn it into cabinets, Computer cases, photography equipment, automotive part etc, etc. Every Thursday I get this envelope with a piece of paper promising me money if I bring it to this place called a "BANK" then that's where I get all this money.

Not trying to be an "A-hole" but you ask a stupid question. Your going to get one in return.

I don't make much as it is. Barely could afford an apartment, car payments and car insurance. I spent around 1500$ for my equipment because I love taking photographs. I love it so much to where I would spend that amount even though I have better and logical things to do with it. Like Pay my Credit cards off, Stop the banks from hassling me.

Maybe someday this camera will take somewhere I never thought I would be!

You spend 2,000 in food a month? WOWZERS!! I can live a whole month on ramen noodles (which I have) that would cost me 10$.

[Learner]

You spend 2,000 in food a month? WOWZERS!! I can live a whole month on ramen noodles (which I have) that would cost me 10$.

Guess different people have different priorities and needs. Now me I'd pay off those credit card bills first, and probably go without food to so it!! To each his own.
By the way, Does anyone on this forum use PSPXI. I have it and have no idea how to really get use out of it. Find this all takes more time.

[Bail]

Does anyone on this forum use PSPXI. I have it and have no idea how to really get use out of it. Find this all takes more time.

I Started off with PSP before switching over to photoshop.
I have to say PSP is more of a "Painting" Program. It's an easy program to start off with if you ask me. If your switching from photoshop however I see where you can get really confused. took me a long time to get used to photoshop and now I can not go back to PSP.

I would read PSP tutorials that you can search on google for. The help files in PSP are more down to earth then photoshops help files.

[RainPacket]

On my Windows box, I use PSPX for graphics editing. I've been a PSP user since... uh... PSP5, I think. Maybe 4. However, I haven't seen enough benefit from PSP XI to be worth it yet, despite the new ubercool tools. Why?

Well, put simply... Aperture. Over on my Mac, Aperture has become my entire workflow, save if I need to use NoiseNinja. (In which case, I have made a convenient little Applescript to export, and load it in NoiseNinja.) I keep my Aperture library on an external Firewire drive, so I could even move the entire library to another Aperture-installed machine if I absolutely needed to.

Since I'm not one prone to using clone brushes and actually /editing/ the photo a'la Photoshop, Aperture does everything I need (and then some). Color adjustments, cropping, straightening, all of that... I can do that in spades. (Plus, I have an even more powerful redeye removal than iPhoto!)

And best of all, it displays all the edits you've made in a little list of checkboxes -- crops, color adjustments, etc. -- and you can uncheck any of them to undo just that particular tweak, and re-check it to redo that. All the edits are stored basically as deltas to the master; given a master file, you create a 'version' and then begin editing. You can create another version from any other version, or another unedited version from the master. You can organize your photos into stacks, keyword them, sort them into project boxes (or folders in boxes), and... well, lots of stuff.

Generally, it just works like the digital equivalent of a darkroom, a lightbox, and a photo filing system all in one. Plus, exporting to any format -- and even making sure it matches color profiles for Mpix or Costco printing or whatever -- is trivial. And though I don't have CS2's lovely editing capabilities, I don't generally need them.

I toyed with Adobe Lightroom briefly, but I didn't like it as much. The fact that I had to switch between 'organization' and 'editing' mode drove me insane; in Aperture, they're one and the same. You can separate them if you want by setting up different layouts and switching between them, but you can organize and edit photos simultaneously. You can copy the color adjustments from one photo to another, and all kinds of stuff, right while you're sorting them into stacks for export. Etc.

And fullscreen mode is a thing of beauty.

Can you tell I'm a convert?

[turtlebud]

Be careful about getting too attached to Lightroom. I'm certain it's only free as long as it's in beta. When Adobe has a final release, they'll start charging for it. The free beta was a way to get photographers involved in the development process.

Anyone have any experience or comments on Aperture? I've been itching to try it out.

I've been using Aperture for about 8 months and for the most part I love it. The main reasons why I switched over from iPhoto (in no particular order) were:

1) more flexibility for importing images - in iphoto, you either had to import the whole card or import your shots via a separate program like image capture and then import it into iphoto
2) non-destructive image editing - i liked that aperture kept the original untouched and only stored the commands that you used to post process the image. the makes it super easy to get back to the original (i know you can revert to original in iphoto too) and keeps the size of your library down because it's not creating a new copy of the image, just storing the adjustments that you made.
3) lift and stamp/batch editing - this has been a godsend at times. if you ever took a bunch of shots in bad lighting and spent time fixing each picture, you'll really appreciate this feature. basically you can fix one picture and then apply the adjustment to a batch of pictures. a real time saver.
4) keyword implementation - using keywords in aperture is 10x easier than doing so in iphoto. i can't really put my finger on why (maybe it's the layout), but i just know that it's really easy for me to enter keywords and captions for the photos (as well as rate them), which makes the library a lot easier to search.
5) RAW handling - i started shooting exclusively in RAW this year and Aperture is faster in handling RAW files than iPhoto

there are other features that I use, but these are the ones that are the big ones for me. the bottom line is that it saves me a lot of time during post-processing. it allows me cull through a relatively large set of pictures (ie, from a wedding) within a couple of hours and have it posted on my website that same day/night. and i'm sure there a bunch of features that I don't use or don't even know about that would greatly benefit you.

of course there are shortcomings with Aperture, it's not perfect. the main things that it could use improvement on are:

1) printing - the whole printing process if you print to your photo printer is kind of slow and not very slick
2) exif data - it doesn't import/show all the exif data that you might be interested in. for me it's lens data (ie which lens I took a shot with) that it doesn't display.

hope this helps and let me know if you have any specific questions.

[Joshua Schroeder]

Thanks for the rundown of Aperture guys. My next computer purchase may come sooner than expected so that I can try it out.

[Floris]

PS CS2...

I totaly dig the program!

[cfischer69]

PS Elements 3 for "advanced" edits and Picasa's built-ins for really basic adjustments.