Bryan Lee
Expat Street Photographer
Im getting a new dedicated photography computer and Im wondering what software members are using as of 2007?
What is the best software to store and find pictures?
Is the combination of Adobe Elements and Lightroom a usable option?
Is CS3 and Lightroom the ultimate setup?
Is Lightzone anything worth considering using?
Is anyone still using GIMP?
Is anyone using PICASA for anything now that its free?
Is Vuescan still king?
What should one budget for software?
Will Aperture work on a PC?
All comments and more questions are welcomed.
What is the best software to store and find pictures?
Is the combination of Adobe Elements and Lightroom a usable option?
Is CS3 and Lightroom the ultimate setup?
Is Lightzone anything worth considering using?
Is anyone still using GIMP?
Is anyone using PICASA for anything now that its free?
Is Vuescan still king?
What should one budget for software?
Will Aperture work on a PC?
All comments and more questions are welcomed.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
Bryan Lee said:
I really like Extensis Portfolio, since it allows more robust search, keyword and file storage/archive options.
I don't see why not.
I don't really like lightroom, and cs3, still in beta has compatibility issues at the moment. So I'd say no.
Never heard of it.
Yes, but I prefer CS2 if you have the funds for it. Still much more powerful.
Many PC users seem to feel that it is a good organizing tool.
It depends. I like it with my flatbed Epsons, but with the neg scanners, I get better results with Silverfast. But that's just me. It will vary with scanner, user ability/familiarity, and how you hold your tongue.
That depends on your needs, equipment, and expectations. I'd say at least 1.5k USD or so, to get really up and going. More if you want to deal with color calibration software, rips, and such for high quality color control on output.
As far as I know, not thus far. I like my Mac.
bmicklea
RF Newbie
Bryan Lee said:
You're getting a dedicated photo computer that's not a Mac? Someone else jump in with the inevitable opposite opinion, but I really think that if you're doing a dedicated computer for photography you have to go Mac - it's pretty much what they're designed for. I did photo processing on a PC for years and two years ago switched to a Mac. Wish I'd done it sooner - everything seems to work a little better and colour management seems much less finicky.
My setup is Photoshop CS2 + Aperture. I use Aperture for the import of photos and as a library, plus I do basic tweaks there. Photoshop is used periodically when I need to do more intense changes.
I looked at Lightroom but somehow I didn't like it as much as Aperture, perhaps because Aperture uses an iTunes like library which I love.
Software can always be changed, the hardware is harder so I'd spend more thought there. In all cases the programs you're talking about are designed by guys using Macs for people using Macs, then they're ported to PCs.
(this is where Brad ducks for cover...)
K
Kin Lau
Guest
I like PSE 5.0, but not wild about Lightroom.
Vuescan works fine for scanning once you figured it out.
No comments on the rest.
Vuescan works fine for scanning once you figured it out.
No comments on the rest.
DavidH
Overweight and over here
Bryan Lee said:
iView Media Pro for storing and sorting - when I got back from one job with 3000 images I realised that I needed something
CS2
CaptureOne for initial RAW work
Qpict for quick views of some image work
Silverfast Ai in preference to Vuescan - I have both but rarely use Vuescan now, finding Silverfast superior
PC v MAC - check out the spoofs of the Mac adds on youtube
I use both PCs and Macs but do my image work on Macs - so all the above are Mac versions - the PCs run Avid video editing software, they're more versatile for that.
good luck
heninger
Member
Bryan Lee said:
Lightroom is *very* cool. 95% of what you need in one place. One rarely needs to go to Photoshop anymore except for heavy-duty retouching.
You really need to try it out, and there will be a demo version next week you can download of 1.0.
For those of you who are old-school PS/ACR/Bridge people, just let it go. You may have to spend a bit of time learning a few new tricks, but its worth it in the long run. No more cobbled together workflows
with different software all thru the process, with the attendant gotchas and complexity. You *can* do great things with the older generation of tools (and more power to you if you get dogamatic on me), but it really makes sense for those new to the field (or lacking the robes of the PS priesthood) to skip the confusing parts and get with the new ways of doing things. Channel mixer? Come on.
Note: I'm a bit biased as I work for Adobe, but I've worked on all of our digital tools and LR is by far the best for the photographer.
As to Mac vs. PC, I also worked at Apple and I find that PCs (pre-Vista) are faster at most imaging tasks, but just barely. Macs or PCs are fine tools, so pick what you like and use it. Ignore the koolaid.
Last edited:
mwooten
light user
Bryan,
Are you a student? If so, then Adobe, Apple, and many others give very healthy discount to students and educators. Taking a couple of classes at your local community college can benefit the mind as well as the wallet
I'm a long time mac and photoshop user. My first mac was a 512k original "toaster" mac, and I learned photoshop with version 4. I'm using photoshop cs2 now. To me the mac os does not get in my way. I'm now using the beta of Lightroom to "develop" my RD1 raw files, and keep track of them. I've pre-ordered v1.0. I don't know if you can use Lightroom as the front-end for scanning film/slides into its workflow. (I have a feeling that if it doesn't now, then it will soon with plugins.)
Michael
Are you a student? If so, then Adobe, Apple, and many others give very healthy discount to students and educators. Taking a couple of classes at your local community college can benefit the mind as well as the wallet
I'm a long time mac and photoshop user. My first mac was a 512k original "toaster" mac, and I learned photoshop with version 4. I'm using photoshop cs2 now. To me the mac os does not get in my way. I'm now using the beta of Lightroom to "develop" my RD1 raw files, and keep track of them. I've pre-ordered v1.0. I don't know if you can use Lightroom as the front-end for scanning film/slides into its workflow. (I have a feeling that if it doesn't now, then it will soon with plugins.)
Michael
dmr
Registered Abuser
bmicklea said:
I've recently upgraded, replaced actually, my "dedicated photo computer" and it's not a Mac. It's just a generic PC from a local dealer. A friend helped me put it all together and it's quite fast. Next project will be to get into some kind of more formal color management. What really helps is if you're not that into PC hardware, make friends with some who are, particularly those into graphics and gaming. They say that what I do is "low maintenance" and "kid stuff" compared to the game graphics.
I'm really glad that I did the upgrade, now that I have a decent printer and a negative scanner.
I would suggest some large hard disks and a DVD burner. Hi-res negative scans really eat up disk space.
I've considered upgrading, but Photoshop 7 does all I need. Really.
Seriously, Mac people love Macs, like Leica people love Leicas. I don't really feel the need to have either, since I'm reasonably happy with what I do have. I use the PC because I've learned them and can use them effectively.
The dedicated photo computer never was planned. It just happened. When I got the laptop I did more and more non-photo stuff on it, and the photos, printing, editing, scanning became what I used the desktop and the nice monitor for,
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Bryan Lee said:
I use it at work occassionally, but I prefer PS-CS.
GeneW
Veteran
I use the GIMP when I'm dual-booted into Linux. The more I study it, the better it is. Quite capable if you spend some time learning it. On the DOS ... er Windows ... side I use PS CS2.Bryan Lee said:
Picasa is good for quick touchups but I don't like its, to me, dysfunctional photo organization mode.
Vuescan is very good for B&W, not so good for colour.
If I were starting over with a new machine, I'd jump to Mac without hesitating.
Gene