[Marina M]

As a beginner, I'll stuck with PhotoWorks. However, I've started with LR but it's a bit too complicated for me.

[photolady95]

I'll stick with my Photoshop Elements 2018, well, now I see they have a 2019, which I'll buy this month, so far it does me fine, and I can use the Nik collection with it. I've never tried darktable. I tried LR, three times, didn't like it all three times. Photoshop I liked, but when it went cloud, not so much. I have Rawtherapee on a disk somewhere but never installed, never needed it.


In the article I was surprised to see Elements as number 2. I like it for the ease of use, it has layers, and I'd say most of what PhotoShop can do, and it catalogs your photos if you want it to, it can publish your photos to the web if you want it to. I don't do either of those things, because......I like to control where and when I publish my photos and where my photos are cataloged.

[barthovis]

I've spent a lot of time the last couple years trying decide on the right photo editing software (for me). I've used Lightroom since v.2 and I like it a lot, as well as Photoshop for some things, but I really dislike Adobe. I've had a few occasions over the years when I've had to contact their (outsourced) customer "service", but every time I have come away from the experience more frustrated than before, and feeling like they didn't understand (or care about) my problem. On top of that, they install about a dozen Windows services (I assume the same on Mac) on your computer that sit in RAM and monitor what you do with "their" software.

I have downloaded several 30-day trials and ended up buying three: Affinity Photo (a very good, and improving, Photoshop sub but not a workflow solution), ON1 (IMO, the most complete photo editing solution available incorporating Lightroom and Photoshop features), and DxO Photo Lab 2. I bought ON1 a couple years ago and although it was capable enough, the workflow didn't flow for me, so I just didn't use it very much. The new 2019 version is a huge step forward, and I could probably be happy with it alone. But before 2019 came out, I had already looked into DxO, and just loved it. I spent a LOT of time doing editing comparisons using the same 2 test photos, which represent typical editing issues, with several programs and have yet to find anything that can surpass, or in many cases equal, the image quality of an image edited in Photo Lab 2. Also, in every interaction I have had with each of these companies (support or otherwise), I felt like I was dealing with an actual employee of that company who understood me. However, these are smaller companies with fewer resources than Adobe, which frustrates a lot of users because they can't make updates to their software fast enough to suit. Also, Capture One is really good, but very expensive, and I got a vibe from them of arrogance and "corporate distance".

[jacamar]

I have used Photoshop Elements over the years and now have Version 13, which I use with the Nik Collection. I use it (and Nik) mostly for adjusting lighting and contrast, B&W conversion, reducing noise, sharpening, panos, and tidying up twigs etc. in wildlife shots. There are probably many PE functions that I never use. I haven't moved on to subsequent versions because they seem very gimmicky - I can't see myself replacing the sky behind a subject or changing a facial expression (which seems a to me to be bit dishonest). I'm aware that PE only works with 8-bit for some applications but I haven't noticed any loss in image quality because of this. Basically, it meets my needs and until someone demonstrates that I can get a more arresting image that's still close to what I saw by using a different app than I'll stick with it.

[emalvick]

WR to the original post, the problem with many online articles is they are just advertisements under the guise of an article, rating. Lists of bests are rarely that cut and dry. If they were, then there would only be a few options in the first place.

At this point in software (same probably goes for cameras), the best is really about what GUI/workflow works best for you. I think every program has its shortcomings, but often that is just the fine line between a photo that processes RAW files vs. a raster editor. Many programs are shifting into the raster editing realm or at least offering some benefits through local edits / layers / etc.

I like to think about these programs from a perspective as if they were all free. The workflow and process in LR is perhaps one of the simplest I've ever used for RAW editing. I think it comes at the expense of having limitations on the finished product, although take that comment with a grain of salt. When I was using LR, I could get to a good finish 95% of the time, and the ability to use plugins and interface with Photoshop made that other 5% not matter much.

