Post production software / wich is the best?

mba1971 · 10-21-2009, 07:42 PM

So lest suppose I want to buy a post processin program. Wich one is worth the money and investment in time ( to master it)?

Wheatfield · 10-21-2009, 08:45 PM

Adobe Photoshop.
The learning curve is huge though as it is a very big program.

graphicgr8s · 10-21-2009, 08:57 PM

Don't forget to join NAPP. Lessens the learning curve.

Class A · 10-22-2009, 02:33 AM

Originally posted by mba1971

So lest suppose I want to buy a post processin program. Wich one is worth the money and investment in time ( to master it)?

Many photographers seem to prefer Lightroom over Photoshop. Less possibilities but typically sufficient.

I'm not a great fan of these fat Adobe programs which are expensive and not easy to use. Bear in mind though that my experience stems from CS3 or even earlier, not sure. I could handle other Windows software blindfolded, but Photoshop set me back to beginner mode for the most basic actions. It was a royal pain to use. It may well be that later versions and in particular Lightroom have a better user interface by now.

Has anyone compared free software like "The Gimp" and "RawTherapee" to Photoshop and Lightroom respectively?

What is one missing out by using the above free software?

deejjjaaaa · 10-22-2009, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by Class A

What is one missing out by using the above free software?

PP means layers, masks and so on and plugins that can save you time & effort... nothing gets close to what is available in/for PS so far if you want to do a heavy PPing...

Eruditass · 10-22-2009, 10:42 AM

Lightroom is great for 99.999% of images and I find it very easy to use and non-destructive - even better for beginners. I recommend it over PS.

philbaum · 10-22-2009, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by mba1971

So lest suppose I want to buy a post processin program. Wich one is worth the money and investment in time ( to master it)?

Depends on your personal goals, fit and preferences.

If you are just starting out, i'd recommend Adobe Elements. Usually about $100 but some box stores like Costco have occasional sales on it for as little as $49. Some folks say it has 95% of what Adobe Photoshop has. One of the best parts is one can get pretty sophisticated with it by learning layers and also its uses most of the plugins available to Photoshop. I currently use the Topaz Denoiser as a plugin for it and its GREAT.

Then later on, if you wish, you can migrate to Lighroom (which is designed to interchange photos with Elements for the things that LR can't handle, or can migrate to the full Photoshop).

Best wishes

Marc Sabatella · 10-22-2009, 12:31 PM

I find the GIMP to be as daunting as Photoshop, personally. I've only taken a breif look at RT, but it doesn't provide the same sort of integrated browsing/organizing/parametric-editing environment that LR does.

I'd say Photoshop or the GIMP or similar programs are both well suited when you intend to spend a long time doing a lot of things to each photo. The strength of programs like LR - also Aperture, ACDSee Pro, and Lightzone - are more in the abiity to *quickly* process many files.

Class A · 10-22-2009, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by deejjjaaaa

PP means layers, masks and so on and plugins that can save you time & effort... nothing gets close to what is available in/for PS so far if you want to do a heavy PPing...

GIMP has layers, masks and plugins as well. What essential functionality is offered by PS that GIMP doesn't have?

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

I've only taken a brief look at RT, but it doesn't provide the same sort of integrated browsing/organizing/parametric-editing environment that LR does.

That's my main gripe with RT (RawTherapee) and the reason why I use Picasa most of the time, only resorting to GIMP and RT when a particular image requires more than Picasa offers.

deejjjaaaa · 10-22-2009, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by Class A

GIMP has layers, masks and plugins as well. What essential functionality is offered by PS that GIMP doesn't have?

take a list of plugins available for PS vs the same for GIMP... not just a raw count - but features... did production version of GIMP manage to achive any real usability w/ 16bit images ? and do not try to fool w/ the word essential - you can do everything just w/ gcc compiler in hand... essentially it is enough to do anything w/ the image

deejjjaaaa · 10-22-2009, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by Eruditass

Lightroom is great for 99.999% of images and I find it very easy to use and non-destructive - even better for beginners. I recommend it over PS.

you probably know that PS can do non-destructive too

flyer · 10-22-2009, 04:16 PM

Whatever you can afford and use properly is the best. It's no use getting Photoshop if you can't use it. Corel Paint Shop Pro can do just about everything Photoshop does at a fraction of the cost. But it's RAW converter isn't too hot. Elements can do just about everything a photographer might wish. And so can a lot of other software, so get what you can use comfortably without breaking the bank, and have fun.

Rodney9 · 10-22-2009, 11:02 PM

I use Corel Paint Shop Pro X2 and Raw Therapee, Brilliant and a quarter of the price of PhotoShop

Class A · 10-22-2009, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by deejjjaaaa

did production version of GIMP manage to achive any real usability w/ 16bit images ?

AFAIK, there is a 16-bit branch of GIMP, but it is less capable. I believe there is work being done on expanding GIMP to 16-bit but I don't know how far they are.

Originally posted by deejjjaaaa

and do not try to fool w/ the word essential

I had not intentions to "fool" but I also don't think it is useful to count the n-th version of a "water ripple effect" plugin that no one in their right mind would actually use. There are a few essential things like layers, tone control, channel mixer, sharpening, blurring, doding/burning, etc. that need to be supported well. What else do you need? A "toy camera" effect? I don't.

Spotmatic · 10-23-2009, 07:14 AM

There is no *best* and a full version of Photoshop is not necessary, over kill and a waste of your time to learn. It is really a program for graphics designers. It had no competition for years. It has plenty now and are much easier programs to use. Most of the *free* programs lack good documemtation.

All PP programs have free trials. Check 'em out.

I use the programs below. YMMV.

Silkypix is a great RAW/editing progam. If you try it buy the $5 e-book....well worth the cost.
ACDsee is worth a look.
Photoshop Elements..but *I* don't like the ACR interface.
Lightroom...I am going to try the 3.0 Beta

I also use plugins from Nik software. http://www.niksoftware.com/index/usa/entry.php

There is no simple answer. Have fun.

10-21-2009, 07:42 PM	#1
mba1971 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Smalltown, Quebec Photos: Albums Posts: 179	Post production software / wich is the best? So lest suppose I want to buy a post processin program. Wich one is worth the money and investment in time ( to master it)?

10-22-2009, 12:31 PM	#8
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	I find the GIMP to be as daunting as Photoshop, personally. I've only taken a breif look at RT, but it doesn't provide the same sort of integrated browsing/organizing/parametric-editing environment that LR does. I'd say Photoshop or the GIMP or similar programs are both well suited when you intend to spend a long time doing a lot of things to each photo. The strength of programs like LR - also Aperture, ACDSee Pro, and Lightzone - are more in the abiity to quickly process many files. Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 10-23-2009 at 12:36 PM.

10-23-2009, 07:14 AM	#15
Spotmatic Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Ft. Myers Florida Posts: 169	There is no best and a full version of Photoshop is not necessary, over kill and a waste of your time to learn. It is really a program for graphics designers. It had no competition for years. It has plenty now and are much easier programs to use. Most of the free programs lack good documemtation. All PP programs have free trials. Check 'em out. I use the programs below. YMMV. Silkypix is a great RAW/editing progam. If you try it buy the $5 e-book....well worth the cost. ACDsee is worth a look. Photoshop Elements..but I don't like the ACR interface. Lightroom...I am going to try the 3.0 Beta I also use plugins from Nik software. http://www.niksoftware.com/index/usa/entry.php There is no simple answer. Have fun. Last edited by Spotmatic; 10-23-2009 at 08:06 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Post production question(s)	bluebronco	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	13	08-06-2009 11:01 PM
What post-production software do you use?	bluebronco	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	08-05-2009 10:10 PM
My Amended Post Production Technique	benjikan	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	4	06-24-2009 03:19 PM
Post production time?	jeremy_c	Photographic Technique	20	12-05-2008 02:31 PM
Post Production Q: How do I getting that bleach bypass look?	kveldalf	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	17	11-20-2008 11:58 PM

10-21-2009, 08:45 PM	#2
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,975	Adobe Photoshop. The learning curve is huge though as it is a very big program.

10-21-2009, 08:57 PM	#3
graphicgr8s Guest	Don't forget to join NAPP. Lessens the learning curve.

10-22-2009, 02:33 AM	#4
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by mba1971 So lest suppose I want to buy a post processin program. Wich one is worth the money and investment in time ( to master it)? Many photographers seem to prefer Lightroom over Photoshop. Less possibilities but typically sufficient. I'm not a great fan of these fat Adobe programs which are expensive and not easy to use. Bear in mind though that my experience stems from CS3 or even earlier, not sure. I could handle other Windows software blindfolded, but Photoshop set me back to beginner mode for the most basic actions. It was a royal pain to use. It may well be that later versions and in particular Lightroom have a better user interface by now. Has anyone compared free software like "The Gimp" and "RawTherapee" to Photoshop and Lightroom respectively? What is one missing out by using the above free software?

10-22-2009, 10:38 AM	#5
deejjjaaaa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Posts: 2,043	Originally posted by Class A What is one missing out by using the above free software? PP means layers, masks and so on and plugins that can save you time & effort... nothing gets close to what is available in/for PS so far if you want to do a heavy PPing...

10-22-2009, 10:42 AM	#6
Eruditass Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,207	Lightroom is great for 99.999% of images and I find it very easy to use and non-destructive - even better for beginners. I recommend it over PS.

10-22-2009, 12:13 PM	#7
philbaum Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA Posts: 3,659	Originally posted by mba1971 So lest suppose I want to buy a post processin program. Wich one is worth the money and investment in time ( to master it)? Depends on your personal goals, fit and preferences. If you are just starting out, i'd recommend Adobe Elements. Usually about $100 but some box stores like Costco have occasional sales on it for as little as $49. Some folks say it has 95% of what Adobe Photoshop has. One of the best parts is one can get pretty sophisticated with it by learning layers and also its uses most of the plugins available to Photoshop. I currently use the Topaz Denoiser as a plugin for it and its GREAT. Then later on, if you wish, you can migrate to Lighroom (which is designed to interchange photos with Elements for the things that LR can't handle, or can migrate to the full Photoshop). Best wishes

10-22-2009, 03:55 PM	#9
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by deejjjaaaa PP means layers, masks and so on and plugins that can save you time & effort... nothing gets close to what is available in/for PS so far if you want to do a heavy PPing... GIMP has layers, masks and plugins as well. What essential functionality is offered by PS that GIMP doesn't have? Originally posted by Marc Sabatella I've only taken a brief look at RT, but it doesn't provide the same sort of integrated browsing/organizing/parametric-editing environment that LR does. That's my main gripe with RT (RawTherapee) and the reason why I use Picasa most of the time, only resorting to GIMP and RT when a particular image requires more than Picasa offers.

10-22-2009, 04:10 PM	#10
deejjjaaaa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Posts: 2,043	Originally posted by Class A GIMP has layers, masks and plugins as well. What essential functionality is offered by PS that GIMP doesn't have? take a list of plugins available for PS vs the same for GIMP... not just a raw count - but features... did production version of GIMP manage to achive any real usability w/ 16bit images ? and do not try to fool w/ the word essential - you can do everything just w/ gcc compiler in hand... essentially it is enough to do anything w/ the image

10-22-2009, 04:15 PM	#11
deejjjaaaa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Posts: 2,043	Originally posted by Eruditass Lightroom is great for 99.999% of images and I find it very easy to use and non-destructive - even better for beginners. I recommend it over PS. you probably know that PS can do non-destructive too

10-22-2009, 04:16 PM	#12
flyer Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ste-Anne des Plaines, Qc., Canada Posts: 2,013	Whatever you can afford and use properly is the best. It's no use getting Photoshop if you can't use it. Corel Paint Shop Pro can do just about everything Photoshop does at a fraction of the cost. But it's RAW converter isn't too hot. Elements can do just about everything a photographer might wish. And so can a lot of other software, so get what you can use comfortably without breaking the bank, and have fun.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-22-2009, 11:02 PM	#13
Rodney9 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 135	I use Corel Paint Shop Pro X2 and Raw Therapee, Brilliant and a quarter of the price of PhotoShop

10-22-2009, 11:12 PM	#14
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by deejjjaaaa did production version of GIMP manage to achive any real usability w/ 16bit images ? AFAIK, there is a 16-bit branch of GIMP, but it is less capable. I believe there is work being done on expanding GIMP to 16-bit but I don't know how far they are. Originally posted by deejjjaaaa and do not try to fool w/ the word essential I had not intentions to "fool" but I also don't think it is useful to count the n-th version of a "water ripple effect" plugin that no one in their right mind would actually use. There are a few essential things like layers, tone control, channel mixer, sharpening, blurring, doding/burning, etc. that need to be supported well. What else do you need? A "toy camera" effect? I don't.