Check Out Our Shop
Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: I want to get photo editing software

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    11,258

    I want to get photo editing software

    I have no idea. I think I take some ok shots on a beginning amateur status. Now it's time to do more editing than a simple crop. Light balance, sequences, etc.

    What do I get? I looked at photoshop and saw CS3 is out of my price range and I probably don't need that many functions.

    I'm thinking $200 to 300.

    Any thoughts or good sites for reviews. I'm sorry to newb it up but I'm board and this forum doesn't get many posts anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    Well, I'm not allowed to delete this post, but, I can say, go fuck yourselves, everybody!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Stuck in perpetual Meh
    Posts
    35,244
    THE GIMP.

    It's free - try it out. Otherwise I got nothin' - PS ain't free.

  3. #3
    advres Guest
    I don't know shit about Photoshop Elements but you may want to look into it. Sounds kinda like FCP vs FCE.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    HELLsinki, Finland
    Posts
    3,683
    Gimp is a really good free option.

    Couple the Gimp with Lightroom and you're set (do most of the photos in LL, and only use Gimp when LL can't handle it).

    Try LL for 30 days free.
    Last edited by hemas; 11-07-2007 at 01:49 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by RootSkier
    You should post naked pictures of this godless heathen.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,787
    Second or third lightroom. Will do almost everything you want to do.

    If you want to move heads around or something then you'll need a freeware photoshop (aka gimp).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Revelstoke; Rogers Pass
    Posts
    877
    check your PM's
    Quote Originally Posted by grrrr
    There are good men out there. Good men who are good looking, who ski hard, have their shit in order, know their priorities in life and will make you happy. I'm not one of them, but they are out there.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Iron Range
    Posts
    4,965
    GIMP is great, but requires a shift in paradigm for those used to PS. Nothing is as good as Lightroom IMO. You can get anything you want for free, depending on your software piracy ethical stance.

    Open source stuff beyond GIMP: Digikam and FSpot if y ou're running Linux, and also this gem which I just discovered:

    http://bluemarine.tidalwave.it/

    Java based Photo Workflow. It looks promising, but newer open source projects can sometimes be rough in the beginning. It's java so it should run on all 3 major platforms.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Iron Range
    Posts
    4,965
    I installed and ran BlueMarine for a while...it needs work. It's very early in the dev cycle, as they don't even have the editing module integrated yet.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    At Work
    Posts
    3,008
    Quote Originally Posted by bio-smear View Post
    You can get anything you want for free, depending on your software piracy ethical stance.
    Ding. Ding.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Land of Little Snow
    Posts
    1,041
    www.isohunt.com

    My solution: PS CS3 and lightroom. Lightroom kicks ass.

    // cout << "I'm a cheap pirate bastard" << endl;

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,490
    Try to find a copy of Photoshop 7, which, is like, 3 or 4 versions back. It was one of the last non copy protected versions of Photoshop, so you can just move it off someone's hard drive and onto yours. Hell, you can probably find it for free or cheap somewhere collecting dust on some geek's shelf. It will be fine for you as a beginner, and if you get the bug, move on up to CS3 or maybe 4 when it comes out.
    Are you a student, or do you know one? Students get Adobe products cheap.

    And, once and for all, Lightroom is an organizing tool, not an editing software. Yeah, you can do a few tricks with it, but it ain't Photoshop. No layers, for a start.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    HELLsinki, Finland
    Posts
    3,683
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    Are you a student, or do you know one? Students get Adobe products cheap.
    Yep, you can get PS CS3 for like 200 bucks or so

    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    And, once and for all, Lightroom is an organizing tool, not an editing software. Yeah, you can do a few tricks with it, but it ain't Photoshop. No layers, for a start.
    Well, it's a little more than just an organizing tool. It's a workflow tool, where you do majority of the tweaks on the photos with it... And only bring out the big guns (PS, Gimp) for the few pics you need.

    Unless you're into big time photo manipulation, LL will cover you on nearly all situations.

    And if you do need to use real photo manipulation, well I'd say that the effort is better spent on learning to take the pics in the 1st place.
    Quote Originally Posted by RootSkier
    You should post naked pictures of this godless heathen.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    11,258
    Thanks everyone. "Found" a copy of PS 7 I'm going to mess with for a bit. Might check out Lightroom too. What is an ethic?
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    Well, I'm not allowed to delete this post, but, I can say, go fuck yourselves, everybody!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,490
    Quote Originally Posted by hemas View Post
    And if you do need to use real photo manipulation, well I'd say that the effort is better spent on learning to take the pics in the 1st place.
    OK, fine. Makes my job more exotic, now that a lot of people think they are actually retouching in Lightroom. But, remember this, the next time you walk down the rows of magazines in Borders. Everyone of those cover pics has been manipulated in Photoshop, and 80% of the interior pics have been, too.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,787
    but what you do is exotic for the average joe. He isn't doing magazine covers or magazine interiors. He's taking photographs. A better example would be browsing a professional photographer's gallery -- I bet the percentage of photos that have seen photoshop in that context is much much lower. Most of those photos shouldn't have to see photoshop until they're being used for a more specific purpose, like a magazine cover.

    right?
    Last edited by focus; 11-08-2007 at 04:26 PM.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,490
    I just think that , if one wants to consider themself a photographer, or, more specifically, an artist who works with the photographic medium, then you must learn Photoshop. It's the industry standard, the most versatile tool, used worldwide. It's a lot like calling yourself a photographer 30 years ago and selling prints the lab made. A, that's expensive, and B, you're losing a lot of control in the process. Photoshop may look expensive, and difficult to learn - the former, not really, the latter, well, maybe, if you don't use it a lot and keep up on things. But once you get it, man, there's a whole world of creativity in your little computer you haven't even thought of dealing with up to that point. I see people trying to do things on, say, Strobist, killing themselves for a little detail or a highlight here or there, that I can do easily in Photoshop. Unfortunately, that's how a lot of pro photographers think these days - "we'll fix it in post" is the cliche, but that's OK, I get paid by the hour.
    Adobe was pretty smart putting those controls in Lightroom, and I'll bet they expand on it down the line, merging the two into one big mess of a software program. But, in the meantime, it seems to have created a new generation of photographers who think it's all you need. It's not.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Conundrum View Post
    I have no idea. I think I take some ok shots on a beginning amateur status. Now it's time to do more editing than a simple crop. Light balance, sequences, etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    I just think that , if one wants to consider themself a photographer, or, more specifically, an artist who works with the photographic medium, then you must learn Photoshop.
    I would say Benny that your statement above is probably absolutely correct, but has very little bearing on what Conundrum is asking about. I don't equate "ok shots on a beginning amateur status" to Conundrum considering himself an "artist who works with the photographic medium."

    Meanwhile, interested to see how this turns out as I'd consider myself in the same boat as Conundrum.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Big E View Post
    "artist who works with the photographic medium."

    I wasn't trying to be pompous there, just trying to stress how I think most people should approach the 21st century of photography. So many times I encounter a photographer or someone in the "art" world who sneers at the new digital age, like it's a disease. "Oh, no, I never manipulate my images. They're my pure vision.", or "Digital prints can never compare to traditional silver halide." Hell, there's still some people out there who won't shoot color. Which is an absurd way of approaching the medium, considering it's short history, and the fact that it's rooted in technology, anyway. But a lot of people are scared of change, and many of them are critics, gallery owners, and, the worst, collectors.
    I think you'd have a lot more fun if you think of every click of the shutter as "raw" material to be molded on the computer.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    I wasn't trying to be pompous there, just trying to stress how I think most people should approach the 21st century of photography.
    Wasn't suggesting you were, just that for us beginners, full-blown PS is a bit of overkill I would say (both in cost and power).

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Stuck in perpetual Meh
    Posts
    35,244
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    ...But a lot of people are scared of change, and many of them are critics, gallery owners, and, the worst, collectors....
    Yeah, those idiots!

    I honestly think PS is its own artform - no longer "Photography" since you don't need to start with an image you captured at all... maybe closer to an electronic medium that you manipulate to produce art. I'm more of a purist, I guess. I like being able to look at a scene, know my camera and it's limitations, and visualize a photograph that I then capture. If I look at my pix straight from the card and am satisfied then that's a great start.

    I do understand that 1/2 of Ansel Adams' magic happened in the darkroom. I do not discount post-production as a viable component of photographic art, but do seem to prefer the more... organic (for lack of a better term) workflow of capturing the image as intended, then manipulating it as little as possible.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    1,084
    So is Lightroom like the payed version of Picasa?

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    HELLsinki, Finland
    Posts
    3,683
    Quote Originally Posted by wanghoeby View Post
    So is Lightroom like the payed version of Picasa?
    Yes, but with $$$ you get all sorts of nice stuff as well. Just download and try it.
    Quote Originally Posted by RootSkier
    You should post naked pictures of this godless heathen.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    State of Disbelief
    Posts
    602
    I 3rd,4th,5th GIMP and add Irfanview. Edit in GIMP and file manage via Irfanview. GIMP does 8bit but unless your doing commercial stuff you wont need the higher bit depth of Photoshop. Plus its free.

Similar Threads

  1. Sound/Audio editing & mixing software?
    By Chainsaw_Willie in forum Tech Talk
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-26-2007, 09:51 AM
  2. Mac Photo Editing software?
    By CantDog in forum The Padded Room
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-04-2007, 02:28 PM
  3. Photo software for my parents
    By Platinum Pete in forum Tech Talk
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-25-2006, 02:46 PM
  4. FS: Professional Video Editing Software
    By Core Shot in forum Gear Swap (List View)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-14-2005, 08:38 AM
  5. Music Editing Software
    By pointemstraight in forum Tech Talk
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-07-2005, 07:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •