Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

There are a lot of discussions here about the various image editing programs. Let's approach the question from a different direction, and talk about what we are looking for in a programing in terms of what we can do with it. What capabilities could we use and where are they available? There are a half a dozen or so members here who are extraordinarily knowledgeable on computer tech issues and some talented digital artists as well. It would be good to get input from as many different perspectives as possible, I think.

As an example of a direction this could go, a member on another thread made an interesting comment, saying that in the fashion industry Photoshop is a necessity for professionals, but that hobbyists might not want to invest the time required to learn Photoshop. What exactly is it that can be done with Photoshop that cannot otherwise be done? And, what is it that takes a lot of time? Learning about digital image editing, or learning the idiosyncrasies of the program?

I have some things I am looking for, but I would like to hear from others so I don't inadvertently steer this in a particular direction.

Mike

paige1209

User friendly program, ability to black out distracting backgrounds, ability to remove spots, and all the basics like cropping, color enhancement, haze removal, black and white editing and a variety of filters. Boy, would that make me happy!

Lila

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Photoshop is a raster editor. In the fashion/portrait industry a raster editor is used to do skin re-touching and beyond that to make the models appear non-human. Photoshop is the choice tool for this task -- the critical point being that a raster editor is required as opposed to a parametric editor.

Joe

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Thanks, Lila. How about layers? Raw image processing?

Mike

paige1209

Raw image processing, yes. Layers are too complicated for me. I just want to be able to take a terrific photo without too much processing!

Lila

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Thanks.

Photoshop is certainly not the only raster editor. What would make it a superior raster editor? Why would a parametric editor be inappropriate for skin re-touching?

Mike

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Maybe someone can explain the difference for everyone between raster editors and parametric editors (better than I could).

Mike

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

For my personal work I do not require heavy re-touch capabilities like sky replacement or head replacement or fantasy creation or special effects. For portraits I'm generally happy with blemish removal and light retouch that leaves people still looking like humans. I just want to process my raw files to a finished image that will typically look convincingly like what I photographed.

I'm concerned with my total workflow and for editing I want a raw workflow that is 100% non-destructive and 100% non-linearly re-editable. I want a parametric editor and I want to save my raw files and the parametric instructions to process them and that's all. I get very nearly what I want from Capture One.

Joe

Rongnongno Loc: FL

The only requirement is 16 bit when you think about it. Bit depth editing is the most and single criteria tht should make folks think twice before purchasing or using anything free under the GNU licensing.

The rest is about features and training. Either one want to learn or not.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

You pointed out to me that there was more information in raw files then I had realized was there. How well does Capture One do that, and how important is that for you? I was surprised that Luminar software was doing a better job at Canon raw files than Canon's DPP program was, and I am pretty sure that Luminar is not the last word on that process.

Mike

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

One's personal shooting needs will dictate their own software needs. So, a discussion of various editing software already is off in a misleading and disconnected direction with such a general basis for a discussion.

If we limit the discussion to RAW shooting, here's a list of needs / much haves:

1. Supports the camera's RAW format for current cameras and with minimal delay on new releases.
2. Supports lens profiles for current lenses and with minimal delay on new releases.
3. Supports a wide gamet colorspace, such as ProPhotoRGB.
4. Supports / maintains 16-bit editing, or deeper.
5. Provides efficient automation of repetitive tasks.
6. Provides efficient automation of repeating a group of similar edits across multiple images.
7. Efficiently renders pixel-level display of images (100% zoom), including current status of edits.
8. Provides efficient recovery / undo of edits, preferably 100% nondestructive risk to original image files.
9. Provides batch processing for import / load of images and export / reformat of output images into multiple file types and pixel resolution.
10. Efficient and easy cropping and aspect changes.
11. Efficient and easy content replacement for masking & cloning.
12. Discrete tools for execution of all standard global edits (exposure, contrast, WB, etc) and management of individual colors via Hue, Saturation and Luminance adjustments.
13. Ongoing maintenance to maintain compatibility with long-term industry trends in hardware, operating systems, security, internet connectivity, etc.
14. Reasonably efficient access to qualified and capable technical support personnel communicating in the user's national language.
15. Access to professional-grade documentation and training videos in the user's national language.
16. Industrial-strength digital noise processing with efficient / batch application of similar settings across similar images.
17. Efficient integration of 3rd-party tools from other vendors into the workflow of the primary tool.

Everything beyond this list is gravy. The list of 'what' rather than 'how' allows for multiple vendor ideas to accomplish while excluding software that can't achieve the basics like maintaining 16-bit editing while performing content replacement.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Thanks. That gives you more color data available to work with in editing, yes?

Mike

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

I'm not overly knowledeable and am moderately talented, and comfortable with software up to a point. As a hobbyist whose biggest audience is myself, I use Lightroom Classic for most of my processing, though I've very occasionally dabbled with special effects just for fun. LR was intuitive for me to learn, though I was already experienced with file management so that helped. I rarely use presets, preferring to choose my own settings to best enhance my photo.
I rarely use Photoshop, mostly for object or spot removal, but I like having its features at my fingertips. Some might get scared off by the more powerful features, but when you take the time to learn the basics the more complicated features like layering, stacking, etc., build on each other in a logical manner. Too many want to drive a racecar before they learn how to turn the key.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

A parametric editor works by creating and saving an instruction or recipe list for how to process the image. This is literally a text file and can even be readable and make sense. Here's a fragment from a DXO PL parametric recipe file:

Sidecar = {
Date = "2019-11-18T22:04:34.4118568Z",
Software = "DxO PhotoLab 3.0",
Source = {
CafId = "C43412a",
Items = {
{
Albums = "",
CreationDate = "2019-11-18T22:02:06.5292200Z",
ModificationDate = "2019-11-18T22:04:34.4088502Z",
Name = "IMG_1808.CR2",
OutputItems = {
}
,
ProcessingStatus = 1,
Rank = 0,
Rotation = 0,
Settings = {
AppliedPresetDisplayName = "1 - DxO Standard",
AppliedPresetUniqueName = "1 - DxO default.preset",
Base = {
ChannelMixerActive = false,
ChannelMixerRed = 0,
ChannelMixerYellow = 0,
ChannelMixerGreen = 0,
ChannelMixerCyan = 0,
ChannelMixerBlue = 0,
ChannelMixerMagenta = 0,
ChromaticAberrationActive = true,
ChromaticAberrationIntensity = 100,
ChromaticAberrationIntensityAuto = true,
ChromaticAberrationPurpleActive = false,
ChromaticAberrationSize = 4,
ChromaticAberrationSizeAuto = false,
ChromaticAberrationLateralActive = true,
HazeRemovalActive = false,
DehazingValue = 50,
ColorAccentuationActive = false,
VibrancyIntensity = 0,
ColorModeSaturation = 0,
ColorRenderingActive = true,
ColorRenderingIntensity = 100,
ColorRenderingIntent = 25,
ColorIntentAutoActive = true,
ColorRenderingType = "Original",
ColorRenderingICCProfile = "",
ColorRenderingDCPProfile = "",
ContrastControlGroupActive = false,
ColorModeContrast = 0,
LightingV2LocalContrastAmount = 0,
MicroContrastAuto = true,
ContrastEnhancementActive = false,
ContrastEnhancementGlobalIntensity = 0,
ContrastEnhancementHighlightIntensity = 0,
ContrastEnhancementMidlightIntensity = 0,
ContrastEnhancementLowlightIntensity = 0,
VignettedBlurActive = false,
VignettedBlurCenterPoint = {
0.5,
0.5,
}
,
VignettedBlurBlendFactor = 100,
VignettedBlurRadius = 0,
VignettedBlurVignetteSize = 100,
VignettedBlurRoundness = 50,
VignettedBlurTransition = 50,
VignettedBlurMode = "Vignetting",
ArtisticVignettingActive = false,
ArtisticVignettingCornerAttenuation = 0,
ArtisticVignettingMidFieldAttenuation = 50,
ArtisticVignettingRoundness = 50,
ArtisticVignettingTransition = 0,
ArtisticVignettingCenterPoint = {
0.5,
0.5,
}
,
CropActive = true,
CropAuto = true,
CropRatio = 0,
CropRect = {
0,
0,
1,
1,
}
,
DistortionActive = true,
DistortionType = "Auto",
DistortionTypeAuto = true,
DistortionIntensity = 1,
DistortionKeepRatio = false,
EdgeTexturingActive = false,
EdgeTextureID = "fuitelum1",
EdgeTexturingOpacity = 0.5,
EdgeTexturingSeed = 0,
EdgeTexturingPosition = "Random",
EdgeTexturingApplyToning = false,

When a parametric editor is working it displays for you a comp of what the recipe will create from your original image. Your original image is otherwise never altered. When you want an image to print or load on the internet you have the parametric editor export that for you by applying the recipe and creating a JPEG or TIFF image as a separate file.

A raster editor actually opens your image file and loads the pixels into memory where it can manipulate individual pixels. It gets confusing in that a good raster editor like PS can work at least partially parametrically. PS's smart filters for example. However a raster editor holds your original image in pixel form in memory and has the ability if you instruct it to overwrite your original.

Because a raster editor works by loading your original image in pixel form into memory it can't load and process raw files. If you try and open a raw file in PS it's sent to ACR where it opens. Adobe Camera Raw is not Photoshop proper and when you finish in ACR a pixel (raster) version of your image is created and passed over to Photoshop where it's loaded into memory for editing.

Two very different approaches with different capabilities.

Joe

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

That is great Paul, thanks. Give me a week to study it and I will get back to you.

That makes for a great checklist. Stacking and vector layers and drawing tools are two functions I use a lot. Vector drawing tools can be really useful for doing minor clean ups on edges. I have been using Zerene for stacking.

On your feature #12, I assume that you want to be able to do localized adjustments, not just global adjustments, yes?

Mike