# Best editing software?



## JeramyJ (Feb 14, 2010)

I realize the answer to this question may be very subjective. However, I am struggling between the broad array of options on the market right now. I need a good general photo editing tool. I shoot in both JPEG and RAW. More Jpeg than raw really. I have used Picaso, Gimp, and have just recently installed Lightroom 3 Beta. 

I would like a tool that does just about everything. I am not as concerned about file management as I am about the actual processing. I am seriously debating between Elements (Whatever Number is now available), and Photoshop CS4. I assume the CS4 will be way above my head in the ease of use department. Although, I have no real experience in that area. Any insight here?


----------



## ann (Feb 14, 2010)

Elements should give you the tools needed for photography, CS4 has a great deal more options, but your paying a great deal of money for software that is  heavily weighted for graphic designer not photographers.


----------



## KmH (Feb 14, 2010)

I guess it depends how serious you are about your editing.

Both GIMP and Elements are limited to an 8-bit color depth.

CS4 has many tools that allow editing in a 16-bit color depth and has an expanded ACR capability for editing your RAW images. Additionally, CS4's tools have more options that do the same tools in Elements.

An alternative to Photoshop is Corel's Paint Shop Pro (PSP).


----------



## ann (Feb 14, 2010)

thanks Keith, i had forgotten about the bit depth which can be critical. At least for me it is


----------



## JeramyJ (Feb 14, 2010)

Thanks for the replies. CS4 it is then I suppose. Will try to find a deal on it. 

JJ


----------



## matfoster (Feb 14, 2010)

ann said:


> thanks Keith, i had forgotten about the bit depth which can be critical. At least for me it is



there recently has been some new developments regarding this aspect of the GIMP. i currently use 2.6.7 which has GEGL ported and shown as a menu option.

"GEGL (Generic Graphics Library) is a graph based image processing framework _that will be used in all GIMP-3.0_. With GEGL, the internal processing is being done in 32bit floating point linear light RGBA. By default the legacy 8bit code paths are still used, but a curious user can turn on the use of GEGL for the color operations with this option. 

In addition to porting color operations to GEGL, an experimental GEGL Operation tool has been added, found in the Tools menu. It enables applying GEGL operations to an image and it gives on-canvas previews of the results."

8.5.*Use GEGL


----------



## KmH (Feb 14, 2010)

matfoster said:


> ann said:
> 
> 
> > thanks Keith, i had forgotten about the bit depth which can be critical. At least for me it is
> ...


 *"there recently has been some new developments regarding this aspect of the GIMP."*

GEGL has nothing to do with image editing at the 16-bit color depth level.

CS4 has the equivelent (OpenGL) and it's not "an experimental GEGL Operation tool", it's a fully functional element if a user has CS4 Extended.

JJ,

The only true discount on CS4 is the Student Edition. Any higher education student, having a valid student picture ID card, qualifies to buy in Adobe's Education Store: https://store1.adobe.com/cfusion/st..._us&view=ols_cat&catID=SPECIALS&store=OLS-EDU

Qualified buyers get 70% off CS4 Extended, $999 retail - $299 for the Student Edition which is *exactly* like the retail version.


----------



## JeramyJ (Feb 14, 2010)

KmH said:


> matfoster said:
> 
> 
> > ann said:
> ...




Might be worth it to enroll in a local University course.  Thanks.


----------



## Garbz (Feb 15, 2010)

While CS4 is great, it sucks if you're not an educational buyer or seasoned pro. When your editing software costs as much as your camera you really need to question the direction in which you're spending your hard earned dollars, especially given the alternative solutions.

Remember while editing in Elements does not give you 16bit support, firstly you admitted yourself you shoot mostly JPEG. Secondly in Adobe CameraRAW for elements you can do the most bit-depth intensive adjustments (white balance, contrast and exposure adjustment) in 16bit before you open the image in Elements which eliminates a lot of the need for 16bit support. It's better, but remember the differences are in terms of slight posterisation and not massively reduced editing functionality, most of which is lost if you shoot JPEG anyway.

Also have a very detailed play with Lightroom. Photoshop as an editing platform is infinitely powerful, but I probably use it for 1 in every 1000 photos I take. Lightroom has all the common adjustment, several touchup, and a few effect tools to do the serious grunt of the work on most normal photos. These days I typically only open Photoshop when I need some very special effects like simulating soft focus, or extending depth of field, or some other very fancy effect that would make purists throw up in their mouths. 

Lightroom is incredibly capable but only if you take the time to get to know it, and it sure as heck is faster than editing 500 of the days images in Photoshop.


----------



## matfoster (Feb 15, 2010)

KmH said:


> GEGL has nothing to do with image editing at the 16-bit color depth   level.



what prompts them to state that GEGL is instrumental in achieving that specific capability?


"Big Features, such as *16 Bit color support* or native CMYK color    space  are not included in GIMP 2.6, however *with the  implementation  of GEGL   the road is now clear to develop such features* *in  upcoming versions.*   Hopefully in 2009 with GIMP 2.8."

Tutorial: What's new in GIMP 2.6? - gimpusers.com


----------



## JeramyJ (Feb 15, 2010)

Garbz said:


> While CS4 is great, it sucks if you're not an educational buyer or seasoned pro. When your editing software costs as much as your camera you really need to question the direction in which you're spending your hard earned dollars, especially given the alternative solutions.
> 
> Remember while editing in Elements does not give you 16bit support, firstly you admitted yourself you shoot mostly JPEG. Secondly in Adobe CameraRAW for elements you can do the most bit-depth intensive adjustments (white balance, contrast and exposure adjustment) in 16bit before you open the image in Elements which eliminates a lot of the need for 16bit support. It's better, but remember the differences are in terms of slight posterisation and not massively reduced editing functionality, most of which is lost if you shoot JPEG anyway.
> 
> ...




I have only just begun to get to know Lightroom 3 Beta. I have been very impressed with it thus far and will likely continue with it. Bit of a learning curve though. Thanks for the input there.


----------



## IgsEMT (Feb 15, 2010)

well, I've tried few like PSCS# LR#, DXO, DXO, Bible Labs, ACDsee, gimp, Capture One, CaptureNX2. After few weeks of playing with each, I ended up with ACDsee for quick/dirty batch (rename, resize and/or just viewing images), LR for general non-raw, PS for detail non-raw files. CaptureNX2 for raw (Nikon).


----------



## skieur (Feb 15, 2010)

CS4 is the best, but not always necessary and not always fast and convenient to use.  Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate or X3 is inexpensive, "photoshop-like" and has more features than Elements.  Elements is number 3 and more expensive than PP X2.  Lightroom is more of a program for doing light editing of a lot of images and it is pricey for what it does, so it is number 4.

skieur


----------



## Tighearnach (Feb 16, 2010)

image editing at the 16-bit color depth level.

Can someone explain what this means. I use Elements and didnt realise I might not be getting the most from my photos because of it. 

Thanks
T


----------



## JeramyJ (Feb 16, 2010)

Tighearnach said:


> image editing at the 16-bit color depth level.
> 
> Can someone explain what this means. I use Elements and didnt realise I might not be getting the most from my photos because of it.
> 
> ...




Agreed, I too would like to hear info on that. However, I assume the bit level is simply a reference to the number of available colors? :er: I could have sprouted an extra chromosome though.


----------



## Invisodude (Feb 16, 2010)

One thing also to throw in here, I noticed in your signature you shoot a Nikon, another great option is CNX (Capture Nx) to process the raw files, then, if more edits are needed, export to TIFF and edit further in elements or paintshot, etc. But you can do a lot of edits in CNX.  Most people hate Capture nx at first, but once you get to know the program, it's quite amazing, the control points are with trying it for sure. I've downloaded element trials a couple times, maybe it's just me but I spend so much time trying to set the brushes how I want them. Then I pull up CNX, even for a jpeg and zip out the edit. You can quickly assign any function to a brush, it's perty cool


----------



## ghache (Feb 16, 2010)

i use photoshop and lightroom.

i like lightroom because of the file manament functions that are alot better in lightroom than the viewer in cs4.

i use lightroom for the whitebalance and all the fun stuff, i apply more advance technique in cs4. 

use them both alot.


----------



## Garbz (Feb 26, 2010)

Tighearnach said:


> image editing at the 16-bit color depth level.
> 
> Can someone explain what this means. I use Elements and didnt realise I might not be getting the most from my photos because of it.



The bit depth is the number of possible values used to display colour. At standard 8bit colour level 0 represents black, and 255 represents white. At 16bit, 0 still represents black, but white is now 65535. As you can see the number of possible shades has increased by a massive factor of 256. 

Now these shades will not be visible to you in general, however they become critical in computing final values when you do things like adjusting exposure. Say you increase the brightness of an 8bit image the software has little data to work with and will calculated a best guess of the final values.

However your cameras capture 10 12 or 14bit data in raw files. When you edit in 16bits this extra data comes through so now your brightness increase becomes less of a guess at final values. This can reduce posterisation an extreme example of which looks like this:







16bit editing becomes important for heavily edited images especially with lots of gradients.


----------



## Fusion (Mar 23, 2010)

​Elements and Lightroom are an excellent combination, use them all the time. Only when I need more do I go to CS4. I can do most thing I need to do with those 2 progs. :cheers:


----------



## Hamtastic (Mar 24, 2010)

Lightroom is Adobe Camera Raw with a cataloging system (and a much cheaper price tag than Photoshop).  There isn't an ACR version of LR3 yet, but I assume there will be.  I only shoot raw, and find ACR covers 95+% of my photo processing needs.  I need CS for stitching, HDR, and other special effects, but I don't use those very often.  For typical photo processing I think Lightroom is a good choice.  

Lightroom automatically handles color profile and bit depth conversions.  The processing is done in 16 bit and a color profile similar to ProPhotoRGB, and then converted to sRGB and 8 bit when exported as jpegs.  It's all supposed to be "invisible" so the photog doesn't have to worry about it.  

I process in 16 bit because I understand the reasoning behind it, and my computer has no problems.  In personal testing and real world experiences the only time I've ever actually been able to see a difference was when trying to lighten dark shadows quite a bit and still recover usable detail.  In other words a severely underexposed shot that I ought to be deleting anyway.


----------

