Photoshop vs. something else?

[Paparoksguitar]

People seem to forget that Photoshop is a designers tool (along with the rest of Adobe's suite) more so than anything. If you want a user-friendly, affordable piece of software, Elements is the better choice. Especially for a hobbyist looking for an initial program.

You may look into getting a Wacom board -- some come with a copy of Elements 5.0 included and will sit you back around $200 (USD).

I got my wacom board for about 130 $ give or take 15 dollars. I would definetly reccomend getting it that way, Ilements came with my wacmon board to, This way it's not much cheaper, and you get a board at the same time. I've never used elements though, I have Photoshop cs2, so i just do everything in that.

 

[Happy Hour]

If you get passed all the childish arguing that seems get worse everyday on here!!! Picasa is a great Free program!!! It allows you to crop,change W/B, Sharpen,change to B&W, Red eye,Enhance colors,and a ton more!! I use this program on every pic B4 I Photo shop. actually If you don't know allot about computers Photo shop is a waist of $$$ It is very complicated to use at first! It is a great program but not worth it if you can't use it!!

 

[iriairi]

If you go with elements, it will get you an upgrade on photoshop later...

 

[Mav]

Congrats. You increased saturation and contrast.

Nope, not that simple. Colors were not amplified linearly as in a generic saturation adjustment. I did about a dozen or so other little things too.

No, you don't need photoshop. If 90% of your photos are sunsets, you probably don't need it (those other 10% will be very annoying). But I bet you'd still think twice about the processing if you had to get the image ready for a gallery.

So the Photoshop Highlight/Shadow filter wouldn't be useful for sunrise/sunset type shots? I think not. But anyways, there are other programs out there that do the same thing just as good if not better. I have a bunch of 3 foot wide prints ready to go up in my house whenever I can get around to framing them. And no I didn't use Photoshop for those either, and only one of them is a sunset/sunrise type photo. The software I used didn't matter, nor did the lens, nor really did the camera. It had mostly to do with the person standing behind the camera.

 

[domromer]

PS is complete overkill for I bet >90% of photographers out there. I used Paint Shop Pro for years all the way back from when it was version 4 and it did everything I needed it to. Later versions would even work with photoshop plug-ins. GIMP is even better since it's free. It depends on the platform, but you can even hack PS plug-ins into working on GIMP too. On Mac I use DxO now (works on Windows too) and do all of my batch processing on that. If I need to do heavier editing I just use GIMP.

I like gimp for the pc but the interface is horrible on macs!!. You need to run x11 which is a real pain. If they made a native version I could use gimp over PS.

 

[That One Guy]

wow!! why all of the fighting? this is not productive to the OP's question.

ThePictureEffect- try this:

Gimp and Picasa are both free. Download those and try them out. If you want something more than what they have, then download a free trial of PS.

I agree that Pp software is just a tool the same way that a camera is.

You can create some very impressive photos with any of the previously posted software.

A photographer tells a story. It doesn't matter what camera, lens, or PP program that he or she has. Those are just tools to create art.

P&S cameras may not have all of the cool functions that a dslr has, but you can still tell a story with it and you can still create art.

 

[Alpha]

Nope, not that simple. Colors were not amplified linearly as in a generic saturation adjustment. I did about a dozen or so other little things too.

So the Photoshop Highlight/Shadow filter wouldn't be useful for sunrise/sunset type shots? I think not. But anyways, there are other programs out there that do the same thing just as good if not better. I have a bunch of 3 foot wide prints ready to go up in my house whenever I can get around to framing them. And no I didn't use Photoshop for those either, and only one of them is a sunset/sunrise type photo. The software I used didn't matter, nor did the lens, nor really did the camera. It had mostly to do with the person standing behind the camera.

This is hogwash. You're telling me if someone gave you a copy of PS, you wouldn't use it, and learn to do better processing with it? Hold that thought. If you're going to answer "no," don't bother wasting the energy in your fingers.

 

[skieur]

I do not recommend Photoshop Elements to anyone not even beginners. The most Photoshop features and by that I mean MORE than in Elements comes in PaintShop Pro Photo X2 for less money than Elements as well.

I use both Photoshop and PaintShop Pro. For high end needs sure I use Photoshop but for speed I use PaintShop Pro with plug-ins.

skieur

 

[nossie]

Someone mentioned a great way to slash the price of Photoshop... Go buy an old version say PS6 or 7 on ebay complete with license etc for a few bucks then buy and upgrade for it for less than half the full price. I haven't tried it but it seems feasible

 

[Arch]

jeez... cant you guys give advice simply without turning it into a worthless arguement?... maybe too much to ask...

The OP hasnt even had a chance to respond yet but its a simple answer.
If you really want to take your hobby seriously from word go (regardless of cost or if your likely to keep it up) then go with PS. An earlier version like ps7 is fine if you dont want to go the whole hog.

If you want to pursue photog as a hobby for good while yet before you decide to get all serious then Elements will do you fine, i would recomend it as it will get you use to PS layout if you later decide to buy the expensive version.

If you just want a starter package and an introduction to photo editing by all means give gimp a try.

I would personally recommend using Elements first.

 

[RKW3]

I do not recommend Photoshop Elements to anyone not even beginners. The most Photoshop features and by that I mean MORE than in Elements comes in PaintShop Pro Photo X2 for less money than Elements as well.

Paint shop pro was the first editing program I ever used, but it really confused me and it took me awhile to get used to it. Once I got Elements I found that much easier to work with. Just personal preference I guess.

 

[nossie]

jeez... cant you guys give advice simply without turning it into a worthless arguement?... maybe too much to ask...

Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!

 

[ThePictureEffect]

Ok. Well I think I have my answer. Although, before I go and spend 80 bucks, I'm definitely going to download the trial of Elements, just so I can compare with GIMP and Picasa.

And seriously, the fighting is not necessary. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and what works for one person may not work for another person. So just let it rest.



Thanks to everyone else for your help!

 

[yeti]

Ok. Well I think I have my answer. Although, before I go and spend 80 bucks, I'm definitely going to download the trial of Elements, just so I can compare with GIMP and Picasa.

And seriously, the fighting is not necessary. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and what works for one person may not work for another person. So just let it rest.



Thanks to everyone else for your help!

Hey ThePictureEffect,

I have used GIMP, I have also used Photoshop on occasion, but what I post-process my pictures with SilkyPix. GIMP is great open-source tool, which I have used quite successfully to design web pages. Along with Photoshop it is a tool most useful to retouch pictures. As people above said they are designers' tools. Yes, they will convert your RAW files to whatever you want, but not in bulk - just one file at a time.

If all you want is to just get ALL your RAW files processed and "developed" into JPEG or TIF with minimum hassle, try SilkyPix. It is very similar to Adobe Lightroom in function and purpose. I haven't had the chance to see Adobe Lightroom to say how it compares (it is not really available for my computer), but SilkyPix does the job, works without emulations on my PC, and isn't too expensive ($150).

That's my contribution. I hope it helps.

 

[Mav]

This is hogwash. You're telling me if someone gave you a copy of PS, you wouldn't use it, and learn to do better processing with it? Hold that thought. If you're going to answer "no," don't bother wasting the energy in your fingers.

If you're not even going to attempt to understand my personal needs in photo editing and processing software, then don't bother trying to cram your personal and thus irrelevant opinion down my throat. Do you think I shoot just like you? Do you think I edit my photos just like you? Do you think I approach my hobby the same exact way that you do? If I did, I bet I'd like PS a lot better but it looks like I don't. I don't take advice from people who have no clue about what my personal needs are. Everybody will do things differently, shoot differently, edit differently, have different budgets, and have different amounts of time allotted, and thus might need different tools to get the job done. Get it? Very simple. You sound like an Adobe sales rep. :thumbdown: And nobody "gives me" PS. Even if they did I still wouldn't use it because it just doesn't work the way I need it to. Hint: PS is not really a good batch processor. If you don't understand this, then the problem is yours, not mine.

And seriously, the fighting is not necessary. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and what works for one person may not work for another person. So just let it rest.

Bingo. :thumbup: