|
Jules
|
 |
« on: May 12, 2013, 03:54:57 PM » |
|
So. Now Adobe have decided to charge us a monthly fee forever if we want to carry on using PhotoShop perhaps it's time for you to step in Mike. QU already has lots of retouching features, not that I use them, I just use it for printing for which it is great and PS for editing. But why not hive off the processing tools and write a new programme called QShop that just deals with retouching and sell it at the sort of price that you charge for QU? You have already done half the work! I think there are going to be a lot of disillusioned ex PS users around when they go fully rental. Time for some good competition here!  Jules |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2013, 03:32:47 PM » |
|
Hi Jules, But why not hive off the processing tools and write a new programme called QShop that just deals with retouching and sell it at the sort of price that you charge for QU? What a good idea - I'd want it fully linked with QU of course. I think with Mike's unique approach dealing with digital images (eg. smart raw processing, DFS and TTS) we could get a very good piece of software which was not a clone of something else. Terry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MelW
|
|
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2013, 07:04:14 PM » |
|
Well of course I for one would absolutely love to see something like this, even though I think I have only limited use for editing beyond the capabilities of QU. On the other hand, the availability of the right tool, might cause me to look at that differently - just as QU's capabilities have gradually shifted my shooting from mainly jpeg to now mainly raw. On the other hand, I am probably not the best data point for this economically. I haven't figured out how Mike makes any money from this anyway, so I am not sure I am a good one to suggest how he should invest his earnings. - Mel W.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff
|
|
« Reply #3 on: May 14, 2013, 06:57:40 AM » |
|
Well of course I for one would absolutely love to see something like this, even though I think I have only limited use for editing beyond the capabilities of QU. On the other hand, the availability of the right tool, might cause me to look at that differently - just as QU's capabilities have gradually shifted my shooting from mainly jpeg to now mainly raw. On the other hand, I am probably not the best data point for this economically. I haven't figured out how Mike makes any money from this anyway, so I am not sure I am a good one to suggest how he should invest his earnings. - Mel W.
I vote for such an extension. Clone tools, dodge and burn, selective blur/sharpening for portraits (blur for faces and backgrounds and sharpening for eyes etc) don't see a need for complicated layers, all done with side car files and selective deletes to cover mistakes and failures. Linked to Ultimate via export to what ever it's called and then back to Ultimate for finishing and printing. Now, how to make money, enough to keep Mike happy and not so much that he gets a take over offer he cannot refuse. That is the question, subscription??  or similar to Ultimates annual membership fee which I consider is the 'ultimate' good value Just my thoughts. Jeff |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Grumpy
|
|
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
|
|
« Reply #4 on: May 14, 2013, 07:47:10 AM » |
|
The curves tool of PS and Qimage Ultimate differ a lot and I have to admit that I prefer the one of PS. The more if I make separation/partitioning curves for custom quad ink sets that later on are converted to ICC B&W profiles. I have tried to do that starting from custom made 16 patches greyscale targets and Qimage's cuves tool but the last is not flexible enough and the 16 patches are not enough for good control. The curves tool I would like to see changed or given a choice for a PS mode. For my other work I need CMYK control sometimes (mainly because the customer has no clue or no access to the original RGB data) but CS 5.5 can do that for the next decade. In PS there is deconvolution sharpening in ACR's RAW processing and in PS smart sharpening. There are other applications around that can do that so it would not be too difficult to add it to Qimage if DFS is not already based on similar methods. I use it in ACR for scanned "RAW" files too exported from Vuescan, I see image improvements by compensating the optical flaws in both the scanner and the camera. Rather than a linked program I would like an extra module integrated or the extra tools available in a Qimage X Ultimate version at a higher price point. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htmDecember 2012, 500+ inkjet media white spectral plots. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2013, 07:53:58 AM » |
|
Hi Jeff, selective blur/sharpening for portraits (blur for faces and backgrounds and sharpening for eyes etc) You can already do this with TTS although I can see some advantage in having the ability to select more than one tone and apply different parameters to each. 2 selections would probably be enough. I regularly use perspective correction in PaintShop Pro and sometimes lens correction with the PT Lens plugin. Occasionally I'll tone map an image with SNS-HDR to get more detail in shadow areas, trouble is noise and posterisation often become a problem. If it's possible for Mike to do Tone Targeted contrast and colour adjustments then complete tone-mapping could become unnecessary. Terry |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 14, 2013, 08:48:11 AM by Terry-M »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Oldfox
Newbie
Posts: 38
|
|
« Reply #6 on: May 14, 2013, 12:51:03 PM » |
|
The curves tool of PS and Qimage Ultimate differ a lot and I have to admit that I prefer the one of PS.
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Peter Funken
Newbie
Posts: 9
|
|
« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2013, 03:41:42 PM » |
|
Hi Jules, But why not hive off the processing tools and write a new programme called QShop that just deals with retouching and sell it at the sort of price that you charge for QU? What a good idea - I'd want it fully linked with QU of course. I think with Mike's unique approach dealing with digital images (eg. smart raw processing, DFS and TTS) we could get a very good piece of software which was not a clone of something else. Terry Over 12 years ago I got an outdated version of PS cheaply and have upgraded that every 3 years or so and since arrived at CS 5.1. I will definitely not buy a CC subscription since I don't need all the tools anyway and what I have now (CS 5.1) is way more than I need or have the ability to put to use. What I do need it for is retouching (healing, cloning) and masks/layers while working on 16bit tiff files. I shoot raw exlclusively and I must admit that although I tried again and again I can't seem to get at ease with QU for raw-converting. I have used and reguilarly updated Qimage for at least 12 years, but only used it for printing and, since QU, for downloading files from the memory cards. I still have my old Photoshop for pixel work and I don't see any need for upgrading until a future version of Windows will render PS CS 5 unsupported. But still, I am looking for an alternative to PS in the QU price range that offers masks and curves and retouching toos and - impotant - works on 16bit tiffs - and is a 64bit application. If Mike was to offer that as a stand-alone application I would buy it sight unseen, just to support him. On the other hand, such programmes are available: The Gimp (open source, no 16bit ability yet but planned for the next major version), Picture Window Pro 6 (7 beta available for testing), a programme I really like (and own), and of course PS elements (at ridiculous discounts), Paint Shop Pro (at least one special sales offer per week in my emails), ACDsee pro 6, 15 ... (80% off for mothers day). That might not be a nice market to enter with a new product at the moment. As I said, count on me as customer if you can compete with PWP and sell for $90. But Mike will need more customers than me. Cheers Peter |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MelW
|
|
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2013, 02:03:56 AM » |
|
I am probably not a typical QU user. I am not a pro. Probably not even that good a photographer - compared to what I see regularly from regular posters here. But if I had cloning, erasing, and perhaps a limited ability to rotate and overlay photos (Ok Fred posted an example of doing the latter in QU last year, but I never tried it), I would never need to leave QU. As it is, I do what i need in PSE, as mentioned above - maybe once or twice a year. On the other hand, when Mike gets a creative thought, we never know what good stuff might come out.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff
|
|
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2013, 07:33:35 AM » |
|
Hi Jeff, selective blur/sharpening for portraits (blur for faces and backgrounds and sharpening for eyes etc) You can already do this with TTS although I can see some advantage in having the ability to select more than one tone and apply different parameters to each. 2 selections would probably be enough. Terry Yes, we can and do quite a lot with TTS, I do tend to use PSe for portraits with an action from CoffeeShop, http://www.thecoffeeshopblog.com/p/all-of-my-free-stuff.htmlOf course at the moment there is no point in trying to create a 'cut down ver of PSe'. As long as Adobe continue PSe we are OK. But if they keep Elements on a purchase basis I can see a lot of people switching from Photoshop to Elements, one months subscription would cover the the outright purchase of Elements. I doubt that would please Adobe. jeff |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Grumpy
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2013, 09:45:26 AM » |
|
Yes, we can and do quite a lot with TTS, Jeff, There was an age old question: If you have to shoot a MIME, must you use a silencer on your pistol? You see the dilemma instantly. Here's one of the same dimension for Ultimate. Somehow, and I haven't figured this out yet since my neighbor gave me a shot of his over 80 baseball team that won the championship. The left side is obviously out of focus and the right side is OK. See screen snaps.... We have a problem! If the whole team is wearing the same colors, how can we tone target the people on the left side? :-)) Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2013, 11:25:28 AM » |
|
If the whole team is wearing the same colors, how can we tone target the people on the left side? See next challenge |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff
|
|
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2013, 07:27:14 AM » |
|
If the whole team is wearing the same colors, how can we tone target the people on the left side? See next challenge I will have to come back to that one when I have more time. Jeff |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Grumpy
|
|
|
|
Ernst Dinkla
|
|
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2013, 09:11:17 AM » |
|
If the whole team is wearing the same colors, how can we tone target the people on the left side? See next challenge Fred, Would it not be a good idea to cast the best solutions of the challenges into Learn by Example texts? I did not even look into the challenges as I have enough of them already in daily practice but I suppose there must be things discussed that I may have come across or might. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htmDecember 2012, 500+ inkjet media white spectral plots. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2013, 09:18:16 AM » |
|
Would it not be a good idea to cast the best solutions of the challenges into Learn by Example texts? I did not even look into the challenges as I have enough of them already in daily practice but I suppose there must be things discussed that I may have come across or might.
Hi Ernst. It originally was intended to have fun and, perhaps, have people join in,,, Never thought about LEARN BY EXAMPLE. Good idea, but it has to be OK with Mike. Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
