What to get: PS, Affinity, GIMP, ON1, other?

[rdenney]

Okay, I think Affinity Photo might be a keeper, too. I know that the support annoyed some folks, but I can't remember the last time (before today) I had to get support, so maybe that won't be an issue. But I just ran through a verification test. I was able to pretty easily export a web-size JPG with no EXIF and with a conversion from ProPhoto colorspace to SRGB. I was able to import a PEF raw image and had pretty good control over that process (better than in CS5). The layering is right, and all the filters work at full color depth. It opened a 1G file without issue. It has a stitching feature.

It also has a whole bunch of stuff I have not used in the past.

It's not perfect. I wish they could figure out how to dock the tool bars on a different monitor, but that is not one of my requirements.

So, where I seem to be ending up is DXO Photo Lab and Affinity Photo. The two together are under $200, and both require paying for an upgrade only on the user's terms.

Rick "experiments will continue" Denney

[rdenney]

Well, the software is called Photoline and not Photoshop. Try a TIFF. PL can even save a TIFF with layers...



A 6x9 TIFF color image scanned with a Nikon LS 9000 @ 4.000 ppi @ 16/48 bit color depth has a size of ~640 MB. So I guess your numbers for a 6x7 scan are kind of bloated. And please don't mention Epson. Real LF photographers talk about drum scanners or Imacon. Real tools, not toys.

For what it's worth: I am working on a 2008 24" iMac (8.1) with 6 GB RAM. I can open any TIFF file up to 2 GB and work on it, even with layers. Never tried a larger file size though. It's fast in every respect on this 'old' machine. I even can load 2 x 1 GB TIFFs for comparison side by side. Due to excellent coding PL opens and saves any file faster than any other software. It doesn't mess with EXIF data like Affinity Photo. The print manager is fantastic, etc.



Contact the developers or ask in the support forum. And maybe you should use the RAW converter that came with your camera. If that doesn't deliver the results you expect, you might try a workshop in 'How to measure light for a perfect exposure'. X-Rite (Sekonic) offers these workshops.



The browser needs some time to generate the thumbnails. If you don't have the time to wait for the thumbs from PSD files, try TIFF files. The thumbs generation is a one time process. Adobe Bridge needs more time for this task. BTW, I am using XnView MP as a browser, which works great. But I guess it is far too cheap for your requirements. Even worse, it is a French product and doesn't have a brand name you are used to.



Ahhh, I see, any company that is smaller than Adobe is a hobbyist thingie? Both developers already coded image editors for Atari. They certainly do have more experience than any hype company in the US.
Oh, by the way, PL with the very small code comes with a footprint of 64.3 MB on your system, compared to almost 1 GB of Affinity Photo and even more for your beloved Photoshop.



I am one of them. There are many of us, mostly in Europe. Already for decades.



Your choice. But wait - DxO is bankrupt.



Good for you if you know how to write. Can you write code? In addition don't forget the developers of Photoline are Germans. Not everybody is fluent in Gods own language.

A real LF photographer doesn't need too many gimmicks in a software. Just a few editing tools to retouch dust or slightly modify some curves. If you need more than that, you really should hone your photography skills. That said, I know from your reply that you are a bloody hobbyist in LF photography. Nothing serious at all.

1. That PSD file had layers in it, which makes it bigger. Layered TIFF is an Adobe format just as much as PSD is, by the way. But if you layer a TIFF, it will get bigger, too.

2. Your opinion of my tools is not what I asked about, and was not germane to the discussion. You used it as an opportunity to invalidate my complaints by belittling me. It's okay--I can take it. But consider that the next time you wonder why another mod thought one of your posts rude. (Ralph did not consult with me before deleting your post, in case you were wondering. When we are involved in a discussion, we let other mods handle things in that thread.)

3. How is measuring light for perfect exposure related to anything I discussed? I do actually think I know how to do that. Are you going to challenge my requirements on the basis of my needs? That is poor form. I need what I need.

4. If the browser is going to lock up indefinitely while it generates thumbnails, it really ought to give some indication that it's doing something other than being locked up. The directory it first locked up on only had half a dozen images in it. The next one it locked up on (after I halted and restarted it) didn't have any images in it at all, but it did have subfolders with images in them. I have hundreds of folders and thousands of photos--the point of browsing is to browse. Adobe Bridge, which is a dreadful browser, builds the thumbnails slowly, but you see it happening, and it doesn't prevent you from giving up on that directory and going to another one. DXO Photo Lab opened a directory with a couple of hundred 70MB raw files in seconds.

5. After all my posts in this thread, you think I'm going to be an Adobe fan boy?

6. I'm happy it works for you, and I was really quite hopeful about it based on its long history (and your recommendation). That established a high expectation and perhaps that heightened the disappointment that the claims were simply false, as you confirmed. I am grateful they allow a download trial first. I would have been perfectly happy with European software--truly. But I do want it to do what it says it will do. Opening PSD's of all sizes was a requirement, simply because I have PSD files of all sizes. The whole point of the exercise is to provide a redundant system. I don't need to hear after the fact that real photographers just know that they have to go back and convert all those thousands of PSD files to TIFF before the software will open them.

7. You have no idea how much I do in editing software, nor do I have to justify what I do or don't require to you. I laid out my requirements. You read them. If I was expecting too much of your favorite software, to the point where if I expressed disappointment you were going to act like I had disparaged your mother, you might have mentioned it. You're the one with all the experience, after all.

Rick "don't be so defensive" Denney

[rdenney]

Herr Huber did respond to me very quickly this morning, which I appreciate. The largest PSD file he had attempted to load was 202MB--files that size loaded for me without issue. I sent him some information about the issues I ran into, but I told him I would be using other products and was sorry to have troubled him. Perhaps it will help him deal with others who run into the same issues.

Rick "the software would probably be fine for other sets of requirements" Denney

[consummate_fritterer]

This is OFF TOPIC but, a certain member seems upset their posts are deleted due to rudeness. I for one, found at least one post unnecessarily rude, as well as self-righteous and arrogant. That poster pushed rudeness just short of calling a good member here a moron. The funny part is some of their arguments are very inaccurate due to misunderstanding of written data and assumptiveness.

I'm following this interesting and informative thread because I'm looking for a suitable replacement for PS which I used extensively years ago but refuse to buy a subscription. I want to own what I'm paying for. I don't rent my cameras and lenses, nor my vehicle, nor my home, either.

[Peter Collins]

+1 consummate_fritterer

I too am following this "interesting and informative thread" because I am the OP!

Something different: What means "SRGB"? And "EXIF"? Anyone?

[rdenney]

+1 consummate_fritterer

I too am following this "interesting and informative thread" because I am the OP!

Something different: What means "SRGB"? And "EXIF"? Anyone?

SRGB is the colorspace used by most display devices. It has a smaller gamut than most digital cameras and most scanner output these days. I generally use ProPhoto (which has the widest gamut) or Adobe 1998 (which is the standard high-gamut colorspace). One works in a wide-gamut colorspace, and then has to convert the results into a colorspace that will fit in the display technology. For printers and the Internet, sRGB is the most common.

EXIF is the metadata that digital cameras attach to the image file. It defines many things, including the camera, lens, exposure, flash condition, etc., etc.

Rick "converting to a narrower colorspace is part of targeting" Denney

[Paul Coy]

+1 consummate_fritterer

I too am following this "interesting and informative thread" because I am the OP!

Something different: What means "SRGB"? And "EXIF"? Anyone?

Same here.
I know this thread is a bit dated but I am in the same boat. I am tired of staring at my scanned contact sheets of my images. I have Elements 8 but never spent any time on it. I have been reading as much as I can find on the whole Adobe subscription argument and I am not a fan of that model. I would not be using those programs regularly anyway to make it worthwhile. I am totally beginning at square one with photo editing. I only have one older simple point/shoot digital camera, and all my images are scanned medium/large format slides and negatives.

From what I am understanding, PaintShop Pro and Affinity Photo seem to be the closest choices instead of PS/LR for folks like me who need to learn a program and get their images processed. I am leaning toward PSP as they support 16 bit channels, layers, all that, and Corel has been around quite a long time. I figure once I learn and get up to speed on what everyone is talking about I can then make a better informed decision on imaging software down the line. Is that flawed?

Peter,
What did you decide on going with?

[jnantz]

Okay, I think Affinity Photo might be a keeper, too. I know that the support annoyed some folks, but I can't remember the last time (before today) I had to get support, so maybe that won't be an issue. But I just ran through a verification test. I was able to pretty easily export a web-size JPG with no EXIF and with a conversion from ProPhoto colorspace to SRGB. I was able to import a PEF raw image and had pretty good control over that process (better than in CS5). The layering is right, and all the filters work at full color depth. It opened a 1G file without issue. It has a stitching feature.

It also has a whole bunch of stuff I have not used in the past.

It's not perfect. I wish they could figure out how to dock the tool bars on a different monitor, but that is not one of my requirements.

So, where I seem to be ending up is DXO Photo Lab and Affinity Photo. The two together are under $200, and both require paying for an upgrade only on the user's terms.

Rick "experiments will continue" Denney

hey rick
good luck with your experiments and using the program/s,
i'm certain you won't have troubles as i did...
my experiences probably weren't " typical " ..
have fun !

john

[DHodson]

With regards to Photoline, I was looking for an editor that let me work in Grey Gamma 2.1 for Piezography. Someone mentioned that Photoline did so I sent an email last week to confirm. Kudos to them, I got an email back from Gerhard the next day indicating yes and with a screen grab showing the selection.

Some might argue that converting the RGB channels works fine but considering the size of a scanned 4x5. I'd rather not have to carry the extra bits.

[j.e.simmons]

I’ve recently installed Photoshop 5.5 on a new Windows 10 laptop, so I think porting over will be available for awhile. I like Capture One for both my small format digital and scanned negatives, though I still click to edit in Photoshop to use the healing tool for spotting. The Photoshop tool works much better than the C1.
John “looking for a 4-valve York BBb that I can afford” Simmons