It's time to abandon PhotoShop

Started Jan 9, 2013 | Discussions
TN Args
Regular MemberPosts: 389Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to Doug R, Mar 20, 2013

You may well not need Photoshop any more but you shouldn't need lies or have truths to justify your decision. "Now that Adobe has decided to go to the monthly rental fee and eliminated upgrades" just is not true and if you have to use it as an excuse to dump Photoshop than it must mean you still need Photoshop. Dump Photoshop or not just don't lie to yourself or others to do it.

-- hide signature --

Doug

Good Grief Doug, if you disagree with a point made, simply correct it. Who needs the crapola.

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TN Args
Regular MemberPosts: 389Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to deep7, Mar 20, 2013

It could pay to check out Pixelmator. It doesn't do everything and takes some learning but it is quite powerful, very quick and cheap.

And it's retina-ready!

-- hide signature --

call me Arg

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tom_N
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,442
Like?
Zombie thread alert
In reply to TN Args, Mar 20, 2013
No text.
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jacques Cornell
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,164Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to Doug R, Mar 29, 2013

Doug R wrote:

You may well not need Photoshop any more but you shouldn't need lies or have truths to justify your decision. "Now that Adobe has decided to go to the monthly rental fee and eliminated upgrades" just is not true and if you have to use it as an excuse to dump Photoshop than it must mean you still need Photoshop. Dump Photoshop or not just don't lie to yourself or others to do it.

-- hide signature --

Doug

Not fully accurate, but not exactly a lie, either. Adobe has eliminated upgrades...for versions more than one version old. For those of us who have traditionally skipped every other upgrade, this is a major sock in the wallet.

-- hide signature --

'No matter where you go, there you are.'

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +27 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DenWil
Senior MemberPosts: 1,540
Like?
Re: Graphic Artists or Photographers
In reply to KRR, Mar 29, 2013

KRR wrote:

This thread indicates that the "art" of photography is being overwhelmed by graphic artists. Anybody out there who recalls the days of film when artists needed to have good equipment and then accepted the reality that--for good photos--all you needed was good light and proper camera settings. That's it.

This photoshop dance is contrary to my way of thinking. Why not put your effort into taking better photographs to begin with; then you would not need 1000 exposures, a database, editing, correction, layers, etc. With Aperture's intuitive design, I just crop and save a TIFF. Easy. Simple. Fast. Cheap. Come on people, let's get back to basics and let the graphic artists do their thing without corrupting our thing.

Although I agree 100%,  that kind of talk around here- between the engineers and the enthusiasts- will get you mugged. Their thing is to sit at a computer and create the image that they could not capture with a thousand frames in a week end.

-- hide signature --

denniswilliams

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zaphodz
Forum MemberPosts: 74Gear list
Like?
Re: Pixelmater
In reply to afterburn, Apr 4, 2013

I have used Pixelmator quite a bit in the quest for a PS alternative and find it to be pretty good overall and it can be integrated into an Aperture workflow, but there are a few caveats.
Firstly there was seemingly an bad bug that caused all sorts of problems including serious crashes that turned out to be an issue with certain NVidia card drivers, this was resolved in OSX 10.8.3 so you need to have at least this version of OSX if you have the affected card driver (you can find out which ones on the Pixelmator site blog).
Secondly, there are some things the current version of Pixelmator (2.1.4 Cherry) doesn't do but will be added in upcoming releases, the most significant being Layer Styles coming in V3 some time this year. Hopefully this will also allow making a selection from a path, which is essential for my workflow. It will be interesting to see if it will be possible to do Frequency Separation with the new release, that would be the clincher for me.
There is an interim version 2.2 due out any time now which will include the ability to fill a vector shape with a gradient fill, useful for creating certain types of mask, and a set of retro effects filters called "Light Leak" which have an Instagram/Hipstamatic feel to them.
Overall, in use Pixelmator is a pleasure to use once you get used to it, and that's the key, don't reject it after half an hour of playing with it, if you take the time to find out how it works you will find that it is quite capable, not yet a PS killer but worthy of serious consideration and hopefully a true PS alternative in the months to come.
The £10.49/$15 price is an offer price and could end when the new version is released, so I'd get it now as X.X upgrades are free.
Hope this is of interest to some.
Cheers - Zaphodz.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Conchita
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,909
Like?
Re: Pixelmater
In reply to Zaphodz, Apr 4, 2013