There are so many other software out there, however. I've tried Luminar, On1, Capture 1, DxO, Raw Therapee, Dark Table, Light Zone, SilkyPix, AlienSkin, etc. I've tried most of those, perhaps too much as another user noted, but it enough that I could see the pros and cons of each. My final selection really came down to how fast I could get to a finished photo; how much I could eliminate the need to raster edit in Photoshop, Gimp, or Affinity Photo; and cost. I probably could have went to any of those above and had a similar end result and success rate as LR, but it always came down to the one I could get along with most. For instance, I could never get along with On1, despite it having a somewhat intuitive user interface. It just didn't work for me. Capture 1 was somewhat the same way, and its cost was just too much for what I needed; if I was a pro, however, I'd probably use it. The three open source alternatives there--RT, DT, and LightZone-- all have their benefits. I used RT when I first got a Pentax camera, but its lack of local edits drove me away, DT only recently went to Windows, and I wasn't fond of the effort I was having to put into it, and LightZone is actually quite fantastic (and I still use it occasionally), but its workflow is quite abstract and different from almost every other software out there. SilkyPix Pro is actually a superb program, but its performance on my computers has never been ideal, and its cost is on a par with C1. Ultimately, I ended up with DxO as once one learns how to use it (and can get along with it), it is great. But, I can see where it may not work for a pro as it gets limited when trying to work with many files (vs. LR with the ability to sync edits very easily).

Finally, for my workflow, asset management never came into play. I've been using a separate cataloging software for ages, and I've stuck with it for many reasons, the most important being that I can use whatever software I want for raw process and raster editing without being tied to that software's library. I can see where some may not like it, but I think it is a lot harder to change software if your asset management and raw developer are the same, and there is a lot less flexibility when you have to incorporate that aspect of a software into consideration.

The big take away, it really is subjective. There is no one real best, just opinions of what is best. And there are a lot of factors that go into those opinions. And of course Linux will never get a fair shake in it when it comes to commercial entities ranking these things. If it isn't the user base being too small, it's either too slow of development or features that are too ahead of their time. It is what it is. I appreciate forums like this one more than articles because at least people (on this forum anyway) tend to be more objective and honest about what they like and why.

[normhead]

I'm interested in Alien Skin (#5 in this article) as a replacement for Apple Aperture. It's non-destructive and has cataloguing features. But I can't find a lot of commentary on it anywhere. It would seem to be the best software that nobody uses.

[Des]

The big take away, it really is subjective. There is no one real best, just opinions of what is best. And there are a lot of factors that go into those opinions. And of course Linux will never get a fair shake in it when it comes to commercial entities ranking these things. If it isn't the user base being too small, it's either too slow of development or features that are too ahead of their time. It is what it is. I appreciate forums like this one more than articles because at least people (on this forum anyway) tend to be more objective and honest about what they like and why.

Excellent, thoughtful post. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

[Kobie]

For photo stacking and "special effects/layer based editing" and the like, I use Chasy's Draw IES.
For portrait work I use Affinity Photo.
For Raw files I use DXO Photo Lab 2.

Each software is a tool and has it's strengths. I use them for their strengths. Well, that and they wok best for myself.

[CharLac]

WR to the original post, the problem with many online articles is they are just advertisements under the guise of an article, rating. Lists of bests are rarely that cut and dry. If they were, then there would only be a few options in the first place.

At this point in software (same probably goes for cameras), the best is really about what GUI/workflow works best for you. I think every program has its shortcomings, but often that is just the fine line between a photo that processes RAW files vs. a raster editor. Many programs are shifting into the raster editing realm or at least offering some benefits through local edits / layers / etc.

I like to think about these programs from a perspective as if they were all free. The workflow and process in LR is perhaps one of the simplest I've ever used for RAW editing. I think it comes at the expense of having limitations on the finished product, although take that comment with a grain of salt. When I was using LR, I could get to a good finish 95% of the time, and the ability to use plugins and interface with Photoshop made that other 5% not matter much.

There are so many other software out there, however. I've tried Luminar, On1, Capture 1, DxO, Raw Therapee, Dark Table, Light Zone, SilkyPix, AlienSkin, etc. I've tried most of those, perhaps too much as another user noted, but it enough that I could see the pros and cons of each. My final selection really came down to how fast I could get to a finished photo; how much I could eliminate the need to raster edit in Photoshop, Gimp, or Affinity Photo; and cost. I probably could have went to any of those above and had a similar end result and success rate as LR, but it always came down to the one I could get along with most. For instance, I could never get along with On1, despite it having a somewhat intuitive user interface. It just didn't work for me. Capture 1 was somewhat the same way, and its cost was just too much for what I needed; if I was a pro, however, I'd probably use it. The three open source alternatives there--RT, DT, and LightZone-- all have their benefits. I used RT when I first got a Pentax camera, but its lack of local edits drove me away, DT only recently went to Windows, and I wasn't fond of the effort I was having to put into it, and LightZone is actually quite fantastic (and I still use it occasionally), but its workflow is quite abstract and different from almost every other software out there. SilkyPix Pro is actually a superb program, but its performance on my computers has never been ideal, and its cost is on a par with C1. Ultimately, I ended up with DxO as once one learns how to use it (and can get along with it), it is great. But, I can see where it may not work for a pro as it gets limited when trying to work with many files (vs. LR with the ability to sync edits very easily).

Finally, for my workflow, asset management never came into play. I've been using a separate cataloging software for ages, and I've stuck with it for many reasons, the most important being that I can use whatever software I want for raw process and raster editing without being tied to that software's library. I can see where some may not like it, but I think it is a lot harder to change software if your asset management and raw developer are the same, and there is a lot less flexibility when you have to incorporate that aspect of a software into consideration.

The big take away, it really is subjective. There is no one real best, just opinions of what is best. And there are a lot of factors that go into those opinions. And of course Linux will never get a fair shake in it when it comes to commercial entities ranking these things. If it isn't the user base being too small, it's either too slow of development or features that are too ahead of their time. It is what it is. I appreciate forums like this one more than articles because at least people (on this forum anyway) tend to be more objective and honest about what they like and why.

What do you use for cataloging?

[emalvick]

What do you use for cataloging?

IMatch

It has a bit of a learning curve (more like a lot of features and can be overwhelming at first use), but it is extremely versatile. It has a great versioning feature and keywording / thesaurus (controlled vocabulary) is quite extensive as opposed to Lightroom. Only real con compared to integrated RAW Developer/Library software is that it can't show you virtual edits or copies because it is strictly for cataloging, and developing a controlled process is a necessity when working with software that has its own catalog (like LR); you can't use two cataloging software simultaneously, so when I used LR, I had to keep my use of it to read only and not use it for keywording or other metadata editing (one could do the opposite and edit all their keywords in a software and use IMatch to read the catalog, but then I would think you might not need it). By the way, because most RAW developers develop sidecar files, I could use the presence of sidecar files to automatically categorize images into a "software" category that allows me to automatically see where I've edited the file, even if I've never exported it (can't see the actual edits though except perhaps in the limited case where you save the edits to an embedded DNG file or you actually export a file and create a version set).

[CharLac]

IMatch

It has a bit of a learning curve (more like a lot of features and can be overwhelming at first use), but it is extremely versatile. It has a great versioning feature and keywording / thesaurus (controlled vocabulary) is quite extensive as opposed to Lightroom. Only real con compared to integrated RAW Developer/Library software is that it can't show you virtual edits or copies because it is strictly for cataloging, and developing a controlled process is a necessity when working with software that has its own catalog (like LR); you can't use two cataloging software simultaneously, so when I used LR, I had to keep my use of it to read only and not use it for keywording or other metadata editing (one could do the opposite and edit all their keywords in a software and use IMatch to read the catalog, but then I would think you might not need it). By the way, because most RAW developers develop sidecar files, I could use the presence of sidecar files to automatically categorize images into a "software" category that allows me to automatically see where I've edited the file, even if I've never exported it (can't see the actual edits though except perhaps in the limited case where you save the edits to an embedded DNG file or you actually export a file and create a version set).

Can you launch an editor from iMatch? i.e. You are doing some filtering in iMatch and you find the image you want, can you then send it to DxO or even one of the NIK modules?

[emalvick]

Can you launch an editor from iMatch? i.e. You are doing some filtering in iMatch and you find the image you want, can you then send it to DxO or even one of the NIK modules?

Yes.

First, I should note this is a Windows only program

They have a favorites panel (not sure if it is called that exactly as they tweaked some panels in the 2018 version) where you essentially set a button that links to the .exe file for the program. So I have a series of buttons for any software I want to operate as a "plugin". Generally, I select a file(s), and click the button, and it opens them in the program. I believe it is the equivalent of right-clicking in Windows Explorer and choosing the "Open with..." option.

It works fairly well, although what happens with multiple files, varies by the program you are using. And, the above does not really work with a program like LR where it functions off its own Library.

I should mention that when I was using LR, my method was to use the color labels in metadata to identify photos I wanted to edit in LR by a specific color and then create a smart-collection based on that color label (that can work with any program that will read color labels).

The other thing I do occasionally when I know I'll be working with a lot of images is to drag and drop them into the open program. That works pretty well with DxO when I am processing a lot of images; it work well with Luminar since the program only worked with one file at a time; and it worked well with RawTherapee, which didn't play well with the "exe" type shortcut described before.

[NS_Sailor]

A few years ago after Adobe began charging annual subscription fees I switched to Paintshop Pro and Aftershot Pro 3.0 by Corel and I doubt I would ever return to Adobe
Corel puts out new/updated with features versions every year and upgrades run about $66 CAD and are supported for 3 years at no extra charge.
One particularly good thing that I like about Paintshop is that they have macro'd/automated many of the processes that would take al lot of added manipulation with layers to achieve
Each version also comes with a number of different innovative Plugins free with software packages Version 2022 has added AI to some of it's processes like background manipulation
I created the attached photo using the Pic-to-Paint Plugin that came with the 2020 version

[125px]

A few years ago after Adobe began charging annual subscription fees I switched to Paintshop Pro and Aftershot Pro 3.0 by Corel and I doubt I would ever return to Adobe
Corel puts out new/updated with features versions every year and upgrades run about $66 CAD and are supported for 3 years at no extra charge.
One particularly good thing that I like about Paintshop is that they have macro'd/automated many of the processes that would take al lot of added manipulation with layers to achieve
Each version also comes with a number of different innovative Plugins free with software packages Version 2022 has added AI to some of it's processes like background manipulation
I created the attached photo using the Pic-to-Paint Plugin that came with the 2020 version

I like Aftershot Pro from Corel as well. I am pretty sure I got it on a CD or DVD included with a Pentax camera I purchased, either the K-50 or K-70. Yay for Pentax! The registration code still works. It works on both Linux and Windows.
It has Perfectly Clear and is pretty straightforward even for more complex post-processing.

I got Silkypix at version 5 or 6, and went to update it after a while, but the doofus required a social security number!!! That, to me, is a "what, are you nuts????" kind of thing. Haven't looked back since.
I ended up getting a copy of Affinity Photo, and was using it mainly to convert from raw using the simple editing tools they had at the time. Finally realized that it's best at editing JPG's, and it's really great for that, but raw conversion is better, I think, with RawTherapee. I also bought Affinity Publisher, thinking I'd use that to control printing, but found another program for that, as well, "QImage One". Not much experience with that, as yet. What I've deduced from this process is that one needs separate programs to work at each stage of the process. So my plan is to go from the file viewer that lets me delete stuff quickly (present candidates, IrfanView and Nomacs), to RawTherapee, to Affinity Photo, to QImage One.