editing software

[richkenney]

How can I best edit pictures taken with my T1i?  What software do I need?  The "EOS utility" is terrible...

[Greyhaven]

Well, I now have two computers that never had Photoshop CS2 on them in the past. The programs only non functionality is it will not allow registration of ownership. The download I used had no restrictions and I downloaded  it twice. So, if I could download it for free, and it's free, and fully functional. Then if it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck?

Grey

[ebiggs1]

You certainly can't argue with free but in reality CS2 is not even close to CS6. It is quite capable, however, and you should learn to use it's features to the fullest. 

[Skirball]

---

@Greyhaven wrote:

Well, I now have two computers that never had Photoshop CS2 on them in the past. The programs only non functionality is it will not allow registration of ownership. The download I used had no restrictions and I downloaded  it twice. So, if I could download it for free, and it's free, and fully functional. Then if it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck?

Grey

---

I know exactly how you downloaded it.  There are plenty of articles on it, on in Forbes I believe.  You can research it if you want, or not...  I've used plenty of 'borrowed' software in the past, so I'm not judging.  But I assure you, Adobe did not hand out free copies of CS2.

[Skirball]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

You certainly can't argue with free but in reality CS2 is not even close to CS6. It is quite capable, however, and you should learn to use it's features to the fullest. 

---

That's utter nonsense for 99.9% of photographers.  Sure, if you’re a digital artist, especially working in 3D, then the difference in the rendering engine and 3D support is huge.  But for a photographer it’s almost the same.  They added in a few tools for beginners, but for the most part you can do everything in CS2 that you can in CS6 that you would need to do for photography.  Yes, I miss this liquefy tool, but I don’t consider that photography, that’s digital art.  All the smart filters and smart objects are the equivalent of those “creative” modes on my cameras that I never use.  Sure, they can be nice if you don’t know what you’re doing, but it doesn’t give you the control of doing it yourself.

[Greyhaven]

Thanks for the details. I also purchased Elements11.I find it quite useful, perhaps, because I do only personal imaging and mostly Astrophotography and nature photography. The more advanced CS versions are more for true professionals and very costly for a hobbyist to own.

Be Well

Grey

[Skirball]

No worries.  I totally agree, I only mentioned it as an FYI because I know there was a lot of misinformation floating around about the CS2 “release”.   This isn’t the place to steer the conversation where it’s going, but I agree, the price for Photoshop for a hobbyist is ludicrous.  I don’t know how non-full time professionals justify the cost of upgrading every year.

[hsbn]

Tax write off is one of the benefit. Also, by keep the upgrading cycle, you'll only have to pay $199 to upgrade, normally 18-24months. $199 is not that bad but it all changed with all the cloud subscription things.

[ebiggs1]

“Sure, if you’re a digital artist, ...”

You are not a Photo Shop user are you?

One thing you are correct about is, Elements is enough for a lot of amateurs but certainly not all of them.

As for astronomy all the “amateurs” in our club, that I know of, use CS6.

[Skirball]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

“Sure, if you’re a digital artist, ...”

You are not a Photo Shop user are you?

One thing you are correct about is, Elements is enough for a lot of amateurs but certainly not all of them.

As for astronomy all the “amateurs” in our club, that I know of, use CS6.

---

I am actually, for quite some time now, as I’ve stated in these forums many times.  I see it’s just more ad hominem responses from you instead of actually supporting your statements.   Elements?  Where did I say anything about Elements?  I don’t doubt that a lot of the people in your photo club use CS6, it’s the most recent version.  And I have no doubt it’s great, but that in no way supports the dismissive comments you make about ‘lesser’ versions. What I think funny about it, and why I comment, is that you imply that people with CS6 are more advanced users. Yet more advanced users know how to manually do everything these new features do (liquefy non-withstanding).   

[ebiggs1]

A dissertation is not required on each comment or suggestion. It is up to the forum users to decide if the comment is worthy or not. By-the-way, it is worth exactly what you pay for it. Nothing!

Take it, or leave it.

My effort is to help people take advantage of my 40+ years of photographic experience. Maybe they will be helped, maybe not. Possibly they will not endure any of the same mistakes I have made.

You can certainly ascertain the level of a person by a few moments conversation. I stand by my statement, you may have CS2 but you do not use CS6. You would know, for instance, 3D is not a part of CS6 and is only available in CS6 Extended.

If there were not any new features added to CS6 over CS2, the fact it is 64-bit is well worth the upgrade.

Explaining the 'Elements' comment, I would prefer Elements 11 over CS2 if given a choice.

Unless, of course, the choice was a free version of CS2!

BTW, I am a beta tester for Adobe. We just got through with Light Room 5. It should be available for purchase by the end of the month if not right now. It is also a worthy consideration and it has an attractive price point for all that it does.  Plus it is not a part of the cloud if you don't want it to be.