Photoshop alternative

[Lou]

I wouldn’t be surprised if this question was already discussed more than once, but I wasn’t around, hence ….

What would be the best Photoshop alternative that one could own rather than rent…

Ps - I already have Affinity Photo which I find very good but looking for something even better that is not on subscription bases, that may be out there…

Thanks,
Lou

[DarkArts]

If you don't mind open source, you could try GIMP (available for Windows, Mac and Linux):

https://www.gimp.org/downloads/

[Lou]

Thanks for the suggestion, been there, it is quite good for open source software but back then it was a bit buggy and clunky. I think they also slackened off on further development and maintenance, but it is still a good alternative.

Originally Posted by DarkArts

If you don't mind open source, you could try GIMP (available for Windows, Mac and Linux):

https://www.gimp.org/downloads/

[DarkArts]

It's come along a fair way - v2.10 has 32-bit per channel improvements amongst other features, though "full" FITS support is still lacking. But, hey, it's free.

https://docs.gimp.org/2.10/en/gimp-i...tory-2-10.html

Apparently, "full" FITS support wouldn't be that hard- NASA already wrote a modern library, it just needs to be added to GIMP's source.

[Lou]

Thanks DarkArts, I may give it another go to see how it compares now against the Affinity Photo. But would like to hear about some other good photo editing software also.

Originally Posted by DarkArts

It's come along a fair way - v2.10 has 32-bit per channel improvements amongst other features, though "full" FITS support is still lacking. But, hey, it's free.

https://docs.gimp.org/2.10/en/gimp-i...tory-2-10.html

Apparently, "full" FITS support wouldn't be that hard- NASA already wrote a modern library, it just needs to be added to GIMP's source.

[Merlin66 (Ken)]

Have a good look at PaintShopPro it does 99% of what PS does and id very cost effective.
https://www.paintshoppro.com/en/products/paintshop-pro


I still use Astroart for all my astro needs......
http://www.msb-astroart.com/

[Lou]

Thanks Merlin66, I haven’t tried PaintShop before. I hope they give some trial time to potential customers. Will have a look at Astroart as well.

[astro744]

I use DXO Photolab 5 Elite in combination with Lightroom 6 and Affinity Photo. All perpetual licences with no subscription. Lightroom 6 no longer has updates unless you subscribe but it does what I want it to do (catalog) and DXO does the main raw editing including camera and lens profiles and a lot of other editing techniques but no layers. Affinity I bought purely for the spot healing brush (similar to photoshop) but it has layers and no subscription.

I was on Lightroom/Photoshop subscription for about 6 months and I felt I was just throwing money away each month as I wasn’t really using it much. However I have updated DXO from 2 to 5 (skipped 3) over the years but if you do this at their Black Friday sales you save quite a bit. I have also invested in their Nik Collection and Filmpack and Viewpoint add ons, all non-subscription and the current versions will do fine for a while on the old 1st gen. i7 that I have.

I recently bought DXO PureRaw which I didn’t need having the DXO Photolab Elite version but it does batch RAW conversion to DNG (with or without camera/lens profiles) and does have DeepPRIME noise reduction (as does Elite) which is superb but only works with RAW from cameras tested by DXO, (most on the market including new Fuji offerings but not Pentax K100D Super which annoyed me a bit as this was the first DSLR I ever got and if any camera needs noise reduction it is this one (at low light levels)). I use Canon now.

Have I spent less on the above than a subscription model of Lightroom/Photoshop only over the same number of years? Maybe, maybe not. I do now have a number of applications that will serve me well on the platform I have and I do not need to upgrade any further unless I feel a new feature would make it worth it and only then when on sale. See https://www.dxo.com/

Disclaimer. I am not really into astrophotography or image processing in general and will go through periods where I dabble with some image processing and then don’t touch it for a while. This is why I don’t like subscription model software as I feel pressured to use it to justify the ongoing cost. I bought the perpetual license software when on sale (usually 40% off), same with upgrades. The software I have now has every tool and feature I will ever need (I think/hope).

[Lou]

Thanks Astro774,

I am similar in terms of image processing needs.

Adobe and other software vendors who sell their software on subscription bases only have written me off as a potential customer by not giving the option of owning it, particularly where there are good alternatives. Just like you, I am not about to start monitoring my software usage to see whether I can justify the monthly fees but even more importantly it is a matter of principle for me. Why not having the option of just buying what I need?

Another thing that comes with subscription software that annoys me immensely is the fact that one needs to register and in some instances log in in order to use it, which ofcourse is used to track you, but also to get you to use their cloud services that you likely don't need or you will end up with your information (data) being kept at a million of clouds that you need to keep a track of and also pay for for the rest of your life. What’s wrong with just keeping your data in your own storage or perhaps a single cloud storage of your choice that you alraedy have.

Last time when I looked at the Adobe site their software was on subscription bases only, if they start selling it outright again I might consider it (if i cool down by then )

I’ll also look into DXO, thanks.

[astro744]

You’re welcome. DXO is not on sale at present so probably not that attractive. They usually have a sale prior to a next release and then another at Black Friday. There may be other times.

The advantage of subscription is you can use on multiple platforms as the license is monitored by you logging in. It gets a bit complicated if you try and use say your Lightroom on a work PC under your personal profile which is already logged in under a work profile to use say work’s Acrobat. Lightroom 6 does allow two platforms provided you use only one at a time, (you still sign in when changing platforms but only to the application; no need to have creative cloud loaded) . Lightroom 6 is not part of creative cloud but will show in creative cloud if it is installed. (It confuses me no end!). DXO can also be on multiple platforms (Three I think for the Elite version) but I think Affinity is one only and the one you registered it with.

