Photo editing software recommendations

[Tintype_18]

On another thread, it was mentioned about editing photos. My T7 and File Explorer allow some editing but would like to expand the capabilities. Did the usual search and came up with a list from the XX Best Free Editing Software. GIMP was mentioned a few times as the recommended software. Anyone use this? Seemed simple to use and free. Thanks.

[FloridaDrafter]

---

@Tintype_18 wrote:

As mentioned, I downloaded the DPP4 software off the Canon support. Downloaded the manual which is 194 pages. Seems to be overwhelming and don't know if I want to take the time to read it. Seems by the time I edit some photos for a publication, my time "cost" would be below the old minimum wage. Any suggestions?

---

I've been using DPP for a very long time and I have only read a few pages of the manual, usually when a new feature is added or I just don't understand exactly what a portion or function does. In fact, I spend 90% of my editing time in two panels: "Basic Image Adjustment" and "Adjust Image Colors" (see attached). There are so few options, that it takes very little time to experiment with the sliders to see what effect they have on your Raw image. Frankly, if you have trouble with DPP you will be very overwhelmed with PSE, PS, LR, and especially GIMP. I've used them all over the past 30 years for graphics and photography work, yes, I still sell and publish a slect few (I'm retired). DPP is the most basic of them all, yet I find it's all I need, maybe because I get a good jump by taking the best image I can to begin with.

Basic Adjustment Panel.

Color Adjustment.

There are other useful tools in this program, but these are basically where I live.

Newton

[wq9nsc]

I agree with Florida Drafter that DPP is very simple to use once you just jump into it.  Most of the time you will just be using it as your basic RAW editor for cropping, adjusting white balance, exposure, and setting desired levels of noise reduction all done easily with point and click or moving sliders and everything is clearly labeled.  Making changes to contrast, saturation, shadow, and highlight gain are equally simple. 

My typical workflow, and I often have a very large number of images from 2 or three camera bodies after a sports event, is to dump them all to a directory on my PC and apply a simple recipe to them as a group which applies a picture style along with settings for white balance, contrast and sharpness and then I do a quick run through cropping the ones that have good possibility and selecting some of those for further minor adjustment. 

DPP isn't as capable as the Adobe suite for major editing but it does a wonderful job of RAW conversion and it allows me to do all of the editing I need for a majority of images very quickly and easily.  And it is extremely simple to use once you spend a short amount of time with it.

I guess you could say it has a steep learning curve but it is an extremely short learning curve and after you spend 30 minutes with a few images you will feel comfortable with it.  The DPP documentation is like much documentation these days in providing a place to look for answers to questions that arise (although google is faster and easier) but it isn't really a good how to get started guide.  That is best done by just diving in.

I have been using DPP since I bought a 1D2  back in 2005 and I still rely upon it.

Rodger

[ebiggs1]

"I’m not aware of any camera settings that DPP ignores in the default state."

DPP4 retains the camera settings in it's previews, LR uses Adobe's default settings. And the camera settings do affect these defults. DPP4 and LR work in different ways from each other. DPP4 being Canon's own propritary software can precisely match the in camera jpg settings and processing. This makes the default previews from DPP4 identical to the in camera jpg conversion. It does not affect the Raw file. It reaims unaltered. In this sense both are exactly the same. Canon is able to address the Raw data diferently than Adobe can. But in the end there is really no difference. The Raw file is unaltered even by in camera settings. A Raw file captures all image data recorded by the sensor when you take a photo that's all. The sensor has no user adjustable settings. The camera has adjustable file saving settings but these are not part of the Raw file.

If DPP4 and/or Lightroom, etc. didn't have or know those settings, it would be more difficult to produce a viewable image.  It could/can be done but not the best way to get to a logical starting point. 

[JamesonBrooklyn]

GIMP is definitely a popular choice for photo editing, and it's great that you're considering free options. However, if you're looking for a more straightforward solution, have you tried https://imgcleaner.com? It's an online tool that can quickly remove unwanted objects and improve your photos without the need for complex software. It might be a great alternative for you if you're just looking for a simple way to enhance your photos. Give it a try, you might be surprised at how effective it is!

[ebiggs1]

If you are going for free and a Canon owner the best and only answer is DPP4. Keeping the object of free in mind, DPP4 is the only software that knows how a Canon digital camera exactly processes it images. Matter of fact DPP4 free or not is still the only editor that knows exactly how Canon digital cameras processes its images.

[normadel]

Digital Photo Professional certainly can be used to edit JPG images. You can do the basics. If you're just a beginner, don't get sucked into the line that "you have to shoot RAW to do editing".  Depends on what you want/need to do. 

If you're using Windows, you can do simple editing with the included Photos app. If you need more,  I highly recommend an app called "Paint.net". It's free, was originally created as a project at Microsoft, and has  tremendous  capability. It's less imposing than Gimp, Photoshop and other "high-end" programs.

[rs-eos]

JPEG bakes in too many things.   It's a great final output format.  Not a good format for editing.

For beginners, I advocate in capturing RAW+JPEG.  This leads to having images that can be immediately shared.   Then, as skills improve over time with editing, you can later revisit editing those RAW images.

Same for video; capture the highest quality format that you can, especially for things that are once-in-a-lifetime.  Your future self will thank you.

[ebiggs1]

"If you're just a beginner, don't get sucked into the line that "you have to shoot RAW to do editing"."

Just because you are a beginner doesn't mean you don't need to or do things correctly or at least in the best way. I never use jpeg anymore and haven't for some time now. There is simply little to no reason to do so any longer. As I recall, DPP4 doesn't have all the controls or editing tools available if you edit a jpeg. However, discounting that the amount of editing is several times greater in Raw than in jpeg. But the biggest reason is, do you want to edit all the data collected by your camera in a Raw file or do you want to edit just 3/4 or 1/2 of it in a jpeg? In camera jpeg discards data it doesn't deen necessary. The act of simply saving a jpeg image trashes some data. It is due to the compression factor which Raw does not suffer from. It comes down to, how good do you want your photos to be.

Almost everybody u/l to their computer and this conversion process is seamless and not even noticed with DPP4. That makes it even more silly to not use Raw.  If you choose to not edit it there is nothing lost or gained. Once in DPP4 you are free to save it in any format like jpeg as you wish. BTW, this is true with every post editing software available today that I am aware of. My personal preference is Adobe's Lightroom and Photoshop but DPP4 is a capable editor and it is free.

[normadel]

To each his own. Saying "to do things correctly or at least the best way" by ONLY using RAW and a possible overwhelming application when simple adjustments are all that is needed and wanted, is pretty judgmental. 

I used to participate in an online forum where any time a raw novice asked about an editing app, the immediate response from many was "PHOTOSHOP, NOTHING ELSE WILL DO!" Also, many also  claimed that you aren't a real photographer unless you use a full-frame camera. 

These attitudes are unnecessary overkill for unknowing beginners. 

[ebiggs1]

"... Saying "to do things correctly or at least the best way" by ONLY using RAW and a possible overwhelming application ..."

Agreed there are several "ways" to do photography but there is only one best way. That is Raw and it is indisputable.

Look it makes no difference to me how you do your work but the simplicity of DPP4 and the various editors out there make it as simple as you want it to be. Not suggesting you get any of them but DPP4 is free and is very capable. A workflow that involves u/l to your computer is accomplished by DPP4 and if that is all you ever want it to do fine. You're done! You want a simple edit fine you're done. But if you are even a beginner and you want the best you will use it and learn it and use Raw. 

Now this is not to say good photos are not possible otherwise. But that goes to the fact all current digital cameras  make good photos right from the box. That is a testament to the engineers at Canon. They have made an almost foolproof camera these days. However it can be taken to a whole different higher level. Even beginners want that besides everybody was a beginner at one time. It means Raw and it means DPP4 or some other editor of your choice. That's a 'period', my friend.