Alien Skin has launched Exposure X, its non-destructive photo editor and film emulation software for Mac OS X and Windows. Exposure X is the successor to Exposure 7, and functions as both a plug-in for Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop as well as a standalone editor. Features include a revamped user interface, RAW image editing, and an import system that doesn't use a catalog file.
Plans to release Exposure X were announced weeks ago. As promised, the software combines simplified design with non-destructive editing tools for organizing, editing, processing, and storing photos. Exposure X doesn’t use a catalog file, instead opening photos directly from the source folder. The interface, meanwhile, does away with separate modules, presenting a full set of tools at all times, according to Alien Skin. Analog looks can be applied to images, including Kodachrome, Lo-Fi, Daguerreotypes, and more.
Exposure X is a free upgrade for Exposure 7 owners and $99 USD for those with other Exposure versions. The software is $149 USD for new customers.
So i have been playing with Exposure X and the more i play with it i can match the color and look i get in lightroom after you learn how the tools work. For sharpening it has two different sharpening tool areas if you use then i am not seeing any less sharp images then what i get in Lightroom. I would like to see more color control like in lightroom i use the extra color tools a lot in Lightroom
I love the Bokeh tool that is almost worth the price of the program just for that. all the presets, borders and light effects and the Vignette tool.
Also it dose not support the new Nikon D500 i am shooting with now.
Also playing with DxO and like it a lot but it lacks any other editing tools it would be great if DxO would work with Exposure is that possible as the two of them together
Over all i would buy Exposure X if they have a way to add my logo png to my images on export center bottom And have D500 camera support
For the most part Exposure X reminds me of a stand alone version of the Developer module in LR. Add some preset to lightroom to get same effects or create your own... LR also seems to keep image sharper
Hi, I am a novice photographer with a Sony a6000 and generally just take my photos as is.
Looking for an effective photo editing tool that is easy to use.
I would also like to know if there are any amazing photo organization programs out there. I am currently using Picasa through google. One of the biggest issues I have is duplicate images across many HDD's and backups. Anyway to de-dupe?
I've just tried the trial version of this software, in my opinion doesn't worth a second of our time. I appreciate the effort they put to develop a valid alternative to our common used softwares but the colour rendering, speed and overall the output quality is hugely far from our usual everyday softwares. I'm not english please forgive my grammar.
As a long term user of Aperture and now Lightroom for the past year (and from before both of those, Photoshop) I have found Exposure X has filled a gap in my needs for a photo editor (this is in response to a post asking if another image editing application was required).
For me, the need was speed. To be able to navigate directly to a folder containing images (raw or jpg) and be able to instantly make adjustments without having to progress through importing and rendering of previews is incredible and really useful. Editing is then a breeze and exporting of images is really quick too. I've not done any timed comparisons but it certainly 'feels' faster than Lightroom at exporting files.
The program has its limits in functionality and its image rendering does not match the quality of Lightroom and C1Pro but the speed is incredible.
So, for anyone needing to do quick and simple edits (crop, exposure tweaks, etc.) where speed is of the essence I can recommend Exposure X.
The problem with making adjustments directly in Exposure X, is there is no histogram! Major oversight! How can you tell if you clip highlights or crush blacks in Exposure?
A good quality, calibrated monitor goes a very long way in helping. A screen which shows a wide range of tones really helps to show any areas clipped or crushed. And also, this is where different people have very different techniques, even in Lightroom or Photoshop I will rarely use the histogram to judge such things.
I tend to know which images have clipped highlights from when I shot them (I use the highlight warning on the camera display when shooting) and so make a choice then if I'm happy with the clipped highlights or not (e.g. shooting into the sun, extreme highlights and shadows in gigs etc.)
The end result is key, the process one takes to get there is up to the individual. If you rely on the histogram and are pleased with your results then that is great :)
I've used Lightroom and Capture One Pro. I tried Exposure a few weeks ago and I liked it so much that I now use it as my full time photography application.
The main features that appeal to me: * fast, responsive, well designed UI * import, view, edit, export photo's from one main screen (not tabbed as most other applications) * no catalogue file(s)! * the film simulation presets are very effective as a quick starting point (and they are beautiful on their own without any additional editing) * this application is designed around conveying a feeling to photographs, which is quite a different, but refreshingly pleasant approach compared to other programs
It may not be for everyone as a standalone app because it lacks a histogram and there's no option to make virtual copies of a picture to experiment with different effects. Technically it's probably not as advanced as LR/C1Pro but for me it does what it needs to do, and I get there a lot faster than with any other program out there.
I have a dumb question... I've read the complaints about no histogram. I understand how its great for getting the most detail during capture... But why is the histogram important AFTER capture in post?
Hey John. Personally I don't miss a histogram. I thought I would but I don't. I guess we've become so used to histograms that many show withdrawal symptoms when there is none :-)
Why is a histogram important after the capture? Not everything one does in-camera is perfect out of the box, so it's somewhat reassuring to be able to check up on shadows and highlights in post and do some corrections.
In my humble opinion, too much a focus on the histogram may limit creativity. It limited mine. So now I edit my pictures based on feeling and I get better results (on a calibrated monitor that is). But I imagine this loss of control could be a problem for many.
As an owner of (a license for) Exposure 7, I was surprised and disappointed to discover that, when I entered my license code for Exposure 7 (I had the automatic upgrade from Exposure 6 to 7, btw), there was no free download at all but a 99 bucks price tag.
I don't see much difference between Exposure 7 and Exposure X, except for the RAW developing, and my preferred RAW editors are CR and LR anyway, so I'll pass on this one.
COMPARISON: Exposure X (trial version) vs. LightroomCC vs. Irident Developer
I chose an image that contained cacti, trees with leaves, gravel and sky. The image was a Fuji X shot which can produce mushy looking green leaves with some converters. I used my Fuji XPro-1 because with the right RAW converter, the images cannot be beat in IQ and tonal spread from deep shadows to bright highlights, IMO.
Both LR and Irident Developer looked the best with Exposure X producing softer IQ and the green leaves looked mushy and edge definition of tree limbs was soft.
Irident developer which is my go-to converter for FujiXTrans images was the best of the three, although the latest LR was really pretty good; an improvement over earlier versions.
Leaving aside Irident Developer, the LR RAW conversion was head and shoulders over the Alien Skin Exposure X. IMO, Exposure X is not ready for prime time.
I just gave it a spin and compared to what I'm able to do in LR, and despite it being fast and responsive and the organization, management, GUI being easy and intuitive, its actual image editing just isn't good. I couldn't even find the white balance control, which is critical to my workflow. The way the tone curve controls are setup is not as intuitive as LR. Also, adjusting the exposure shadow would alter the saturation, and that is unacceptable. LR has separate controls for Blacks and Shadow, as well as highlights and whites, and that is a much better way to achieve desired results.
I fail to see that it offers anything over and above the features already in Lightroom and/or PS. I'm sure ti is a very competent application, but it seems to feature its ability to integrate with the Adobe products which already have the features that Alien Skin offers. It seems redundant. Have I missed something?
What would be nice is a plug-in that would feature as nice a content-aware tool available in PS that would work equally well in LR. The ability to have layers and layer masks in LR would also be nice. But as it stands, at least according to the Alien Skin website, their application is redundant to LR.
If I have missed something, I would appreciate responses from those who have actually used this product.
You have missed the film presets, the starting point of editing in this program? Lightroom does not offer such a feature, at least not that good.
If you are more of a technical oriented person I would say that Lighroom/PS will suit you better. You could always use Exposure as a Lightroom plugin though, and have the best of both worlds.
Elsewhere on the FujiX forum, I tested the new Alien Skin app against LR and Irident developer and found that both LR and Irident gave higher IQ than Exposure X using only the RAW development modules.For that reason alone, the new Alien Skin app. does not impress. As for film simulations, that is ,to me, of limited value. On the few occasions I want film simulation, I resort to my old reliable and use the DXO Film Pack 5.
Alien Skin is welcome to the fray and given further development and future upgrades it may be really competitive. Right now it isn't IMO.
I actually like it quite a bit. It gives you a lot of creative freedom as an addition to PS and LR. I DL the new version for free since i have been using the other version for a while and so far it looks great. Any tool that will help you think outside the box and another tool to be creative with is great in my opinion. /Martin.
I cannot find in the specs what the maximum (pixel)size is that exposure X can handle before the textures get unsharp. With other words: what are the dimensions of the added alpha channels which are called textures or overlays. Is is possible to add custom textures?
OK...I just checked out a tutorial by Jimmy Beech for importing Textures into Exposure 6. It works exactly the same for Exposure X. You can import 1.Textures, 2. Light Effect and 3. Borders. Borders once imported replace pixels on the edge and I believe are not "adjustable" in the software. Imported Textures and Light Effects are. You can separately import the same image into all three categories as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdqYUj2mc_w
Gave it a QUICK try... It's not bad - but it tends to cater too much to the preset-one-click crowd in my opinion... And that "bokeh" settings: rather appalling - the results of these kind of "automatic bokeh effects" are always so artificial and easy to spot...
Overall I feel like it's not in the same league as either LR or C1Pro feature wise. maybe I'm wrong - I haven't spent much time with it... but the quick glance revealed nothing revolutionary for me.
The presets are pretty good though. And when used as a starting point you can come up with some very personal results.
I took one photograph and edited it in both C1Pro and Exposure X. In C1Pro it costed me 10 minutes to come up with something I liked. In Exposure it took me like 2 minutes. When I compared both results I liked my Exposure edit a lot better...
But hey, these matters are so personal it's impossible to claim one program is better than the other. What works for you is what counts, not my or anyones else's experience or opinion ;-)
Presets: I work heavily with Presets: MY OWN. It takes some time to set up your workflow at the beginning, create your own presets etc... but then it's pretty rapid. For me those standard presets give you the same kind of look all over... and then there's the entire flood of 100+ presets... I'd rather have 10 - I've set up according to my taste and get rid of the rest.
I'm not saying Exposure X is bad - don't get this wrong... it's just that some things are a tad simplified beyond reason... it's like those scene modes no one uses on a high-end / mid-range DSLR... Why would you buy a D750 and the use "Scene Modes" - preferred they would have given that space on the dial to something else or make it customisable... to me: waste of space.
Exposure X is also a good bit slower than either LR or C1Pro on my system... constantly getting the "Rendering" message if working with larger RAW files... whereas with LR & C1Pro the same modifications are almost instant.
I'm with @Wiggle Foot on this one. It's important and encouraging to see some competition facing up to Lightroom. Adobe desperately wants all of its users to convert over to its subscription model...something which I absolutely won't do. Hopefully, competitors will keep Adobe on the straight and narrow, and if not, well, it's nice to know there are places I can go.
if you use a mac - give Affinity Photo 1.4 a try... it's like 40$ and honestly that thing is pretty much head-to-head with photoshop... and it's not a subscription.... "unfortunately" it's mac only so far...
I completely agree about competition being good... I've bought C1Pro (non subscription) and am pretty fond of it.
I think it's a special douche-bag move to leave new features OUT of LR6 (non subscription) and have them only in LR-CC. I guess at some point LR-CC will be the only one left (adobe).
I understand the subscription model - and it has *some* merits (price wise, if you're really needing EVERY new version)... But I get the negative aspects too... so yes, competition is good. I would have just hoped Exposure to be a bit less "instagram" focused and a tad FASTER too (you constantly see this "rendering" message when working with larger RAW files. Something I see neither with c1pro nor previously LR. (and my computer isn't shoddy either)
If you are a Windows user, maybe you want to try Corel's PaintShop Pro. It has been my editor of choice since early 1990s. They also offer 30-day trial. Its currently version is less than $50 on Amazon.
I never was a fan of Adobe products, and I would not use them. There are plenty of other affordable editors on the market, including some good ones that are free.
But comparing Exposure and Adobe's products is like comparing fast food and a five star restaurant. Exposure is simply at another level altogether. For years I figured that whatever programs like Exposure offered, I could duplicate pretty well in Photoshop or Lightroom -- little did I know. From Black and White conversions to analog emulations, Exposure is a revelation. And Exposure's lens simulator (Bokeh) module is phenomenal -- having shot with some of the lenses modeled, I was stunned at seeing a realism I honestly did not expect.
This is not about Adobe bashing -- their products have been an invaluable tool -- but I wanted to move beyond the mechanical presets of Lightroom to actually creating -- in the same intuitive way I once painted on canvas or 'made' photographs instead of merely taking them. If you want the power of applying not a 'look', but an unlimited visual language to your work, Exposure (and On1) are the way to go.
Always funny to read 2 completely opposing opinions on a key feature in the same thread.. one person LOVES the Bokeh and thinks this program is a revelation... while another thinks the Bokeh is APPALLING and artificial.
I'm all for another program on the market.. but this doens't seem to offer anything that can't already be done (and be done well) by the myriad of others that are already out there.
Do we really need another photo editor? ACDSee Pro and Ultimate will do non-destructive edits, as will Photo Ninja and DxO (using virtual copies). I believe Capture One can also do non-destructive edits. For Nikon users, the old NX2 and now NX-D will do non-destructive editing. (Although NX-D, well ... .) I suspect there are others out there also. So unless the Alien Skin program has some notable advantages and/or features, it seems to me that it is playing in an already crowded field. The film filters seem nice, but the same kind of effects are available from 3rd-party add-ons, so I don't know that someone would buy the program for those alone. (Note: I realize that the AS program will be available for both Windows and Macs. I don't remember how many of the programs I cite are available for both. Mac availability might give it a leg up.)
@One Moment: But as I've tried to point out, there is already a good bit of competition for LR. In an crowded field, you have to do something unique to succeed. So we will need to see if the AS program does that.
It is a really nice piece of software but still needs some tidying up. There is no histogram, the space between the menu items on the side bars is too great resulting in lots of scrolling to get to them. It would be great to be able to place components of the sidebars on a different monitor and have the image being edited on full screen on another monitor. Otherwise first impressions are very favorable especially with all of the film filters available. It is time Lightroom had a competent competitor. Alien skin is an excellent company and I have been using their software for a number of years with excellent results and it is also very stable.
Think yourself lucky - it doesn't even install on my Windows 10 notebook. It says it's ready for use but the shortcut it creates has a "This PC" icon and clicking it just opens Explorer.
Tried several times, no success. I suspect it needs more testing before it's really ready for release.
@Ralf, Almost all software intentionally (most likely) will leave its keys in the registry, it's user data, ..., and its folders in Program Files (assuming you are a Windows user). If you try an uninstaller utility, such as Revo Uninstaller (there are several others), then you would have a clean uninstall. Revo comes in both, free and paid versions.
I was wondering when this would hit the News section here. Alien Skin sent me a download link and license key a couple of days ago. Kudos to Alien Skin for providing their users with a free upgrade to a new major version.
Aren't all modern pp software non-destructive in their default mode these days? It's simply a matter of keeping the original file and saving the edits in a new file automatically unless the user overrides it. Putting it in the headline implying its a unique feature when just about everything works that way nowadays doesn't make sense.
Thanks for the paper reference. It says "In general, NDI refers to imaging processes where the source image may be adjusted in a way that leaves the original data intact. There are several different ways to accomplish this type of adjustment, each with its own uses, strengths, and weaknesses. "
Which is what I was talking about above particularly in the simplest, most general way that most people understand it. So I stand by my op.
there is an internal difference but not necessarily much difference to the user. Except that the "save the original and keep the edited copy" can use up more space than "keep the original and a script of all the modifications". And the non-destructive method can more easily implement a layered undo, which may not be fully implemented in a live-edit process (though it can be). In any case, there are very few live-edit programs that actually destroy the original (maybe some dumbed-down phone apps?).
Well, PS is destructive and its for a reason. Beyond some point of complexity, storing a script just won't do it. Or be actually lareger than an image copy.
It's the file format that is lossy, the JPG/JPEG format, regardless of the editor. If your editor saves a "COPY" of the original, but not the original, then the original remains as is (even if you open it 1000 times, but not save it). The copy that the editor makes (not all editors make such a copy automatically) undergoes some compression (a JPG mathematical algorithm compressor, another topic that's outside this discussion), which you may think of it (for simplicity) as some sort of data sampling, as opposed to continuous, analog data.
Most editors, by default, save the JPG file at 85-90% of the original quality, and you can adjust these values in the settings, which affects the resulting file size. Save a JPG file 50 times or more (for experimenting) and you'd end up with an image that looks like it was taken in the 1800s. If you want to save in a lossless format, you may opt for the PNG format, and there are other lossless formats, but some of them create huge file sizes.
@sh10453 you've confused lossless with non-destructive.
To store an edited image non-destructively, you could, e.g., always store an XMP sidecar file containing all processing instructions alongside the original. Some image format like DNG, TIFF (and I believe, even JPEG) allow to store that XMP information in their meta data section. So yes, even JPEG can be edited a thousand times w/o any impact on image quality with an editor doing so.
Not many image editors (or other programs) support XMP. DNG means using an Adobe product, which I don't care to use, and on RAW files (we are talking JPG). TIFF creates huge file sizes.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. So far, it's a fun camera to shoot with – if a bit over the top.
The Canon EOS R is the first full frame mirrorless camera to use the new RF mount. We're well underway putting it through our range of standard tests – take a look at how it compares to the competition and our thoughts on using it so far.
The GFX 50R is a 50MP rangefinder-style mirrorless camera. It borrows heavily from the existing 50S model but in a smaller body and at a lower price. How does it differ?
The instant camera market is heating up, and with four formats and 15+ cameras to choose from, we felt it was high time to examine them all and pick our favorite.
Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at seven current models and chosen our favorites.
What's the best camera for a parent? The best cameras for shooting kids and family must have fast autofocus, good low-light image quality and great video. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for parents, and recommended the best.
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.
The Kickstarter campaign for Yashica’s digiFilm Y35 camera has produced a wave of complaints about delays in shipping product as well as cameras that don’t work.
Although Raw performance of the EOS R is very similar to the 5D Mark IV, Canon's done some tweaking on the JPEGs - take a look at our studio scene to see for yourself.
If you've backed one of the company's crowdfunding projects, the reward will not arrive and you won't get your money back either as Meyer Optik Görlitz's parent company, Net SE, is completely dead.
Google's Super Res Zoom technology uses pixel-shifting methods to achieve zoom results comparable to some optical solutions. Google has published an in-depth explanation on its AI blog.
Toy manufacturer Tomy has launched a no-battery-required smartphone printer that is remarkably like the one Holga has been promoting via a Kickstarter campaign but which is already available for $40/£39.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
After shaking up the Lightroom ecosystem with Lightroom CC last year, Adobe has released version 2.0 of the cloud-centric photo organizer and editor. We look at new features like People View, how far Lightroom CC has come in its first year, and where Lightroom is headed.
The weather and has most definitely taken a turn toward fall here, and our shooting opportunities have followed suit. We brought the Canon RF 35mm F1.8 along to a harvest festival of sorts and a few of our usual haunts.
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf has signed House Bill 1346 into effect, which imposes a fine upwards of $300 to drone operators who invade the privacy or harm the physical wellbeing of citizens.
Sigma is a company in flux, but CEO Kazuto Yamaki is undaunted by the upcoming prospect of developing lenses for eight lens mounts. The challenge will be keeping the company's identity along the way.
If you've been meaning to convert all of your old photos, video, and audio to digital formats, but simply lack the time or willpower to get through it all, a new service from Kodak will help you get the job done.
Almost all new cameras include impressive video features, but for the best results you'll often need an off-camera recorder. Chris and Jordan take a look at the brand new Ninja V from Atomos, and explain why it might just be one of the most useful tools you can add to your camera.
Sick of using your plain ol' keyboard to edit your photos in Lightroom and Photoshop? TourBox is hoping to expedite your post-production workflow using a clever combination of dials, buttons, and knobs.
We sat down with the Google Pixel camera team to learn about key new camera features on the Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL, and an explanation of the sophisticated software advancements that power them.
Comments