Well, but that's the thing. It seems to me that Pixelmator is moving farther and farther away from being a possible photoshop replacement, and more towards a drawing/art program. Recent developments and the touted new features in blueberry or whatever it will be called all seem geared far more to drawing than to anything directly photo related.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
abib
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: Pixelmater
In reply to Zaphodz, Apr 22, 2013

Hi - I've looked at frequency separation in pixelmator and posted the method to get three layer and two layer separation as in the popular PS 2/128 method. It's a bit involved but it works.

http://support.pixelmator.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8984

that should help you achieve it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zaphodz
Forum MemberPosts: 74Gear list
Like?
Re: Pixelmater
In reply to abib, May 19, 2013

Hi abib, funnily enough I was just looking at that the other day. I tried it but couldn't follow the instructions, any chance you could post something with more explanation (or PM me if you prefer), I would appreciate it very much.

Thanks - Zaphodz

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
minniev
Senior MemberPosts: 1,548
Like?
Acorn
In reply to Chester S Parks, May 19, 2013

I am pretty much done with photoshop though I'll keep my old version till it won't work any more. This weekend I've been downloading trial versions to see what works best. If you're a mac person, you may want to take a look at the new version of Acorn, which is really pretty cool. It has more of a mac feel than any alternative I've tried (don't know how else to explain it). Lightroom is my staple for cataloguing and developing RAW files and will keep using it till they suck it up into the Cloud. Acorn worked seamlessly as an external LR editor and plopped its finished files down in LR right where I wanted them without any argument, just like PS did. I am still wrangling with Pixelmator to get it to play nicely with lightroom due to its file naming formats. Pixelmator works OK but I hate having to chase down the resultant files and its interface isn't very intuitive. Corel is such a nuisance to deal with on tech support, I just don't want to fool with their products.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RobertBarnett
Senior MemberPosts: 1,402Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to Chester S Parks, May 23, 2013

One thing I have wondered about is just how smart is it to jump your images from one program/plug-in to another just to avoid using Photoshop. There has to be some loss of quality when you go from program to program, plug-in to plug-in instead of just doing it all in one program like Photoshop.

Robert

 RobertBarnett's gear list:RobertBarnett's gear list
Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony DT 30mm F2.8 Macro SAM Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alpha Doug
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,181Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to RobertBarnett, May 24, 2013

Both Topaz and OnOne have features that will allow you to bring a Copy Tiff into a multi plugin window, which will allow you to use several different plugins on the same data without "saving" that image back into the library until you are finished.  In some ways this is no different from round tripping to Photoshop.  Actually, if you use an uncompressed Tiff file to do the editing, even if you open it and save it several times, there is very little if any image degradation.

-- hide signature --

Only my opinion. It's worth what you paid for it. Your mileage may vary! ;-}
www.dougwigton.com/

 Alpha Doug's gear list:Alpha Doug's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony SLT-A77 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Olympus PEN E-PM2 Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
theswede
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,936Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to RobertBarnett, May 24, 2013

RobertBarnett wrote:

One thing I have wondered about is just how smart is it to jump your images from one program/plug-in to another just to avoid using Photoshop. There has to be some loss of quality when you go from program to program, plug-in to plug-in instead of just doing it all in one program like Photoshop.

Why? What technical reason would there be for loss of quality? What specific technical limitation in using several programs will cause loss of quality?

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony 50mm F1.4 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
graybalanced
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,084
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to RobertBarnett, May 24, 2013

RobertBarnett wrote:

One thing I have wondered about is just how smart is it to jump your images from one program/plug-in to another just to avoid using Photoshop. There has to be some loss of quality when you go from program to program, plug-in to plug-in instead of just doing it all in one program like Photoshop.

