Photograph Manipulation Programs

[HadEnuff]

Hi y'all,

I have over the years dabble with some photograph manipulation programs, but it's been over 10 years. I think the first one I had was called Photoshop Elements, and that went away for awhile, now I see it has come back again, and I also had a program called Aperture for a while.

I have thousands of photographs taken in very high resolution, over the last 12 years, with my Nikon D300. I just bought a new home, and I'd like to put a few of them up on the walls in large formats.

I'd like to have a program that would allow me to merge several photos, where different parts of each version are in different degrees of exposure. I've seen that feature advertised. I don't know what it's called.
I've also seen a feature advertised where you can eliminate a person in the background, if you like the picture better that way. Don't know what that's called either.

So, I'm asking here for a reference for a tutorial, where I can learn more about this aspect of modern digital photography, and also recommendations for programs that would provide these features, at reasonable cost, and with a reasonable learning curve.

thanks

 

[Ronstar]

I have the Lightroom / Photoshop subscription. I think I pay $10.99 per month for this subscription. Exposure blending can be done in either software.

I sometimes take several photos of a single scene at different exposures using bracketing on my Nikon D810. Then I pick the the photo with the best exposure, or merge them as an HDR in Lightroom

In Photoshop, this can be done as exposure blending https://www.youtube.com/watchv=UdgDH_ht-js

In photoshop, I use content-aware-fill to eliminate objects from a photo.

 

[DrRoy]

I also started with Elements but now have the Photoshop subscription. It does everything that I need and hardly use any photo that I have not edited with it first.

 

[Aerides]

GIMP is a free photo software (open source) that does much of the same functions as PS. But they all come with a bit of a learning curve these days. I'm not sure if it does the specific thing you need, but from my understanding it's pretty well rounded.

 

[steelyman]

I’ve been using digiKam, free open source software and it fits my needs well. I’m a casual user/photographer.

http://digikam.org

 

[frayne]

Hi y'all,

I'd like to have a program that would allow me to merge several photos, where different parts of each version are in different degrees of exposure. I've seen that feature advertised. I don't know what it's called.

thanks

Is HDR what you may be referring to ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dynamic-range_imaging

 

[Walt34]

I also started with Elements but now have the Photoshop subscription. It does everything that I need and hardly use any photo that I have not edited with it first.

I followed the same path, from Elements to Photoshop and then added in Lightroom. I'll grant that the learning curve can be steep. Photoshop alone has a near-infinite number of processing combinations and with that number of options comes complexity, but also comes capability.

 

[Chris7]

I have Photoshop/Lightroom. Lightroom is a lot easier to use, but most of what it does is on a global level unless you add different filters around the photo. You can "draw" on a filter that will copy other ares of the photo on top of what you select and thus remove things. But unless there is a good area to copy from, it is hard to use.



Photoshop can remove unwanted things, and I hear it does it well, but it can be difficult to learn. Lots of Tutorials on Youtube. I don't use Photoshop.


There is a picture editor on newer Windows and it does a decent job of removing objects.



I had previously used Gimp, but never went back after using Lightroom.


Stitching may be the term for connecting photos, I'm not sure.



cd :O)

 

[rt-texas]

Photoshop and Lightroom person here. Tried some other "freebies" at times but haven't found anything that comes close.

LR is great for organization of your library as well as being 75% easier than PS, in my opinion, so do most of my work there. And if I think I need PS to do something more complex then I just google and find a youtube video that tells me what I need to know.

Also newest PS has something called super resolution that up-reses, if that's a word, your files very nicely now with complete new algorithms and the results are stunning. Might be nice to have if your trying to print in a larger format.

 

[RonBoyd]

I, also, am a Lightroom fan. I have ~150,000 images on file. I don't know how I would be able to organize them without LR.

Further explanation my be needed: Lightroom is a cataloging application -- organizing your images (and edits done during processing). It is, also, used for post-processing. It does this by using Adobe Camera RAW -- which will handle more than 95% of your image manipulation needs. For those "special requirement" images, Lightroom moves the image (and edits) into Photoshop. There is nothing Photoshop can't do with an image... absolutely nothing.

The benefit of a catalog, and thus of Lightroom Classic, is that you're able to manage your photos across the entire catalog, in many respects even if the source photos aren't currently available (such as when an external hard drive is disconnected). With Lightroom Classic you can browse your photos, update metadata, search across your entire catalog based on a variety of metadata values, all without the source photos currently available. -- Tim Grey

there are clearly some significant advantages to the catalog with Lightroom Classic. There are, of course, some disadvantages. As many photographers have realized, if you perform work with your images outside of Lightroom Classic, the catalog will not match your photo storage, and folders and photos can go missing. So, you do need to be a little more careful in the context of a catalog, but there are benefits to be gained if you use a proper workflow with that catalog. --Tim Grey

 

[Freedom56]

I still have Photoshop CS4 and it's subscription free. It does what I want. I also have Corel Paintshop Pro 2020 that came bundled with some camera equipment that I bought. It's okay also. I shoot mostly time lapse and video these days so I use Vegas Pro 18.

 

[audreyh1]

Lightroom.

 

[FreeBear]

Check out affinity photo. Great photoshop knockoff. Cheap, no subscription. Has 30 day demo, 25 bucks with current 50 percent sale.