If Adobe Photoshop Elements allowed full 16 bit editing with all tools available I would probably just use it. I’ve stopped upgrading it since version 14 since the spot healing brush and a few other tools only work with 8 bit images with Elements.

[Lou]

Thanks to both of you for the above advice and opinions. I looked up and watched some youtube reviews of PaintShop and DXO and they both appear to be serious (perhaps professional grade) image editing software available for outright purchase, with trials also available. With the Affinity Photo that makes it 3 serious options, and we can also throw in the GIMP as a public domain free alternative.

I will install trial versions of PaintShop and DXO and have a closer look at them as I get some time, to get some first hand experience before I decide which one it is going to be…

Having said that, there might be some other options that someone might throw in here for consideration.

[astro744]

Capture One is another option. You have the choice of subscription or full purchase. It is aimed at pro photographers. 30 day trial available.

See https://www.captureone.com/en

[Merlin66 (Ken)]

Lou,
The heavyweight picture/ image processing software is directed towards the commercial/ serious amateur photographic market, not the astrophotography amateur.
There are many (!!) feature of these "professional" programs which, as an astronomer, you'd probably never use.
So the question...is this for astrophotography or "serious" photographic work??

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

Originally Posted by Merlin66

Lou,
The heavyweight picture/ image processing software is directed towards the commercial/ serious amateur photographic market, not the astrophotography amateur.
There are many (!!) feature of these "professional" programs which, as an astronomer, you'd probably never use.
So the question...is this for astrophotography or "serious" photographic work??

Totally agree, I myself cannot be serious astrophotography until I get a decent camera. That is my next step then I will gradually progress to higher-level software for post-processing. I have been using GIMP for a long time and I have seen it develop over many years and now find it more than enough for my DSLR images and possibly continue to use it over time. I even follow some Photoshop tutorials and use GIMP under the same situation. There are some other photoshop plugins that I cannot use though, but these are scripts that use some of the basic and advanced features of Photoshop. I may consider this with GIMP but I am not the best in scriptwriting.
I am gradually advancing my paid software solutions, but in my defence as an electronics engineer, I enjoy making many items myself and obtaining better images from low-cost DIY projects.

[Merlin66 (Ken)]

Besides having the capabilities of producing “nice pictures” you still need some software to give you camera/ mount/ accessories control as well as the basic image acquisition and processing capabilities the better the integration the more comfortable it becomes. That’s why I use Astroart for my spectral acquisition and processing.

[Lou]

Thanks Merlin66,
It is for both, I am very new to astrophotography but would like to be able to use the same software where/if possible.

Originally Posted by Merlin66

Lou,
The heavyweight picture/ image processing software is directed towards the commercial/ serious amateur photographic market, not the astrophotography amateur.
There are many (!!) feature of these "professional" programs which, as an astronomer, you'd probably never use.
So the question...is this for astrophotography or "serious" photographic work??

[Lou]

Thanks, that is an area with a lot to learn for me, it is next on my hit list.

Originally Posted by Merlin66

Besides having the capabilities of producing “nice pictures” you still need some software to give you camera/ mount/ accessories control as well as the basic image acquisition and processing capabilities the better the integration the more comfortable it becomes. That’s why I use Astroart for my spectral acquisition and processing.

[Lou]

Thanks astro774, will have a look at this one as well.

Originally Posted by astro744

Capture One is another option. You have the choice of subscription or full purchase. It is aimed at pro photographers. 30 day trial available.

See https://www.captureone.com/en

[drew12345 (Drew)]

Startools is very good.

Also if you wish to give Gimp a try which is also very useful, here is a link to a good demo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSxdHrO0zfU

or maybe copy and paste...

[sil (Steve)]

Luminar is a recent PS alternative, its ok but seems more for the iphone filter generation/mentality and just not really something i use nor is ps , i just dont need it most of the time, gimp is fine. I use none of these sort of things for astrophotography ever except maybe resize and save a jpg to use online. Pixinsight is my AP program of choice when I want accuracy and control in my stack, otherwise I use Astropixelprocessorwhich does an awesome job with little effort, When I tested is default workflow against the bestI could do with pixinsight (time consumingas it was) the result from APP was indistinguishable and I never really could get into StarTools but I guess I was just more comfortable with the complicated PixInsight. APP has plenty of stuff to configure but you really dont need to tweak anything and its pretty simple, you dont get forced into doing thing according to how a developer wants you to work. You can feed APP just a bunch of jpg lights and get a great result, you dont require darks flats or biases etc but if you take any or all of thou can add them in and it’ll make use of what it can where it can, doesnt tell you you needsome sort of frames and just abandon you. I think its a great first purchase (it is a purchase NOT a subscription) once you want to move on from DSS and if PI seems too complicated and expensive. I know others recommend other programs and they all have their merits, I bought a few but found they were good for certain ways of working and not flexible for me and I’m not flexible anymore .

Anyway look at Luminar for PS alternative. Its not a clone of PS features and does things differently but I think Gimp and paintshop pro are the most mature alternatives and have a wide communities to help you out.

For my real photography I use a leica camera and have it configured to my liking and so I can use jpgs straight from the camera most of the time and maybe just need something basic to crop/resize and save to jpg. For autocorrection prettification I use Photolemur. I don't Need photoshop and its never impressed me anyway, its “big” advances have always been taken from open source or shareware programs , they didn’t invent autofilling they just took something that someone else invented and stuck it in their program. Its overhyped software and not worth the cost they want IMHO.