I don't think there's any more of a risk to that than if you opened the same lossless format image (e.g., TIFF or PSD) repeatedly in multiple sessions in just Photoshop.

What you lose is the ability to maintain nondestructive edits in adjustment layers, smart objects, etc. since even if non-Photoshop apps have nondestructive features, there isn't a common format between them that would preserve the nondestructive editability from app to app.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RobertBarnett
Senior MemberPosts: 1,402Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to graybalanced, May 25, 2013

Sorry I just don't buy that opening, editing and saving an image in say 5 different applications even in a lossless format doesn't cause more image damage than doing all 5 things in one application. There is more going on then opening and saving and no one seems to take that in to consideration.

Robert

 RobertBarnett's gear list:RobertBarnett's gear list
Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony DT 30mm F2.8 Macro SAM Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,365
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to RobertBarnett, May 25, 2013

RobertBarnett wrote:

There is more going on then opening and saving and no one seems to take that in to consideration.

Robert

Such as?

The difference between opening and saving an image in 5 different applications or in Photoshop alone depends entirely on what you do in those applications before saving.

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows
--Epictetus

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RobertBarnett
Senior MemberPosts: 1,402Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to WoodWorks, May 25, 2013

As a single example what color space are these plug-ins opening your images in? It may put them back in whatever you had them in when you opened them, but that doesn't mean that they opened them in that color space and worked in that colorspace. Once or twice like this is one thing but dozens because you have to have so many different things to make up for features in Photoshop and you have data loss.

You will never convince me that the more programs you run your images through that they will be just fine and dandy. There will be data loss.

Robert

 RobertBarnett's gear list:RobertBarnett's gear list
Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony DT 30mm F2.8 Macro SAM Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,365
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to RobertBarnett, May 26, 2013

RobertBarnett wrote:

Once or twice like this is one thing but dozens because you have to have so many different things to make up for features in Photoshop and you have data loss.

Robert

You keep moving the goal posts, Robert. It's hard to keep up. Who said anything about "dozens" of  different applications in this thread?

What I said is that what happens to your image in some application other than Photoshop depends entirely on what you do to your image in that application. So if you open it in Pixelmator, for instance, in the same color space, at the same resolution, and then simply save it, there would be no appreciable difference to the quality of that image than if you had done the same in Photoshop. After all, your image is, to put it simply, a bunch of pixels, each with a certain numerical value of hue, saturation, and brightness, and Photoshop isn't some sort of magical application.

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows
--Epictetus

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
theswede
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,936Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to RobertBarnett, May 27, 2013

RobertBarnett wrote:

Sorry I just don't buy that opening, editing and saving an image in say 5 different applications even in a lossless format doesn't cause more image damage than doing all 5 things in one application.

Ignorance as an argument does not work very well. Try providing a coherent argument instead of holding forth your inability to comprehend.

There is more going on then opening and saving and no one seems to take that in to consideration.

Of course there is - that is the point of editing. But what you are claiming is that the opening and saving causes degradation, not that the "more going on" does. You need to support that the opening and saving causes degradation or you have no point.

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony 50mm F1.4 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
theswede
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,936Gear list
Like?
Re: It's time to abandon PhotoShop
In reply to RobertBarnett, May 27, 2013

RobertBarnett wrote:

As a single example what color space are these plug-ins opening your images in?

The one the images specify they are in.

It may put them back in whatever you had them in when you opened them, but that doesn't mean that they opened them in that color space and worked in that colorspace.

The only time they do not is when they're broken. And yes, using broken software will cause image degradation. But that is not inherent in using multiple applications. If you use 100 applications and none of them are broken, you have no degradation.

Of course, if you use a broken plugin in Photoshop you have the exact same problem.

Once or twice like this is one thing but dozens because you have to have so many different things to make up for features in Photoshop and you have data loss.

What makes it necessarily so? If you do not use broken software you have no data loss no matter how many applications you use.

You will never convince me that the more programs you run your images through that they will be just fine and dandy. There will be data loss.

You are ignorant and you will remain so no matter what arguments and facts are put forth. Good to know!

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony 50mm F1.4 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads