Free Open Source Photo Editing Software

[willvan]

I am a bit ticked with Adobe, don't particularly like the catalogue set-up in Light Room and am on my fourth version of PS Elements and would have to upgrade again to get ACR support for my latest two Canon cameras.

I'm kinda relieved to hear I'm not alone in my dislike of the LR catalog. I already know I'm not alone in my dislike of Adobe's "revenue enhancement" policies.

It seems to me that a business is headed for trouble when they succeed in ticking off a substantial proportion of their customers.

I've been using Lightroom since LR2, and use it extensively. I do not use their catalog, as such. Well, I do and I don't............

I use FastStone (PC only, but Free, and excellent!) as my go-to photo viewer (including some very capable editing tools!). So I do a shoot, upload into folders I designate. Open FS to view and cull, as needed. Then to process the RAWs I go from FS via "edit with external program' wherin I have LR (and NIK and so on). Yes, there is then the prompt to open in LR's catalog, but so what. I do my stuff in LR then Export as a TIF to the same folder. Then, from FastStone again I go to NIK, usually, to use its amazing control point editing tools. I find it faster to do it this way rather than going from LR to NIK or other plugins.

I do not want a hard drive full of endless LR edit-edit-edits. I use indicating letters (ie, TC for tonal contrast, in NIK) when I save-as. Been doing this for years, I can find my stuff and do re-prints easily.

I realize LR has amazing cataloging potential and use for some, such as for wedding work. But it is not a necessary part of using LR to its fullest for many others.

Interesting approach and good on you if it works, notwithstanding your process sounds a bit cumbersome. I have had FastStone on my desktop for several years and while I use it occasionally, based on what you are doing, it certainly looks viable that I could take advantage of the capabilities of FastStone in combination with DPP which I use and like. I haven't downloaded the update for FastStone and hopefully there are a few tweaks to make it even better.

At Malch: I can see Adobe self imploding at some point if they continue on their present course.....and they would not be the first to do so.

Bill

 

[CAcreeks]

I use Linux exclusively for my photo editing,

So do I. However Fuji EXR shooter, I do not need Raw, which saves me time and storage space.

Often the Windows version is less stable, has fewer features, is much slower, etc.

The Windows version of GIMP seems every bit as good as the one that run on Linux!

7. Gimp - In my opinion this application was never a photo editor, and it hasn't aged well. It's kind of like comparing Photoshop to the other Adobe applications like Elements or Lightroom.

That seems like a fair assessment. But because I learned how to use Photoshop by reading books, and GIMP is heavily ripped off from Photoshop, it was easy for me to do the same stuff on Linux.

GIMP is excellent and hugely useful for editing JPEG. One of the best features is that it detects the JPEG quality levels and can save using the same settings, thus greatly reducing artifacts.

There is a Windows version that I believe has almost all the same features, but is noticeably slower than the Linux version.

Do you have benchmark results for saying this? It does not "feel" any slower on Windows.

 

[CAcreeks]

Anyone that limits themselves solely to Linux is unnecessarily restricting their choice of Photo Editing software.

Fortunateley everyone is entitled to their own opinion. but yours suck's.

"The apostrophe is to alert the reader than an S is following." -Dave Barry

Either of you - what is some good photo editing software that runs on Android tablet?

Because I think anyone who limits themselves solely to Windows is unnecessarily restricting their choice of photo editing software.

 

[CAcreeks]

LightZone's main "claim to fame" was it's use of layers and edit regions (or what they liked to refer to as "zone" based editing). It was ahead of it's time some years back as far as low cost raw converters and editing tools. That way, you can do things like select a zone (region) you want to apply changes to (saturation, contrast, exposure, etc.) in a layer, then apply changes to that one section of an image only.

That seems very useful.

One of the reasons I did not switch to Aftershot was that it offers no way to edit just one part of an image, such as the shadows under trees, separately from the remaining parts of the image. You can globally adjust shadows, but that's it. Whereas GIMP allows selection of just the area I want to adjust.

Another reason I did not switch to Aftershot is that Corel never sent the DVD that I ordered from their website. Perhaps it is download only. For a Raw-based workflow I would take time to download it again, but with my current cameras, I don't need it. Furthermore Corel does not support Fuji digital cameras.

 

[CAcreeks]

1. Digikam - ... For sharpening, use the refocus option, it's the best sharpening tool there is...

Any online comparisons you could recommend?

Photoshop smart sharpen is also excellent. I suspect that is the same method Lightroom uses, but I'm not certain.

 

[Jim Cockfield]

LightZone's main "claim to fame" was it's use of layers and edit regions (or what they liked to refer to as "zone" based editing). It was ahead of it's time some years back as far as low cost raw converters and editing tools. That way, you can do things like select a zone (region) you want to apply changes to (saturation, contrast, exposure, etc.) in a layer, then apply changes to that one section of an image only.

That seems very useful.

One of the reasons I did not switch to Aftershot was that it offers no way to edit just one part of an image, such as the shadows under trees, separately from the remaining parts of the image. You can globally adjust shadows, but that's it. Whereas GIMP allows selection of just the area I want to adjust.

Huh? That's totally false.

Of course you can (adjust just one part of an image with AfterShot Pro). That's one of the nicer things about it (it's layers and edit region features). That's one of the *many* reasons I prefer AfterShot Pro over competing products like Adobe LIghtroom.

It's layers and edit region features let you make any adjusments you want to make to a specific part of an image (exposure adjustments, fill light, shadow and highlight recovery, color adjustments, tone curves, sharpening, noise reduction, etc.) except for lens distortion correction, which has to be applied to the entire image versus only part of it.

You can have as many layers and edit regions as desired (with different adjustments being made to different parts of your image), and they're all non destructive edits, too (meaning you can undo any of the edits you don't want later and redo them to taste).

Here's a good webinar going into many of it's features (and I'd suggest watching the entire webinar to get a better idea of it's *many* features and how to use them).

You'll see layers and edit regions discussed starting around 26 minutes into it. IOW, start around here (26 Minute mark) and you'll see that kind of thing starting to be discussed in detail about 30 seconds later, with a number of examples of how it can benefit you later on with more examples (so you can make changes to only a selected portion of an image).

Again, you can make *any* corrections to a specific portion of an image, with the exception of Lens Distortion Correction (which has to be applied to the entire image versus a portion of it).

Another reason I did not switch to Aftershot is that Corel never sent the DVD that I ordered from their website. Perhaps it is download only. For a Raw-based workflow I would take time to download it again, but with my current cameras, I don't need it. Furthermore Corel does not support Fuji digital cameras.

DVD, huh? I dunno, as I've never bought it that way.

Just download the latest trial version of it, and it will work for 30 days without buying it. Then, if you decide you want to purchase it, do that, and they'll send you a license key via e-mail (so you can plug it into your trial install to make it a registered installation without any need to reinstall it from scratch again.)

The same license key also works under Multiple Operating Systems without buying separate copies of it. For example, if you have both Windows and Linux distros on the same PC, just install it in the Operating Systems you're using and the same license key works with all of them (so that you can purchase only one copy and use it in multiple Operating Systems).

--
JimC
------

 

[CAcreeks]

Of course you can (adjust just one part of an image with AfterShot Pro). That's one of the nicer things about it (its layers and edit region features). That's one of the *many* reasons I prefer AfterShot Pro over competing products like Adobe Lightroom.

How do you select?

I was unable to find the Magic Wand.

 

[Jim Cockfield]

Of course you can (adjust just one part of an image with AfterShot Pro). That's one of the nicer things about it (its layers and edit region features). That's one of the *many* reasons I prefer AfterShot Pro over competing products like Adobe Lightroom.

How do you select?

I was unable to find the Magic Wand.

Watch the webinar I just linked to.

Did you not read my last post?

I even explained where it started to explain layers and regions at (around 26 minutes and 30 seconds into it), and even gave you a link to the webinar that started 26 minutes into it, explaining that around 30 seconds later that kind of thing would be demonstrated).

So, just click on the links in my last post. ;-)

It shows you how to do that kind of thing (it's very easy to understand), and even shows you specific examples like selecting part of the bottom portion of an image to change it's exposure without impacting the sky exposure).

Again, you can make *any* available corrections you want to make to a specific portion of an image (color correction, shadows and highlight correction, fill light, exposure, noise reduction, sharpening, tone curves, etc. etc. etc.) with the sole exception of lens distortion correction (which has to be applied to the entire image versus a portion of an image, which makes sense given how that kind of thing works).

It's layers and edit region features are super for those kinds of corrections.

IOW, AfterShot Pro is great for that kind of thing (which is something that Adobe Lightroom doesn't give you), and because it's cross platform makes it great for users that have both Windows and Linux installed on the same PC (and you can use the same AfterShot Pro license key in more than one installation of it in different operating systems on the same PC, meaning you only need to purchase one copy of it for use on the same PC).

--
JimC
------

 

[CAcreeks]

Watch the webinar I just linked to. I even explained where it started to explain layers and regions at (around 26 minutes and 30 seconds into it), and even gave you a link to the webinar that started 26 minutes into it, explaining that around 30 seconds later that kind of thing would be demonstrated).

Here is the webinar about selecting areas:

Is there a magic wand? Or is selection possible only with the polygon tool? There is something that looks like a wand on the right side of a dialog in the video, but he never mentions it.

Anyway, my photos seldom or never have polygonal areas for selection. I need to select by color or with the magic wand.

I would be more excited about Aftershot if it supported the cameras I own. The software itself is commendable.

 

[Jim Cockfield]

Watch the webinar I just linked to. I even explained where it started to explain layers and regions at (around 26 minutes and 30 seconds into it), and even gave you a link to the webinar that started 26 minutes into it, explaining that around 30 seconds later that kind of thing would be demonstrated).

Here is the webinar about selecting areas:

Is there a magic wand? Or is selection possible only with the polygon tool? There is something that looks like a wand on the right side of a dialog in the video, but he never mentions it.

The polygon tool is the primary way of selecting a region you want to apply region specifics edits to within a new layer.

But, you can supplement it by using the paintbrush tool if you need finer control over the area you want to include in those edits (IOW, just use the polygon tool for primary selection, then grab the paintbrush for finer control so you can "paint" the areas you want to include outside of the polygon area for the edits you want to make within a new adjustment layer). I've found it to be perfectly fine for my needs (polygon for rough selection, paintbrush for finer control over additional areas I want to include for region specific edits within a layer).

I would be more excited about Aftershot if it supported the cameras I own. The software itself is commendable.

What cameras do you have?

Check the tech specs here for starters:

http://www.corel.com/corel/product/index.jsp?pid=prod4670071#tab4

Then, check the release notes for the latest updates (as Corel has added around 30 new camera models since they've updated their product page for it). Just pick the release notes under any OS for the latest 1.2.0.7 update to see the cameras added.

http://www.corel.com/corel/pages/index.jsp?pgid=800161&ppid=4300004

They tend to support most of the popular models that users would be more likely to shoot in raw with (meaning that some of the users of entry level cameras are going to be "out of luck", since they tend to do things like "tune" tone curves, etc. for any camera supported and it's too time consuming to do that for all cameras that shoot raw from their perspective if only a small percentage of those cameras users are likely to shoot raw with them).

But, even for cameras that users are more likely to shoot raw with, they are a bit slow about updating it (last update was around 5 months ago, so they're past due for a new one). They're using a guy that used to work for Bibble Labs in Austin to add new cameras right now, and I suspect he's a bit overwhelmed keeping up with them (as there are a lot of new camera coming out anymore).

However, they're actively working on a new Corel AfterShot Pro 2.0 release with a lot more features related to GPU acceleration that should have support for more camera models, without as much reliance on the older Bibble Lab developers for that purpose. I'd expect to see a public beta sometime soon (probably not long after new years)

BTW, you still get most of AfterShot Pro's editing features with jpeg files, too.

--
JimC
------

 

[Doug Pardee]

From what I can tell from a quick glance, it's just calling the dcraw.c binary for the initial raw conversion (versus trying to integrate code from it into it's own compiled software)

LightZone uses dcraw to identify the various file formats, and to locate and extract the raw data from the files. LightZone has its own (fast) demosaicing process that it applies to the extracted raw data.

Side note: LightZone's demosaicing code assumes a standard GRBG-type color filter arrangement. For cameras with other filter arrangements (notably Fuji X-Trans), LightZone has dcraw transform the raw data into a GRBG layout which LightZone can then process normally. This transformation takes some time, and LightZone will cache the transformed raw data so that the next time the same image is opened, the transformation won't need to be done again.

 

[lylejk]

You just haven't used GIMP in over a year I bet. Major strides have been implemented even this past year. Trust me; I can keep up with most retouchers using GIMP over them using PS. Soon (maybe even by end of year; crossing my fingers) 2.10x will be released offering 16/32 bit support so I won't hear the naggers complain anymore.

 

[Mark S Abeln]

Since this question comes up all the time, I figured I'd post my updated list of favorite software.

Thanks! I will look into these.

6. RawTherapee - This application is somewhat slow but it has tons of editing features. It reminds me of Photoshop only in the learning curve required, complexity, and sheer number of options and settings. Some may really like it but I just never got the hang of using this efficiently, and I didn't find it to do anything I couldn't do with the other applications I use. There is a Windows version that does work as well as the Linux version.

Earlier this year I was working on a big project with a deadline, and I discovered that some of my raw images would not convert adequately, leaving much of the images black, despite the fact that RawDigger showed that I had captured good color in all channels. Neither Adobe Camera Raw nor Nikon NX2 would convert these images.

As this was a desperate situation, I downloaded RawTherapee, which I'd looked into in the past but never used. It was able to process every problematic image without problem. Later, I heard that it used more mathematically correct algorithms when dealing with color conversions, as well as higher mathematical precision.

As it turns out, digital cameras can capture a larger gamut of color than the sRGB standard most often used in images. My problematic raw images had this problem, where my raw converters would push large parts of my image to black. RawTherapee, instead of pushing out of gamut data to zero, will temporarily use negative numbers to represent out of gamut color. This allowed me to adjust my image so that I could get a clean image without blocking shadows. Also, the software uses higher precision math so that I can do more severe manipulations on an image while still keeping it looking good.

It is for these reasons that the software is slow — I'm thinking of getting fast, barebones Linux server as a compute server for open source products like this — but in difficult situations it is invaluable.

You don't need much data to adequately display an image on a computer monitor, but if you do lots of manipulations, such as shadow brightening, then it helps having lots of image data to do the processing nicely.

I've recently deployed newer versions of enfuse and ImageMagick which also do these kinds of advanced math handling, and I am rather pleased, except for the slowness. I'd also recommend Raw Photo Processor 64, which runs on Mac.

 

[ABA DABA]

Anyone that limits themselves solely to Linux is unnecessarily restricting their choice of Photo Editing software.

Fortunateley everyone is entitled to their own opinion. but yours suck's.

"The apostrophe is to alert the reader than an S is following." -Dave Barry

Either of you - what is some good photo editing software that runs on Android tablet?

I'm not an English major but should there not be an "a" between ON-- Android or maybe an S after tablet.

Can't help you, don't have a Android tablet, IPhone or any other of those fancy electronic thingy's.

Because I think anyone who limits themselves solely to Windows is unnecessarily restricting their choice of photo editing software.

Same as above about Linux

 

[CAcreeks]

The polygon tool is the primary way of selecting a region you want to apply region specifics edits to within a new layer. But, you can supplement it by using the paintbrush tool if you need finer control over the area you want to include in those edits...

Thanks, that doesn't sound so bad. It's not as if the magic wand is infallible or quick to select!

AfterShot does not support any of my cameras.

What cameras do you have?

Fuji. Aftershot does not support any Fuji cameras last I checked.

I toyed with the idea of buying Panasonic M43, but various people said the colors were little improved, or not at all, when converting Raw with Corel tools.

 

[Nicolas Robidoux]

Mark Scott Alben: If you are using gcc to build ImageMagick, and you are using it on a specific type of chip, compiling it on it, you may want to try the following compile options: -march=native -O3 (or maybe stick to -O2; depends, partly, on the vintage of our compiler).

On Linux, how to use these flags is discussed briefly here: http://exquires.ca/install.html

I have not benchmarked recently, but recent versions or gcc sometimes produce miraculously fast code at -O3. Olden days warnings about this compile level being "unsafe" can be ignored without worry. The kind of "safety" that used to be talked about is not something that concerns us.

You may, however, need a fairly fresh gcc to reap noticeable benefits.

The other things about ImageMagick is that is sometimes runs faster with OpenMP disabled. A list of build ImageMagick flags is here: http://www.imagemagick.org/script/advanced-unix-installation.php. Turning OpenMP off seems less worthwhile to try now than it used to (unless your machine is not multicore).

Benchmark on the type of tasks you usually do.

The quick and dirty benchmarks I posted here unfortunately used fairly old gcc: http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20498

 

[Nicolas Robidoux]

One of the things that -march=native -O3 will do is tell recent gcc to move some instructions to the vector unit. This part of gcc has made great strides in the last year or so.

 

[Nicolas Robidoux]

Similar discussion of GIMP: http://www.gimpusers.com/forums/gimp-developer/15360-ways-to-improve-gimp-2-9-performance

 

[Mark S Abeln]

Mark Scott Alben: If you are using gcc to build ImageMagick, and you are using it on a specific type of chip, compiling it on it, you may want to try the following compile options: -march=native -O3 (or maybe stick to -O2; depends, partly, on the vintage of our compiler).

On Linux, how to use these flags is discussed briefly here: http://exquires.ca/install.html

I have not benchmarked recently, but recent versions or gcc sometimes produce miraculously fast code at -O3. Olden days warnings about this compile level being "unsafe" can be ignored without worry. The kind of "safety" that used to be talked about is not something that concerns us.

You may, however, need a fairly fresh gcc to reap noticeable benefits.

The other things about ImageMagick is that is sometimes runs faster with OpenMP disabled. A list of build ImageMagick flags is here: http://www.imagemagick.org/script/advanced-unix-installation.php. Turning OpenMP off seems less worthwhile to try now than it used to (unless your machine is not multicore).

Benchmark on the type of tasks you usually do.

The quick and dirty benchmarks I posted here unfortunately used fairly old gcc: http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20498

Thanks for the hints. Lately I've been getting lazy and using Macports for my software distributions, so I'm not sure how recent everything is, but I'll give these a try. I have a 2.3 GHz Intel Core i5, a couple of years old, but still rather good.

 

[vwsjr]

Glad to see all the conversation and just wanted to catch up on a few things at random here.

I don't have benchmarks to show which applications perform better or worse on Windows vs. Linux, those comments are just based on my personal experience. I do like Gimp, just don't like it so much for photo editing. The Windows version gets better with every release, but in my experience it's just never run like it does on Linux.

As far as the quality of the refocus sharpening in Digikam, all I can say is give it a try and compare for yourself. What I like is that it gives very good results very quickly...better than unsharp mask for sure. A while back I did see a tutorial on using a combination of unsharp mask and refocus sharpening. I experimented with it and was able to get even better results in some cases, but every image took a good bit more work to get the settings for each sharpening method correct.

One thing I forget to mention, which I think is obvious for the most part, is that generally the things you take the most time to master, whether it's a specific application, or a specific technique, are the things you will find to be the best. I think that's why everyone is just so adamant about their software or technique being the absolute best. When you've done it for years and mastered the best way to use the tools you have, anything else does generally seem worse. I'm not saying that I'm an exception, but working in IT I learn a lot more applications than I would otherwise. Whereas I might dismiss an application immediately because of one feature I really don't like, I might have to become intimately familiar with it (and continue to use it no matter how much I dislike it!) to teach to other users, assist users, or just to be able to justify why we are or aren't purchasing it.

I saw the comments about selecting specific regions to edit and that is probably the biggest complaint I have about all the applications I use regularly. Of the open source applications I use, only Gimp has decent options for selecting and editing regions. For me it gets to cumbersome though to add that into workflow. If I was doing professional work, that would probably be a deal breaker for me, and force me to go to commercial apps.

Finally, as far as Jim's comments about speed, I agree with those. A typical day for me might be shooting 500 photos, previewing those quickly and deciding that only about 50 are worth a very quick edit for the web, and of those 50 maybe only six are truly worth spending a lot of time on in the editing process, maybe for printing or because I just want to try to get something 'just right'. That's definitely not high volume to me, and yet I still feel like any time I spend editing is a waste! For me, I'd always rather be taking photos than editing, and I find it to just be a necessary evil when you aren't satisfied with in-camera jpegs.