I feel this is less photography and more digital artistry, but Adobe is a long way behind in some of these things. Skylum's "Luminar AI" can change the background entirely. If you're looking to do a lot of masking and layering work, Topaz Labs have some algorithms that not only can select the background through a bride's veil, you can clean it up or even replace the entire scene behind it easily. You can then tweak it in Photoshop or whatever alternative very easily afterwards. The non-Adobe software has more intuitive/powerful controls, and the photos just look better. DXO Photolab and Capture One frankly leaves Adobe's Camera Raw in the dust. If you use raw files extensively, there are better programs out there for processing them. so smaller companies, even open source projects can, through creative innnovation, collaboration, or specialisation, make something that makes your photos look better, and often at lower price than what Adobe charges. Every photographer has their "way" of processing photos, which means they place differing emphasis on differing tasks, and Adobe has taken the "shotgun approach" and tried cover everything. I've worked in the IT sector, and bureaucracy will always "get in the way".Īdobe apps are very good at many things, but their software is not necessarily the " best" at any particular editing task. It takes time to reallocate teams, and there's mis-communication between various departments. Adobe is a huge organisation now, and they suffer from a lot of corporate inertia. They develop the software in a way, that leaves smaller companies scrambling to catch up. It's powerful, its feature rich, it's of a professional standard, and it's undergoing constant development by a legion of professional coders hell-bent on making improvements and adding features. I have used Adobe successfully for well over a decade, and their entire range of software is popular for a reason. I don't want this to be an "Adobe bashing rant". While I will take a different approach with this article, I feel that the following article has great insight into the general "paid" software options: are popping up as many photographers, graphic designers, and creative types feel that Adobe isn't the ideal choice for them. Perhaps a "case in point" is the fact that sites like "Life after Photoshop" found here: Consequently, some photographers are searching for alternative solutions. However, Adobe's offerings come with complexity, cost, and even connectivity/privacy concerns. Photoshop has been around so long that the word is both a noun and a valid verb for fixing/faking photos in the English language. They've been around since the birth of digital image manipulation, and they've been aggressively developed ever since. Photoshop and Lightroom are bar none, the most popular photo editing apps out there.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |