ACDSee Pro 5 User Reviews

I prefer ACDsee over Lightroom because of simplicity, speed and file management. I don't do extensive editing much and ACDsee's tweaking ability is more than enough for me. If you want to manage pictures, folders and don't want to import, export and undergo those complicated and slow stuff, ACDsee is for you. The explorer panel is amazine. It's like Windows Explorer within the program. If you need to tweak photos, basic editing like brightness, contrast, dodge, burn, resize and multiple ...

I have been using the ACDSee range for more than 5 years and it forms the backbone of my photographic processing. A great package at a good price to meet the photographers needs. A previous user posted concern at splitting EDIT and DEVELOP functions - I only use the develop function (except for preparing images for the internet when the BATCH EDIT option is really useful to resize and add a Text watermark). I cannot see the need to use both EDIT and DEVELOP routinely to refine photographs. ...

A great package with one fatal flaw, namely the dividing of processing into "Edit" and "Develop", and the requirement to 'save' as you switch between one and the other. As both Edit and Develop share 80% of the same functions, (bar one or two important ones such as 'crop') the designers decision to go down this double window approach is both bizarre and irritating. Splitting into two wastes a lot of time, and having to save needlessly between them adversely impacts IQ. There should be ust one ...

A great package with one fatal flaw, namely the dividing of processing into "Edit" and "Develop", and the requirement to 'save' as you switch between one and the other. As both Edit and Develop share 80% of the same functions, (bar one or two important ones such as 'crop') the designers decision to go down this double window approach is both bizarre and irritating. Splitting into two wastes a lot of time, and having to save needlessly between them adversely impacts IQ. There should be ust one ...

A great package with one fatal flaw, namely the dividing of processing into "Edit" and "Develop", and the requirement to 'save' as you switch between one and the other. As both Edit and Develop share 80% of the same functions, (bar one or two important ones such as 'crop') the designers decision to go down this double window approach is both bizarre and irritating. Splitting into two wastes a lot of time, and having to save needlessly between them adversely impacts IQ. There should be ust one ...

A great package with one fatal flaw, namely the dividing of processing into "Edit" and "Develop", and the requirement to 'save' as you switch between one and the other. As both Edit and Develop share 80% of the same functions, (bar one or two important ones such as 'crop') the designers decision to go down this double window approach is both bizarre and irritating. Splitting into two wastes a lot of time, and having to save needlessly between them adversely impacts IQ. There should be ust one ...