Was going to switch from subscription photoshop a year ago, but affinity photo’s raw conversion was weak, 10 years behind Adobe photoshop. Hopefully, they have improved. Still excellent for 25 bucks.

I’m sticking with Adobe photoshop subscription because I love the rolling upgrades, especially to raw file processing. We use Adobe Lightroom for raw pics on phones. Pretty amazing. I shoot most landscapes on a phone now, slr only for birding action pics.

 

[W2R]

Back in the 1990's, I couldn't afford Photoshop so I bought Paint Shop Pro. It had everything I needed and I liked it a lot. I kept using that for almost a quarter century. Then in 2019 I replaced it with an updated version, and that is what I use now. I like it because it is non-subscription.

 

[RonBoyd]

I like it because it is non-subscription.

FWIW, I prefer the subscription method. I can remember the days of yor when every 18 months I had to spend $180 for an upgrade (Photoshop). Worse, after 18 months the program was quite out-of-date.

Now, with a subscription, the program is always up to date (even on a daily basis). Not surprisingly the $10 a month seems somewhat more pleasing rather than that $180 chunk for the same period.

 

[W2R]

FWIW, I prefer the subscription method. I can remember the days of yor when every 18 months I had to spend $180 for an upgrade (Photoshop). Worse, after 18 months the program was quite out-of-date.

Now, with a subscription, the program is always up to date (even on a daily basis). Not surprisingly the $10 a month seems somewhat more pleasing rather than that $180 chunk for the same period.

See, your problem was forking out that $180.

I never did that (not even once), since Paint Shop Pro did not require it. You bought it for $29, got the program on a CD, and if that program did what you wanted it to do you were set for a quarter century or more.

 

[Palmtree]

If all you need to do is the occasional "remove person" or retouch out power lines, etc. it is much cheaper and easier to just pay around $10 or so to have it done. The site retouchup.com has been around for years and they do a fantastic job for very little $$.

 

[RonBoyd]

I never did that (not even once), since Paint Shop Pro did not require it. You bought it for $29, got the program on a CD, and if that program did what you wanted it to do you were set for a quarter century or more.

I understand and good for you. However, I don't have a 25-year old camera and the post-processing processes of 25-years ago would fail to do what the OP is asking for.

If all one needs is basic in-camera image development than simply shoot JPEG's. However, if you need to process current RAW images (or even JPEG's properly) produced by current (and future) cameras, one needs to have current image processing technology.

In other words, if it is merely about saving money, then your method is ideal (well, except for that initial $29). But if it is about producing an image that one can be proud of (perhaps mounting on the wall or putting in a book), then it is like everything else... you pay for what you get.

 

[W2R]

In other words, if it is merely about saving money, then your method is ideal (well, except for that initial $29). But if it is about producing an image that one can be proud of (perhaps mounting on the wall or putting in a book), then it is like everything else... you pay for what you get.

Never found anything at all that I wanted to do but couldn't do with PSP once I spent the time to thoroughly familiarize myself with its capabilities. For whatever reasons, I never felt that subscription software was the only possible way to buy software having the functionality needed for personal or professional use.

 

[Freedom56]

For me the Adobe subscription would be $52.99 per month for Premiere Pro, After Effects, PS, and LR. A Vegas Pro update costs me $199 every 4 years as I see no reason to update after every major release. Now I have an even better deal, I joined the Vegas Pro beta test team where I get free updates and I can report problems to the development team. I get to try out new feature before it is released to the public.

 

[stepford]

IIf all one needs is basic in-camera image development than simply shoot JPEG's. However, if you need to process current RAW images (or even JPEG's properly) produced by current (and future) cameras, one needs to have current image processing technology.

Don't most camera manufacturers still provide free (and up to date) software for the conversion of RAW image files produced by their cameras? One could argue that the workflow of doing RAW conversions within Photoshop is cleaner, but the stand-alone RAW conversion programs like Canon's Digital Photo Professional, Nikon's Capture NX-D and other similar ones do a perfectly fine job.

I just convert using the stand-alone program from the appropriate camera manufacturer then open the converted file in my old copy of Photoshop PS5. This combination works just fine with today's cameras. It probably takes an extra few seconds to do things this way rather than using the in situ Adobe Camera Raw converter in the current iteration of Photoshop, but free and fully functional beats convenient and expensive in my application.

 

[Walt34]

When I bought my Nikon D7000 years ago I did try their Capture NX program. Never again! The experience was pretty dismal for me, the program seized more often than not, there was no documentation that I could find, and it was a royal PITA to use.

In contrast, there are more books and tutorials on Photoshop and Photoshop Elements than "Carter's got liver pills" for those who've been around to remember that expression. BTW, Elements is not a program to turn up one's nose at, and you can buy it only once, or once every third upgrade, or whatever you like.

For those who don't like the subscription model (and I'm one of them, even though I do participate) Elements will do ~90% of what the full version of Photoshop will do and that may well be all that you need. I'll grant that Lightroom is a bit easier and has the advantage of never, ever, changing the original image so you cannot damage it in Lightroom. But I've read that many professional photographers use only Elements because that's all they need.

For video, I use Premiere Elements because that's all I need, and frankly is more than I need. But I wanted a program that I could find documentation for and the freeware ones don't have that, at least that I could find.