Author Topic: Alternative to Adobe Photoshop (Read 2187 times)

BuriaL · « **on:** July 16, 2009, 10:43:30 PM »

Adobe Photoshop is giving me a headache..
Iam looking for a new program. Something lightweight, as in you dont need a 500 page book to disable annoying functions.

Iam gonna try something called "paint.net" now.

If anyone have some good software suggestions, post.

relic2279 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 16, 2009, 10:55:20 PM »

Corel Paintshop Pro X2 or X3... I have both and usually use Corel.

Edit: Actually, my bad. Didn't fully read your post. It's just as confusing to learn as Adobe...

Pzc · « **Reply #2 on:** July 16, 2009, 11:33:51 PM »

Paint.NET is great and you can also have a look
at GIMP, it's also freeware so it won't cost you
anything but a little time.

halfelite · « **Reply #3 on:** July 16, 2009, 11:44:32 PM »

I think gimp is one of the winners that is next in line behind photoshop. But it has a huge learning curve.

BuriaL · « **Reply #4 on:** July 16, 2009, 11:56:39 PM »

Tested Paint.net, Gimp and PhotoScape. Still looking..

kyanwan · « **Reply #5 on:** July 17, 2009, 12:51:12 AM »

I use:

- Photoshop
- Fireworks (*Macromedia, now Adobe. HISSSSSSS!!!)
- Freehand (*See above.)

I have found myself using Fireworks more often lately - it's great for making web graphics. If you combo it with Freehand - you can do a lot (Freehand is great if you've got a drawing tablet.)

If you forced me to stop using Photoshop, I'd take Fireworks.

( And from what you said above, GIMP makes Photoshop look like e-z mode-u. If you're getting pissed about the complexity of Photoshop - GIMP will make you: FFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUU UU!!!!!

Aneroph · « **Reply #6 on:** July 17, 2009, 01:43:04 AM »

Quote from: kyanwan on July 17, 2009, 12:51:12 AM

I use:

- Photoshop
- Fireworks (*Macromedia, now Adobe. HISSSSSSS!!!)
- Freehand (*See above.)

I have found myself using Fireworks more often lately - it's great for making web graphics. If you combo it with Freehand - you can do a lot (Freehand is great if you've got a drawing tablet.)

If you forced me to stop using Photoshop, I'd take Fireworks.

( And from what you said above, GIMP makes Photoshop look like e-z mode-u. If you're getting pissed about the complexity of Photoshop - GIMP will make you: FFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUU UU!!!!!

Gimp is to photoshop as Linux is to Windows.

If your looking for something super easy, why not just use the crappy msPaint that comes on windows computers stock? Can't say it's great, or even really to be considered as a photo editor, but you can do more in it than what most people realize. If you're looking for something super easy to learn to do just some general editing of pictures then look no further. Just know that the easier something is to learn, the less functionality it tends to have

iindigo · « **Reply #7 on:** July 17, 2009, 02:03:08 AM »

The problem with GIMP is that it was designed by programmers and engineers. Unfortunately, those type of people usually fail horribly when it comes to designing UIs, and as a result, GIMP is anything but easy to use or intuitive. As someone who has used Photoshop since version 6 back in 2001, it drives me up the wall.

I'm curious, though... what do you mean by, "annoying functions"? The only thing that I could see getting annoying might be layers if you're not familiar with the concept, but almost everything else doesn't make a difference unless you actually opt to use it...

zherok · « **Reply #8 on:** July 17, 2009, 02:24:37 AM »

I'm with iindigo, I don't really care for the way GIMP is laid out after having used Photoshop.

There's tons of things Photoshop does that I'll never need to use, but doing what I want it to do isn't that hard. There is a weight issue, I guess, but even for simple things I'd avoid something like MS Paint. It's a lot bigger hassle to deal with what MS Paint can't do just to avoid having too many options with Photoshop.

Could try Elements. I know it's essentially Photoshop, but if you're worried about having too many features, I'm fairly sure what you're losing is mostly high end printing options and the like that you probably don't use anyway.

BuriaL · « **Reply #9 on:** July 17, 2009, 02:55:18 AM »

Quote from: iindigo on July 17, 2009, 02:03:08 AM

..
I'm curious, though... what do you mean by, "annoying functions"? The only thing that I could see getting annoying might be layers if you're not familiar with the concept, but almost everything else doesn't make a difference unless you actually opt to use it...

One of those annoying functions would be:
Select > All
Select > Modify > Border
Select > Select Inverse
Paintbucket > [Selection]

Now for some reason it smooth it, not only in the selection but outside it to. I didnt find a way to make it work like this.
I did a manual selection instead, by typing in the pixel size, and..it worked..

I wonder what the difference is.

I tried out Corel PaintShop Pro PHOTO X2 Ultimate 12.5 (its called that..

.
Guess ill stick with Adobe for now.

iindigo · « **Reply #10 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:06:54 AM »

Quote from: BuriaL on July 17, 2009, 02:55:18 AM

Quote from: iindigo on July 17, 2009, 02:03:08 AM
..
I'm curious, though... what do you mean by, "annoying functions"? The only thing that I could see getting annoying might be layers if you're not familiar with the concept, but almost everything else doesn't make a difference unless you actually opt to use it...

One of those annoying functions would be:
Select > All
Select > Modify > Border
Select > Select Inverse
Paintbucket > [Selection]

Now for some reason it smooth it, not only in the selection but outside it to. I didnt find a way to make it work like this.
I did a manual selection instead, by typing in the pixel size, and..it worked..

I wonder what the difference is.

I tried out Corel PaintShop Pro PHOTO X2 Ultimate 12.5 (its called that.. .
Guess ill stick with Adobe for now.

By "smooth", do you mean the selection borders? If so, that's natural. Photoshop is not really designed to be a pixel editor and thus will antialias whenever possible, since jagged, sharp edges are unwanted most of the time.

BuriaL · « **Reply #11 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:50:34 AM »

(click to show/hide)

Quote from: iindigo on July 17, 2009, 02:03:08 AM

..
By "smooth", do you mean the selection borders? If so, that's natural. Photoshop is not really designed to be a pixel editor and thus will antialias whenever possible, since jagged, sharp edges are unwanted most of the time.

Gradent Black-transparent would prolly be a better description. in 1920x1080 pixels i dont think there are much rough edges.
Its ether a bug, or some verry stupid idea from the programmers side.

iindigo · « **Reply #12 on:** July 17, 2009, 11:01:29 AM »

Quote from: BuriaL on July 17, 2009, 03:50:34 AM

(click to show/hide)

Quote from: iindigo on July 17, 2009, 02:03:08 AM
..
By "smooth", do you mean the selection borders? If so, that's natural. Photoshop is not really designed to be a pixel editor and thus will antialias whenever possible, since jagged, sharp edges are unwanted most of the time.

Gradent Black-transparent would prolly be a better description. in 1920x1080 pixels i dont think there are much rough edges.
Its ether a bug, or some verry stupid idea from the programmers side.

I think you might be misunderstanding.

Photoshop smooths selections. If it didn't, the result without any shadow of a doubt would be rough looking, regardless of your resolution. This is called aliasing.

Here's a circle I made by using the elliptic selection tool and filling it in:

Is the problem present in this image? If no, then...

...here's the same circle made with the elliptic selection tool, but with one of its settings changed:

Do your selections look something like this? If so, the problem is actually your fault, not Adobe's. This is caused by a setting known as "feathering" and is entirely off by default. You changed it at some point. To disable it, just change to the selection tool, look at the topmost palette, and set Feathering to 0.

BuriaL · « **Reply #13 on:** July 17, 2009, 12:38:15 PM »

Its off, and my selections look fine. I only had this problem with the approach i mentioned.

I just stubled over something tho, if i do a transform when using the "bugged" approach. the selection appair as separate from the transform..dont ask me why.

blubart · « **Reply #14 on:** July 17, 2009, 12:49:13 PM »

the reason it is so smoothed is because you are using Select > Modify > Border instead of Select > Modify > Contract.
the first does a smooth transition while the other cuts sharp. different tools for different purposes

iindigo · « **Reply #15 on:** July 17, 2009, 02:46:34 PM »

Ahh, that makes sense. I'm still using Photoshop CS (the UI went downhill from CS2 forward, IMO), so that function doesn't exist for me and thus I know nothing about it

Tatsujin · « **Reply #16 on:** July 17, 2009, 02:53:55 PM »

Quote from: BuriaL on July 16, 2009, 10:43:30 PM

Adobe Photoshop is giving me a headache..
Iam looking for a new program. Something lightweight, as in you dont need a 500 page book to disable annoying functions.

Iam gonna try something called "paint.net" now.

If anyone have some good software suggestions, post.

........... Your having a headache from PhotoShop? Are you new to it or you just don't feel like learning it?

Go with GIMPs since a lot of people recommend that program, as it is very similar to PhotoShop.

blubart · « **Reply #17 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:02:44 PM »

Quote from: iindigo on July 17, 2009, 02:46:34 PM

Ahh, that makes sense. I'm still using Photoshop CS (the UI went downhill from CS2 forward, IMO), so that function doesn't exist for me and thus I know nothing about it

have you tried cs4? at least to me it seems like every tool is exactly where it belongs. i only moved from cs3 ~3 weeks ago and am already getting headaches if i have to work on cs3/2.

queenmetroid · « **Reply #18 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:11:41 PM »

I'm a huge GIMP fan, but yeah, it has a lot of quirks. It doesn't feel remotely like a Windows program, so I had a difficult time getting used to it. (Maybe that's because it's not. xD)

iindigo · « **Reply #19 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:38:51 PM »

Quote from: blubart on July 17, 2009, 03:02:44 PM

Quote from: iindigo on July 17, 2009, 02:46:34 PM
Ahh, that makes sense. I'm still using Photoshop CS (the UI went downhill from CS2 forward, IMO), so that function doesn't exist for me and thus I know nothing about it
have you tried cs4? at least to me it seems like every tool is exactly where it belongs. i only moved from cs3 ~3 weeks ago and am already getting headaches if i have to work on cs3/2.

I have tried CS4 briefly, but what bugs me the most is Adobe's crappy half-baked custom UI elements (buttons, titlebars, etc). CS1 is nice because it doesn't have these, for the most part - it just makes use of the default system theme.

I might give it another try soon, though.