Micrografx Picture Publisher

Started Feb 16, 2013 | Discussions
Jeff Peterman
Jeff Peterman Forum Pro • Posts: 12,807
Micrografx Picture Publisher

Today, I was responding to someone about an old image I'd created (in about 1993) and it made me think of the software I'd used for that image - Micrografx Picture Publisher. That was a great photo editing tool, and had many features before PhotoShop, at a much lower price than PhotoShop. I was really sorry when the company failed to release a real upgrade and I was forced to switch to PhotoShop version 6.

I'm curious about how many others here remember that software.

-- hide signature --

Jeff Peterman, Moderator 7D and Phone/Tablet forums.
Not a staff member, or paid employee, of DPReview.
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
www.pbase.com/jeffp25
www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

 Jeff Peterman's gear list:Jeff Peterman's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ40 Canon PowerShot S110 Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +18 more
drh681
drh681 Forum Pro • Posts: 20,742
Re: Micrografx Picture Publisher

I do. That was my first editor too. I used it because Photoshop was still Mac only (or had just gone dual platform) and grossly expensive. (it's still expensive but ... watchagonnado?)

Corel bought the program(company?) and many of the tools appeared very quickly in PSP.

-- hide signature --

Photons by the bag.
Gravitons no longer shipped outside US or Canada
-----.....------
You got a camera, now go out and get a life; or at least a picture of one!

 drh681's gear list:drh681's gear list
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Lensbaby Composer Pro with Sweet 35 Optic Nokia Lumia Icon
Jeff Peterman
OP Jeff Peterman Forum Pro • Posts: 12,807
Re: Micrografx Picture Publisher

I tried PSP at the time I gave up on Picture Publisher, but it lacked the power so I switched to PhotoShop. Fortunately, I received Adobe Photoshop LE free with my first digital camera (an Olympus 2020), which let me buy PhotoShop at the normal upgrade price.

Micrografx also had a great vector program, and a good flow charting program - their package including all three (and I think some other tools) was cheaper than PhotoShop alone, and it's a shame that they disappeared to.

-- hide signature --

Jeff Peterman, Moderator 7D and Phone/Tablet forums.
Not a staff member, or paid employee, of DPReview.
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
www.pbase.com/jeffp25
www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

 Jeff Peterman's gear list:Jeff Peterman's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ40 Canon PowerShot S110 Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +18 more
albertj358
albertj358 New Member • Posts: 16
Re: Micrografx Picture Publisher

The vector program was Micrografx Designer, and is still available as Corel Designer Technical Suite X5. In the early years, Designer came with a bundled version of Windows 2.x, and that's when I first started using it.

The real loss is Picture Publisher. While Corel moved some of the features into PSP, PP was light years ahead of everyone else. I only stopped using PP 9.0 last year. It had too many problems with memory on 32 bit Vista, had to set the memory use below 256MB, otherwise it would crash.

Al

 albertj358's gear list:albertj358's gear list
Canon EOS Rebel T6s Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM | C
mikes
mikes Veteran Member • Posts: 3,429
Re: Micrografx Picture Publisher

albertj358 wrote:

The vector program was Micrografx Designer, and is still available as Corel Designer Technical Suite X5. In the early years, Designer came with a bundled version of Windows 2.x, and that's when I first started using it.

Yes this is true, and Corel Designer now is incredibly powerful tool with the DE add-on.

The real loss is Picture Publisher. While Corel moved some of the features into PSP, PP was light years ahead of everyone else. I only stopped using PP 9.0 last year. It had too many problems with memory on 32 bit Vista, had to set the memory use below 256MB, otherwise it would crash.

Al

My original CD9 box. This is the version I liked best relative to technology. It was waaaaay ahead of the competition, IMHO.



-- hide signature --

Only when you can criticize yourself, should you criticize others. Mikes.

ronzie Senior Member • Posts: 1,288
Re: Micrografx Picture Publisher

I have version 8. I really liked it. It performed better though on Win3.1 than later iterations up to my current XP for color profiles using the Kodak CMS profiles that were a purchased item. By itself, P. Pub has no color management, but its other features are flexible and easy to use. The contextual tool bar was I think the first and they had object orieted cut and paste in a depth axis, as you do in layers, but you prioritized the depth order of each object for back to front priority. Photoshop at the time did not have such object control.

I still use it for quick and dirty graphics in XP.

As I understand it the company was acquired by Corel which adopted the similar tool bar context for the chosen tool. Others have followed.

I first used it when it was only a gray scale editor and I used a hand scanner with it, It did wonderful B-W editing.

-- hide signature --

Ron Ginsberg
Minneapolis, MN
Land of 10,000 Puddles

Leandros S Senior Member • Posts: 1,975
Which version is recommended?

Which version would you guys recommend? It looks like I can get 5, 6, 7 or 8 in the second hand market. I kind of collect these graphics programs.

Thanks.

albertj358
albertj358 New Member • Posts: 16
Re: Which version is recommended?

Leandros S wrote:

Which version would you guys recommend? It looks like I can get 5, 6, 7 or 8 in the second hand market. I kind of collect these graphics programs.

Thanks.

If you intend to actually use it, there are bugs that affect them all in an OS later than Windows 95 ~ 98. Micrografx had put out various fixes until the time that Corel bought them, and Corel put out a final fix for PP 10. Strangely enough, there is someone who has copies of the updates, which can be found here:

http://www.kitchencloset.com/realstuff/micrografx_updates/

I suspect that this is that only place left place you will be able to find these.

You might want to see if you can track down version 9, it worked well in Windows 2000 and Vista, as long as you set the memory used to less than 256MB. Otherwise, go for version 8.

Al

 albertj358's gear list:albertj358's gear list
Canon EOS Rebel T6s Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM | C
hbrookes Contributing Member • Posts: 919
Re: Which version is recommended?

I also started with this program back in the 90's. The thing I loved is that is could fit on a floppy disc and I could load it when I needed for a quickie fix...

Harry

-- hide signature --

I never mess with the 'History brush' because it may alter the future!

CGS11 Contributing Member • Posts: 680
Re: Micrografx Picture Publisher

Still have my PP versions 8 and 10.  PP was my program of choise when I went digital in 1998 with a 1.57 MP Kodak DC260.  I tried the Corel version for awhile before going to PhotoShop.



-- hide signature --

cgs
WSSA Member #162

 CGS11's gear list:CGS11's gear list
Nikon D80 Nikon D600 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm F3.5-4.5G ED VR
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads