Alternatives to PS - what they can and can not do?

[Matus Kalisky]

Given the last news from Adobe there will be many of use who will - sooner or later - look for a software to replace Photoshop.

Obviously - there is not a software that can do all the things Photoshop has or even uses the same layout or logic, but there are several options some of you may already have quite detailed experience with.

Would you guys and galls be so kind and share your experience on image-editing software you use - what are the up and down sides compared to Photoshop?

Example of questions that just come to my mind:
- Can these softwares import PSD files?
- 16 bit processing?
- Adjustment layers or other way to make the changes revertible?
- noise reduction / sharpening / retouching tools ?
- batch processing
- Linux/Mac/Win
- color / contrast / levels / BW / toning ?

thank you in advance

[Lenny Eiger]

Example of questions that just come to my mind:
- Can these softwares import PSD files?
- 16 bit processing?
- Adjustment layers or other way to make the changes revertible?
- noise reduction / sharpening / retouching tools ?
- batch processing
- Linux/Mac/Win
- color / contrast / levels / BW / toning ?

thank you in advance

Just in case someone is taking notice, we definitely need a curves dialog, or something that will do the same thing, and the capability for masking. That's the big one for me...

Lenny

[Ben Syverson]

FWIW, Lightroom does all of the things mentioned so far, except for Linux.

[Greg Miller]

FWIW, Lightroom does all of the things mentioned so far, except for Linux.

Maybe. And maybe for some people that is an acceptable alternative. But the thought of having to use Lightroom to do what I do is not a welcome thought - not even close. I do 90% of my work in Photoshop for a reason.

[bob carnie]

plus 1
Lightroom does not even come close to PS in capabilities.
I use LR for quick edit and selection for our work, maybe setting up some final print canvases.

I think some are dreaming if they think a product will be developed to rival PS.

Maybe. And maybe for some people that is an acceptable alternative. But the thought of having to use Lightroom to do what I do is not a welcome thought - not even close. I do 90% of my work in Photoshop for a reason.

[Brian Ellis]

. . . . I think some are dreaming if they think a product will be developed to rival PS.

I agree if by "rival PS" you mean something that will do everything for everybody that Photoshop does. But many of Photoshop's tools and capabilities aren't used by most photographers, they're there for graphic artists/designers. Unless there are legal problems I would think that somebody might take those functions of Photoshop that are most used by photographers, leave out all the things most of us never use or do (which for me is probably 70% or more of Photoshop) and make a viable product that costs relatively little compared to Photoshop.

I should add that I haven't written a program in over 40 years and when I did I put the code on paper, handed it to a keypunch operator who put it on cards and then gave it to an operator who fed the cards into the computer. To say I'm a little out of date when it comes to software is a major understatement.

[bob carnie]

Photoshop yes travels across many levels,

Just considering the ability to move between colour spaces, separating out images, Man this product has been really thought out.
I consider myself a printmaker , not a photographer, the camera is just the beginning capture device. I use areas of PS that some here would not venture into, for many reasons.
The enlargers or in PS is where the magic starts happening. The designers past and present have really listened and put in this software basically more than any one person could ever master.
Consider Brian how long it has taken us to learn PS. We are all at different levels and use it in many different ways. Years of questioning and solutions have gone in to its design. Frankly I would never consider switching as it took me 5 years to grasp what I know, I have no intentions to learn another product that **could** rival PS.
If one is working basic then I can see a Rival product come out, but to replace PS in one single sweep would be impossible .

I never use plugins as I believe everything I personally could use is right before me , I just need to make my fingers request the functions I visualize or want to do. I am not talking photo comp here, I did this by hand, I am talking real world applications to create better images.
There are many workers experimenting with PS to alternative printmaking, and this is where the current crop of designers would not even have a clue on how to develop a working model. PS was designed by people who listened to old school masters and put in the things they want.

I still laugh every time I use the red ruby funtcion when masking , makes me all teary eyed.

[Matus Kalisky]

Guys - could we please stay on topic and just share the knowledge and experience we have with other image processing software (that includes Lightroom too, of course).

So again - what can other software tools do and what can they not? What are your workarounds for the missing (relative to PS) features?

Let's just try to help each other.

[Jeff Dexheimer]

I use both lightroom and photoshop. Lightroom is not a replacement for photoshop for many of us, myself included.

[Greg Miller]

I think there is a chance that Apple will jump in with an alternative product. The reasons they might:

1) They have plenty of cash on hand. They actually have enough cash to (theoretically) purchase all the buildings in Manhattan
2) They hate Adobe
3) They have some expertise in the market (aperture)
4) They have expertise in software development and the software engineers to do it
5) They have a very loyal customer base which would make it easier to pull customers who otherwise are tough to pull from Adobe

Even if there isn't a huge profit potential, I could see Apple doing it just to make Adobe sweat. I'm not saying they will, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.