| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/06/2006 04:15:56 AM · #1 |
I'm new to digital and am struggling a little with editing software. I've got access to Photoshop, but find it too fiddly and have downloaded the trial of Photoshop Elements, but find it far too show (despite a fast machine). I'm playing with the trial of ACDSee 8, which I quite like. My question to you more experienced users is... Is ACDSee any good (ie worth paying for) or is it too 'mickey mouse'? Any comments appreciated.
Q |
|
|
|
01/06/2006 04:23:25 AM · #2 |
I've never used ACDSee to edit photos. I have used Ulead PhotoImpact which was alright. But then I got convivned to learn Photoshop as once I did I would never want to use anything else and that ended up being true. I bought a book called Adobe Photoshop CS2 - Classroom in a Book which makes it so easy to learn.
Some other users have suggested a free download program called GIMP. I've never tried it but it seems to be pretty popular and best of all it costs nothing.
|
|
|
|
01/06/2006 04:23:52 AM · #3 |
ACDSee has been making great products for years and years, and though I haven't used the newest version I still use an old version for viewing/browsing/renaming files.
I say if the trial has features that appeal to you then it would probably be worth buying the full program. Photoshop is an awesome editor but if ACDSee will do everything you want then go for it...
Dave |
|
|
|
01/06/2006 04:29:31 AM · #4 |
Thanx Count, but that's why I posed the question...I don't know enough about Photoshop to know if ACDSee pales by comparison. What do you reckon?
Q |
|
|
|
01/06/2006 04:48:45 AM · #5 |
Hi Q
Well, it seems (from their website) that ACDSee 8 has some basic editing tools and features, plus the sorting/organizing(sp?) tools they added to the product a while back. For the sorting/organizing tools alone it might be a worthwhile program. For editing purposes then yes it does pale in comparison to Photoshop.
What didn't you like about PS exactly? You mentioned elements (demo) was to slow is that the problem with PS too?
Dave |
|
|
|
01/06/2006 05:27:54 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Count:
What didn't you like about PS exactly? You mentioned elements (demo) was to slow is that the problem with PS too?
Dave |
He said it was "too fiddly". I take that to mean, he wants a more automated approach to image processing. Consumer-oriented programs like ACDSee and Jasc Paint Shop Photo Album 5 essentially swap precision for automation. They give you much simpler, more intuitive interfaces for cleaning up and optimizing images.
I have steered many friends and acquaintances who wanted simple, straightforward photo-optimization into the Jasc product and they all love it. I even have a copy of it myself because I use it for image filing, and it has awesome collections of styled borders that I find useful for prepping images for the web. It's a pretty nifty little editor too, but it can't do most of the things I take for granted with Photoshop.
Curiously enough, I am finding that the quickest, most straightforward path I have for making simple images is to shoot RAW and run them through the EOS viewer utility. Move a few sliders, and voila! Then drop it in PS for cropping/resizing.
Robt. |
|
|
|
01/06/2006 06:46:43 AM · #7 |
Thanks All. Bear, I just had a look at the Corel Paint Shop Pro X info on their website and that looks as if it might do the trick. I'll give the trial of that a go once my ACDSee trial has expired. I appreciate the tip.
Q. |
|
|
|
01/06/2006 07:10:11 AM · #8 |
I had not realized Corel had bought Jasc. That's actually good news I think; they are a pretty robust company. For sure, Paint Shop has "Editing for Dummies" features that Photoshop doesn't even come close to, and it has higher-end features for when you want them. Paint Shop Photo Album only has the "dummies" features.
What's especially nice about them is the side-by-side, large previews of original and modified versions so you can easily see what's happening.
Robt. |
|
|
|
01/25/2006 04:51:11 PM · #9 |
I have been using ACD for years. I currently have version 8 installed and am upgrading to the new version of ACDPro today. While this is no photoshop, it does a lot of things very well. There are some cool features in Pro. As you probably know, you can do a lot of bsic edits in ACD, and then link to the editor of your choice, which in my case is Micrgraphx Picture Publisher version 10.0
ACD is fantastic for organizing and working with photos. Pro is even better. Worth the money. |
|
|
|
01/25/2006 05:00:12 PM · #10 |
workflow:
1. download from camera - canon camerawindow
2. raw conversion and some editiing - pixmantec rawshooter premium 2006
3. additional editing - adobe photoshop cs2
4. organizing and cataloging and everything else - acdsee pro
rawshooter premium 2006 does fantastic job, it can easily replace photoshop in all basic tweaks such as cropping, color corections, levels and curves ... it does not make "advanced" use such as dodging and burning and stuff like that ... oh, i should stop now :-)
peace
|
|
|
|
01/25/2006 05:03:19 PM · #11 |
I had ACDSee 7 and threw it out. I went back to version 2.4 and just have the best service from it. I can't see me using anything else. The later versions are 10x the size, eat resources, are slower, have features I don't want or need and keeps crashing or locking up not just my machine but a couple of friends ones too.
ACDSee v2.4 is the bees knees for arranging, sorting, renaming, converting etc etc .... I LOVE it.
Brett |
|
|
|
01/25/2006 06:00:39 PM · #12 |
I've been a faithful ACDSee user for years. That said...
ACDSee 8 is a piece of garbge. I use it, but it crashes. It's not even as good as 7. Every release they make they refuse to fix many ongoing bugs, and charge big bucks for the 'upgrade' which is usually a fix to features that were busted in the previous release(s).
And now they want me to kick down another $40 to upgrade to ACDSee Pro!
If you aren't already invested in the workflow, I'd avoid it. :)
|
|
|
|
01/25/2006 06:07:09 PM · #13 |
Don't judge Elements, the editor, by the file cataloger/browser it contains. That's very very very slow. But Elements, the editor, is a 90% of photoshop for 10% of the cost, and provides an excellent jumping off platform for later.
You still might want to have ACDSEE as the catloger, or Thumbsplus, or similar. (You can also download and try Thumbsplus on the web.)
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/20/2024 12:38:14 AM EDT.
