Your choice for purchaseable image-editing software for digital

Pitchertaker

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
352
Solutions
1
Reaction score
35
Hello all:

Newbie to digital photography. Want opinions on what stars among the galaxy of image software you prefer for image editing that can be bought outright in a box, rather than "rented."

Not very advanced using software of any kind so the product needs to be intuitively designed and accessible for beginners yet advanced enough to permit growth as my experience increases.

Op System: Windows 7 Home.

Links for purchasing suggested products and reasons why you prefer it will be appreciated.

Will be downloading the free software Olympus offers off its website for my new Olympus OM-D EM-1 but want to buy something additional that may offer more features.

Many thanks for your responses.
 
Last edited:
Solution
Newbie to digital photography. Want opinions on what stars among the galaxy of image software you prefer for image editing
The answers to this question depend very much on how much editing, and what kind(s) of editing, people do.

I see that you intend to shoot raw, which implies that you intend to learn how to get the best out of your images. While Photoshop Elements is reasonably good as an all-round editor it has very limited capabilities for developing raw files: Lightroom (LR) is very much better for adjusting colours, perspective, lens aberrations and many other things.

So that implies that LR is better than PSE: but wait: sometimes you may want to pull out specific areas of an image for special treatment, and there LR...
Do try and get your jpeg files right in the camera before you get carried away with raw.
That was what we had to do w/ film, but the rules are different w/ digital. It is perhaps still a good exercise to try; go out one day and seriously try to take every image 100% perfect so that nothing needs to be done later. Take a wide range of subjects: Landscapes, Sports, Street Photography, Portraits, Closeups of Some Products...whatever interests you, This exercise will open your eyes. It's incredibly difficult to do everything 100% perfectly!

Another worthwhile exercise is to do the opposite. Go out one day as setup your camera to operate w/o any input from you, but shoot RAW. Be sloppy. Just fire away and then go home and use LR to render JPEGs. Don't crop them. Don't do ANY editing.

You will obviously have more pictures from Day 2, so look at them and rate them. It's terribly easy in LR; just pull up an image in the Develop Module and type 0-5 which will assign that number of stars. Then go back and pick out the best N images from Day 2, where N is the number of 100% perfect images from Day 1. The easy way to do that is to assign 5 stars to the keepers from Day 2. This is easy to do when someone shows you how...

[Aside] How to select on Star Ratings...

1. Just above the "filmstrip" at the bottom is a thin black strip. At the extreme right side of this strip is a grey field that starts out saying "Filters Off".

2. Click on that "Filters Off" field. A white window will appear with 12 choices. Click on "Rated".

3. The filmstrip will probably change, but ignore it for the moment. Notice that a line of stars has appeared to the left of the "Rated" field. Click on the right most star and all of them will turn white. You have now selected only the images that you rated "5".

4. Those "5-star" images should be in the filmstrip. Select all of them.

Then go to the Library Module and Export them as JPEGs. This will take only a few minutes!

Then use the Slideshow Module of LR to setup a show of these images. Scramble them; you don't want to have all of Day 1 and then all of Day 2, but you need some way to know which is which! THEN, invite a friend to come over for a "screening". Show the friend the pictures and have s/he rate each one. After you have had perhaps a dozen friends do this, tally their votes. I think you will find that they like the stuff from Day 2 MUCH more than Day 1.

Why? Because it is more fun to take pictures casually and that joy of photography affected what you captured!

Then on Day 3, edit ALL the good 5-star images from Day 2. Your goal should be to make them POP. A good way is to set Clarity = +25 and Vibrance = +18. Then look at the Histogram and use the "Exposure slider to move it close to the right side [if it was not already close]. As a test to see if you have the "Exposure" right, find an image w/ a white object; mouse over that white object. It should be around 95% in all 3 color channels [they are shown below the Histogram when you do this.

Then watch the left side of the histogram and use the "Shadows" slider in much the same way.

Then, go to the "Detail" panel on the right side [all the above was in the "Basic" panel] and expand it. Look for noise in each image and set the NR slider to just barely remove it. Add a bit of sharpening [not usually more than 50].

Enable lens corrections and if needed select the brand and model of your lens.

Now you have some great images. Test them on your friends. Show them the before/after and ask them to select the version they prefer.
 
Hello all:

Newbie to digital photography. Want opinions on what stars among the galaxy of image software you prefer for image editing that can be bought outright in a box, rather than "rented."

Not very advanced using software of any kind so the product needs to be intuitively designed and accessible for beginners yet advanced enough to permit growth as my experience increases.

Op System: Windows 7 Home.

Links for purchasing suggested products and reasons why you prefer it will be appreciated.

Will be downloading the free software Olympus offers off its website for my new Olympus OM-D EM-1 but want to buy something additional that may offer more features.

Many thanks for your responses.
Picasa.

If you need to edit a raw file before converting to jpeg, then Raw Therapee or the camera's own raw convertor software will do it for free. Picasa is also free and will find any converted raw-to-jpeg file you save on the computer.
Picasa is sorta OK as an editor. Many beginners like it for it's simplicity. But be aware that Google "steals" everything you do [you think the NSA is evil?]. Most people don't care [because they don't have a clue], but if you do...
I haven't used it in several years. Isn't the Cloud part of uploading and backup still optional with it?
If they say is is optional, do you believe them? :-0
 
Newbie to digital photography. Want opinions on what stars among the galaxy of image software you prefer for image editing
The answers to this question depend very much on how much editing, and what kind(s) of editing, people do.

I see that you intend to shoot raw, which implies that you intend to learn how to get the best out of your images. While Photoshop Elements is reasonably good as an all-round editor it has very limited capabilities for developing raw files: Lightroom (LR) is very much better for adjusting colours, perspective, lens aberrations and many other things.

So that implies that LR is better than PSE: but wait: sometimes you may want to pull out specific areas of an image for special treatment, and there LR has very limited capabilities while PSE is much better. So if you really want the maximum flexibility you'd buy both: quite possibly using LR exclusively for most images but migrating to PSE for those that need special treatment.
Most people who know about these matters, say they use LR for about 95% of their edits and PSE for the rest. That's my experience.
that can be bought outright in a box, rather than "rented."
If what I've described satisfies you then you don't need to go beyond those buyable programs. However, despite their undoubted qualities - which, let's remember, are perfectly adequate for everything that many people want to do - there are may sophisticated things that they either can't handle at all or do so in slow and cumbersome ways.

For those more sophisticated things you really can't beat the full Photoshop (PS). PS isn't available as a standalone program; it comes as part of the PS Creative Cloud (CC) suite. That suite includes PS itself, the same raw developer (Adobe Camera Raw, ACR) that's in LR, Bridge (which isn't an editing program but has a lot of file naming and management functions), LR and various other applications.

If you do eventually need those capabilities then the photography-only PS CC package is actually cheaper than it was to buy, when taking into account the periodic cost of upgrades.
The cost of renting CC is expected to rise once they set the hook.
Not very advanced using software of any kind so the product needs to be intuitively designed and accessible for beginners yet advanced enough to permit growth as my experience increases.
Adobe products get a lot of support, both from Adobe and third parties. Here's the link to the LR suite of training videos (ignore the fact that it says CC - functions are identical with the bought version). https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/lightroom.html?promoid=KSKAX Here's the PSE page https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop-elements/topics.html
Yes, the wealth of available help learning and mastering the Adobe products is why people should go Adobe. Sad that their CC initiative will ruin all this for them and us.
 
Q on Lightroom 5. This seems a good choice. Can pick up version 5 still and it doesn't seem vastly different from 6, the latest iteration. Since I refuse to pay a monthly fee for any software PS isn't a choice for me. Is there a serial number for me to find and enter when I load it and if so is it on a card or hidden someplace on the package?
Yes, there is a s/n to register with Adobe, IIRC it's on the CD case; if a direct d/l then you'll get it in an e-mail.
I will be working in Raw. Still learning about all of the image formats but this seems what most work in. I guess I can convert Raw images to Jpeg or Tiff or whatever, right? Thanks.
Yes.
 
Q on Lightroom 5. This seems a good choice. Can pick up version 5 still and it doesn't seem vastly different from 6, the latest iteration. Since I refuse to pay a monthly fee for any software PS isn't a choice for me. Is there a serial number for me to find and enter when I load it and if so is it on a card or hidden someplace on the package?
Yes, there is a s/n to register with Adobe, IIRC it's on the CD case; if a direct d/l then you'll get it in an e-mail.
I will be working in Raw. Still learning about all of the image formats but this seems what most work in. I guess I can convert Raw images to Jpeg or Tiff or whatever, right? Thanks.
Yes.
Thank you for the response. Deeply appreciate everyone's kind, informative replies.
 
Google has a capable free program called Picasa that is easier to use than Elements.
 
If you do eventually need those capabilities then the photography-only PS CC package is actually cheaper than it was to buy, when taking into account the periodic cost of upgrades.
The cost of renting CC is expected to rise once they set the hook.
Expected by whom? CC has been available for about 2 years now (I started my subscription on 23 June 2013), which seems quite a long time for the hook to bite. In that time there hasn't been even an inflationary increase, so in real terms the price has fallen, not risen.

As first offered CC had the same content as CS Extended (I'd previously bought the basic CS package so the Extended version came a an immediate benefit). Since then Adobe has progressively added to the package, notably by including LR: so for anyone wanting both programs (and there are many) that's another way the price has fallen in real terms.

Adobe, like any other commercial organisation, wants to maximise profits but is also subject to competition. Present pricing is based largely on the wider market as it stands: whatever you expect, I expect that as long as the wider market remains stable so will Adobe's prices.
 
Hello all:

Newbie to digital photography. Want opinions on what stars among the galaxy of image software you prefer for image editing that can be bought outright in a box, rather than "rented."

Not very advanced using software of any kind so the product needs to be intuitively designed and accessible for beginners yet advanced enough to permit growth as my experience increases.

Op System: Windows 7 Home.

Links for purchasing suggested products and reasons why you prefer it will be appreciated.

Will be downloading the free software Olympus offers off its website for my new Olympus OM-D EM-1 but want to buy something additional that may offer more features.

Many thanks for your responses.
Picasa.

If you need to edit a raw file before converting to jpeg, then Raw Therapee or the camera's own raw convertor software will do it for free. Picasa is also free and will find any converted raw-to-jpeg file you save on the computer.
Picasa is sorta OK as an editor. Many beginners like it for it's simplicity. But be aware that Google "steals" everything you do [you think the NSA is evil?]. Most people don't care [because they don't have a clue], but if you do...
I haven't used it in several years. Isn't the Cloud part of uploading and backup still optional with it?
If they say is is optional, do you believe them? :-0
I'm inclined not to worry about such things. There are plenty of people who take on that burden on everyone's behalf whether it is welcome or justified or not.
 
Google has a capable free program called Picasa that is easier to use than Elements.
the current version is a lot less capable and is not really comparable..the original version was very different since Google has decided that everything should be cloud based
 
If you do eventually need those capabilities then the photography-only PS CC package is actually cheaper than it was to buy, when taking into account the periodic cost of upgrades.
The cost of renting CC is expected to rise once they set the hook.
Expected by whom? CC has been available for about 2 years now (I started my subscription on 23 June 2013), which seems quite a long time for the hook to bite. In that time there hasn't been even an inflationary increase, so in real terms the price has fallen, not risen.
BUT, LR was only included recently, with Version 6. And they haven't gotten to PSE yet. The clock is ticking...

My point is that the fish that bite the full CC PS suite are a quite different species than the medium sized ones that swallow LR. Then still, there are minnows that nibble around PSE. If they tried CC PS, they would gag and drown. Adobe obviously has several lines in the water...
As first offered CC had the same content as CS Extended (I'd previously bought the basic CS package so the Extended version came a an immediate benefit). Since then Adobe has progressively added to the package, notably by including LR: so for anyone wanting both programs (and there are many) that's another way the price has fallen in real terms.

Adobe, like any other commercial organisation, wants to maximise profits but is also subject to competition. Present pricing is based largely on the wider market as it stands: whatever you expect, I expect that as long as the wider market remains stable so will Adobe's prices.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]
 
Hello all:

Newbie to digital photography. Want opinions on what stars among the galaxy of image software you prefer for image editing that can be bought outright in a box, rather than "rented."

Not very advanced using software of any kind so the product needs to be intuitively designed and accessible for beginners yet advanced enough to permit growth as my experience increases.

Op System: Windows 7 Home.

Links for purchasing suggested products and reasons why you prefer it will be appreciated.

Will be downloading the free software Olympus offers off its website for my new Olympus OM-D EM-1 but want to buy something additional that may offer more features.

Many thanks for your responses.
Picasa.

If you need to edit a raw file before converting to jpeg, then Raw Therapee or the camera's own raw convertor software will do it for free. Picasa is also free and will find any converted raw-to-jpeg file you save on the computer.
Picasa is sorta OK as an editor. Many beginners like it for it's simplicity. But be aware that Google "steals" everything you do [you think the NSA is evil?]. Most people don't care [because they don't have a clue], but if you do...
I haven't used it in several years. Isn't the Cloud part of uploading and backup still optional with it?
If they say is is optional, do you believe them? :-0
I'm inclined not to worry about such things. There are plenty of people who take on that burden on everyone's behalf whether it is welcome or justified or not.
When you grow up and become wise, you will look back at all the foolish things you did when you were a child and regret some of them.
 
Google has a capable free program called Picasa that is easier to use than Elements.
the current version is a lot less capable and is not really comparable..the original version was very different since Google has decided that everything should be cloud based
I agree; Picasa might be 'capable' as a browser and adding some effects, but it's not close to Elements.
 
Hello all:

Newbie to digital photography. Want opinions on what stars among the galaxy of image software you prefer for image editing that can be bought outright in a box, rather than "rented."

Not very advanced using software of any kind so the product needs to be intuitively designed and accessible for beginners yet advanced enough to permit growth as my experience increases.

Op System: Windows 7 Home.

Links for purchasing suggested products and reasons why you prefer it will be appreciated.

Will be downloading the free software Olympus offers off its website for my new Olympus OM-D EM-1 but want to buy something additional that may offer more features.

Many thanks for your responses.
Picasa.

If you need to edit a raw file before converting to jpeg, then Raw Therapee or the camera's own raw convertor software will do it for free. Picasa is also free and will find any converted raw-to-jpeg file you save on the computer.
Picasa is sorta OK as an editor. Many beginners like it for it's simplicity. But be aware that Google "steals" everything you do [you think the NSA is evil?]. Most people don't care [because they don't have a clue], but if you do...
I haven't used it in several years. Isn't the Cloud part of uploading and backup still optional with it?
If they say is is optional, do you believe them? :-0
I'm inclined not to worry about such things. There are plenty of people who take on that burden on everyone's behalf whether it is welcome or justified or not.
When you grow up and become wise, you will look back at all the foolish things you did when you were a child and regret some of them.
At my age, I can prioritise stuff to worry about and this doesn't even make the bottom of the list. Obviously you have a lot to hide, which is fair enough.

Last time I used Picasa, I could choose which folders do exclude from it, and that probably includes their cloud thing. I could never let it upload full-size files anyway, because the broadband is very slow here.

If the broadband was fast I would not hesitate to take advantage of it for most stuff, as I already do for business and management data, banking, shopping and other stuff.
 
Lightroom is a good RAW converter. It works similarly with JPEG but the main problems with them is that they have applied WB, Noise reduction, Tone curve, Sharpening, etc. so you can change some things but you start from a cooked image.

If you want some small changes it works. If you want substantial edits it's impossible. It's like you want to make bread starting from lasagna. You can have a different lasagna from it but never a bread.

Lightroom is good for general manipulations like RAW conversions, crop, resizing, noise reduction, sharpening, straightening. In PS you can do much more. If you don't need some advanced features GIMP has 90% of the functionality at infinite lower price. Both have quite steep learning curves but you will find more information for PS than Gimp on the Internet.
 
Do try and get your jpeg files right in the camera before you get carried away with raw.
Everyone should try to get their exposure right in camera regardless of file format (or even of medium). But what "right" means depends on what one wants from the file. There are two principle objectives that are very different from each other:

A. Getting the camera's output image to look like the scene without the need for any adjustments. Camera makers try to get their JPG output like this, because this is a popular way to work. But it can often sacrifice image quality (even though what's left can be good or even very good).

B. Getting the camera's output image to the ideal state for producing the best possible image quality. This will sometimes, by chance, be the same as method A but in general it will look different - sometimes a lot different. Various methods are proposed: Expose To The Right is common. This article by gollywop explains ETTR http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6641165460/ettr-exposed

I should say that although I've linked this article I don't fully agree with it. I fully endorse the basic principle but don't agree that ETTR must be at base ISO or in raw. It will usually give the best results that way but shooting JPG at higher ISO will still yield better results if the histogram is kept tight to the right.

This latter point is important in the context of your advice: as you haven't suggested that the OP should ETTR in JPG I infer that your "right" corresponds to A above. But for someone wanting best IQ it's poor advice even when shooting JPG, and for someone who already wants to shoot raw it's downright poor advice.
 
Do try and get your jpeg files right in the camera before you get carried away with raw.
Everyone should try to get their exposure right in camera regardless of file format (or even of medium). But what "right" means depends on what one wants from the file. There are two principle objectives that are very different from each other:

A. Getting the camera's output image to look like the scene without the need for any adjustments. Camera makers try to get their JPG output like this, because this is a popular way to work. But it can often sacrifice image quality (even though what's left can be good or even very good).

B. Getting the camera's output image to the ideal state for producing the best possible image quality. This will sometimes, by chance, be the same as method A but in general it will look different - sometimes a lot different. Various methods are proposed: Expose To The Right is common. This article by gollywop explains ETTR http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6641165460/ettr-exposed

I should say that although I've linked this article I don't fully agree with it. I fully endorse the basic principle but don't agree that ETTR must be at base ISO or in raw. It will usually give the best results that way but shooting JPG at higher ISO will still yield better results if the histogram is kept tight to the right.

This latter point is important in the context of your advice: as you haven't suggested that the OP should ETTR in JPG I infer that your "right" corresponds to A above. But for someone wanting best IQ it's poor advice even when shooting JPG, and for someone who already wants to shoot raw it's downright poor advice.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]
Not bad advice at all. [Cheeky sod!] If all one wants to do is play around on the computer manipulating raw files then all that is needed is the most basic camera with a good lens, compose, point and shoot.

The best current cameras have blinkies and all kinds of aids to get it right, or as right as possible for the user in the camera. They have scene and art modes and all kinds of clever stuff that photography snobs and mainly older photography snobs like to either ignore or denigrate, yet they are all useful tools there to help the photographer. As are the tools provided in post-processing software of course. Learn to use them all, but start with learning to use the camera and its controls to get the best possible images first, along with composition and lighting techniques. THEN learn more advanced post-processing and image manipulation should that ever become important enough for the individual. To some, that will be the most important part. To me it's certainly not, but I don't either make a living from photography [many who do, now shoot jpeg only anyhow] or am stuck in an inflexible rut.

Try everything. Use everything. Do it well. Those are my general rules.
 
Last edited:
Do try and get your jpeg files right in the camera before you get carried away with raw.
Everyone should try to get their exposure right in camera regardless of file format (or even of medium). But what "right" means depends on what one wants from the file. There are two principle objectives that are very different from each other:

A. Getting the camera's output image to look like the scene without the need for any adjustments. Camera makers try to get their JPG output like this, because this is a popular way to work. But it can often sacrifice image quality (even though what's left can be good or even very good).

B. Getting the camera's output image to the ideal state for producing the best possible image quality. This will sometimes, by chance, be the same as method A but in general it will look different - sometimes a lot different. Various methods are proposed: Expose To The Right is common. This article by gollywop explains ETTR http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6641165460/ettr-exposed

I should say that although I've linked this article I don't fully agree with it. I fully endorse the basic principle but don't agree that ETTR must be at base ISO or in raw. It will usually give the best results that way but shooting JPG at higher ISO will still yield better results if the histogram is kept tight to the right.

This latter point is important in the context of your advice: as you haven't suggested that the OP should ETTR in JPG I infer that your "right" corresponds to A above. But for someone wanting best IQ it's poor advice even when shooting JPG, and for someone who already wants to shoot raw it's downright poor advice.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]
A technical query regarding comments: How do you guys section off quotes before offering comments? Also: What's "OP" mean? Do I need to move to Mayberry? :-D
 
Last edited:
Do try and get your jpeg files right in the camera before you get carried away with raw.
Everyone should try to get their exposure right in camera regardless of file format (or even of medium). But what "right" means depends on what one wants from the file. There are two principle objectives that are very different from each other:

A. Getting the camera's output image to look like the scene without the need for any adjustments. Camera makers try to get their JPG output like this, because this is a popular way to work. But it can often sacrifice image quality (even though what's left can be good or even very good).

B. Getting the camera's output image to the ideal state for producing the best possible image quality. This will sometimes, by chance, be the same as method A but in general it will look different - sometimes a lot different. Various methods are proposed: Expose To The Right is common. This article by gollywop explains ETTR http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6641165460/ettr-exposed

I should say that although I've linked this article I don't fully agree with it. I fully endorse the basic principle
This is an example as explained at the bottom of this post ***
but don't agree that ETTR must be at base ISO or in raw. It will usually give the best results that way but shooting JPG at higher ISO will still yield better results if the histogram is kept tight to the right.

This latter point is important in the context of your advice: as you haven't suggested that the OP should ETTR in JPG I infer that your "right" corresponds to A above. But for someone wanting best IQ it's poor advice even when shooting JPG, and for someone who already wants to shoot raw it's downright poor advice.
A technical query regarding comments: How do you guys section off quotes before offering comments? Also: What's "OP" mean? Do I need to move to Mayberry? :-D
Just click the cursor where you want to insert a quote and press the 'return' button and start typing. *** I'll insert something above to demonstrate. If you wish to delete text, highlight it and press delete. This is called 'snipping'.

The OP is you, the Original Poster.
 
Last edited:
Or - 1st highlight the text you want to quote in the prior post. 2nd copy that text using the Ctrl-Insert key combination. 3rd, in the edit box for your new post click the "Increase quote level" box in the tool bar at the top (shows a tiny right pointing arrowhead with 3 lines). 4th, paste the selected text with the "Shift-Insert" key combination.

OP = "Original Post"

Kelly
 
Last edited:
A technical query regarding comments: How do you guys section off quotes before offering comments? Also: What's "OP" mean? Do I need to move to Mayberry? :-D
Just click the cursor where you want to insert a quote and press the 'return' button and start typing. *** I'll insert something above to demonstrate. If you wish to delete text, highlight it and press delete. This is called 'snipping'.

The OP is you, the Original Poster.
Thanks! OP says: "DOH!"
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top