![]() Piknic and any online editor just isn't in the same class. Its got many of the features of Photoshop, at a fraction of the price. The UI is often a big complaint and can take some getting used to, but after some usage - its acceptable to me.Īs Sean points out in a comment above, Adobe Elements is also an option. We have another question on the differences of Gimp vs Photoshop already. There are plugins for many features (like the content aware fill is provided somewhat by the resynthesizer plugin). It (the Gimp) may lack some of the really advanced features of Photoshop, but in general its pretty suitable. For the every 'blue moon' edit that I need that Lightroom can't do, you can set the Gimp to be an editor in Lightroom. You 'run' from photo to photo in Lightroom, making the changes quickly or even applying batch changes for whole sets of photos. It saves your changes in metadata and then reconstructs the changes from the metadata instead of saving an altered photo. Lightroom is designed for you to make all the small tweaks to your photos fast and efficiently without worrying about changing files around, 'saving' new copies, or changing your mindset for every picture. ![]() I find 90%+ of the basic tweaks I need can be done in Lightroom. Photoshop is nice, but its not meant to deal with the huge number of photographs you can do from a real shoot. Most of the reasons are already outlined in this question. If you don't have it, I'd recommend Adobe Lightroom and then use Gimp for the occasional 'advanced' edit.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |