Photo editiing software (Page 3): Corel's Paintshop Pro X6 is a strong processing package that is very reasonably priced. List at $99 it is often on sale for much less. It has an...

hotglassguy Loc: Jeffersonville, IN

Corel's Paintshop Pro X6 is a strong processing package that is very reasonably priced. List at $99 it is often on sale for much less. It has an integrated organizer, "quick" edit, and a full featured editor. There are people on UHH that use it so you could ask questions.

Welcome to the UHH!

Collie lover Loc: St. Louis, MO

I use Corel PaintShop Pro X5. Version X6 just came out. Both are reasonably priced and will do everything Photoshop does and for less money.

Racin17 Loc: Western Pa

joer wrote:

No worry, we have all been there. br br You proba... (show quote)

Thank you. Much appreciated

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Philipschmitten wrote:

Now I am stuck between Lightroom and Elements. oh my decisions decisions

I still think photoshop is best--can't stand Lightroom and Elements.

Photoshop is expensive, however there is little in the way of a learning curve if you know what you're looking for.

I start with ACR (which I think is wonderful) touch up a little in Photoshop CC, and I'm done.

Wouldn't do it any other way.

Cheers...tom

Nic42 Loc: Cardiff, Wales

dynaquest1 wrote:

If I were you, I'd pick Elements over Lightroom as it has way more photo editing options (it's a mini-Photoshop).

If you don't need 'layers' and shoot in RAW then Lightroom is the better option as it has a far superior RAW converter to Elements.

CurreyPhoto Loc: Reddick, Florida

Nic42 wrote:

If you don't need 'layers' and shoot in RAW then Lightroom is the better option as it has a far superior RAW converter to Elements.

I use Elements 11 and when I upgrade the RAW converter, I use the same ACR file that is used in Lightroom and Photoshop, so I think it is the same converter as you have in Lightroom, unless Elements makes changes to it when it is taken into it. I do understand that some of the functionality is not available in Elements, but I believe the converter engine is identical. If I'm not right about this I would really like to know.

chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon

I use Fast Stone to organize my photos and to look at them. I edit/post process with Zoner Photo Studio 16 (just upgraded). ZPS is the best of PS and LR in one program for under $100.

excophoto

I subscribe to the Adobe Creative Cloud which gives you EVERYTHING Adobe for $50 a month. I am also an application developer, and like to mess around with video and record audio so it made sense for me... For $50 a month you can't lose. For those who don't need everything Adobe, you can get JUST Lightroom & PhotoShop for $9.99 a month, which is a great deal, if you do the math you would pay more if you purchased them outright and bought all the upgrades because you always have the latest version regardless. In 1 year of subscriptions you still spent less than a SINGLE LICENSE for PhotoShop, forget about adding in any upgrades.

I use:

Adobe Lightroom 5 for organization, processing

Adobe PhotoShop CC for any advanced processing (Masking, merging, advanced filters etc.)

Photomatix for processing my HDR shots

FlickR for storing them online (will be moving to something else soon, FlickR has become too much of a social network for me.)

faygo Loc: Tucson, AZ

Not that you don't have enough choices, but... I use Microsoft Digital Imaging and it is right up there with Elements in the things it can do. Love my program. It also sorts by date and time.

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

Philipschmitten wrote:

I am using Picasa because it lets me save my photos at 800 megs so I can publish them on my website. I like the simple editing tools also. So my question is,,,,,,is there any other programs like that available?

We all tend to like software we are most comfortable with. Saving time on workflow is important to me. LR is a favorite for many, and it's arguably one of the better tools out there, but I never got used to its catalog feature. This database tracks the location and info about each photo, among other things. I prefer ACDSee Pro. With this app, you can organize your photos anyway you like---just like Picasa.

And like many good applications, you can try it before you buy it:

http://www.acdsee.com/en/products/acdsee-pro-7

cookie14 Loc: Southcentral, PA

joer wrote:

Windows Live Photo Gallery its part of Windows Essentials. Search you computer files, you may already have it. Its simple and does an excellent job. I use it in combination with my other editors.

Google it if you don't have. Its free.

I use the Windows Essentials, too. It works nicely!

RichardRW Loc: West coast of Florida

Once you edit a photo in Elements it has to be saved as a jpeg or a tiff taking up hard drive space and it replaces the original unless you have made a second actual copy. Edits in Lightroom are stored separately in a small file and never change the original. Much less space needed and original is intact. If you have a registered student you know, have them purchase a copy of Lightroom for less than Elements. There are tradeoffs in the price.

RichardRW Loc: West coast of Florida

Once you edit a photo in Elements it has to be saved as a jpeg or a tiff taking up hard drive space and it replaces the original unless you have made a second actual copy. Edits in Lightroom are stored separately in a small file and never change the original. Much less space needed and original is intact. If you have a registered student you know, have them purchase a copy of Lightroom for less than Elements. There are tradeoffs in the price.

Ugly Jake Loc: Sub-Rural Vermont

odinswolf wrote:

but have recently been trying FastStone and so far like what it does. it is a free download.

Rob

Picasa is just awful - especially for indexing - try FastStone.

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

Philipschmitten wrote:

I am using Picasa because it lets me save my photos at 800 megs so I can publish them on my website. I like the simple editing tools also. So my question is,,,,,,is there any other programs like that available?

800 megs? What's that? Are you talking about megapixels or megabytes? There isn't an 800MP camera on earth and a RAW file is typically only 50MB or so- certainly not 800MB. Define this for us so we can be on the same page. Do you mean 800KB file size small enough to put on a website?