I have for years used an excellent Adobe software called PhotoDeluxe and onto PhotoDeluxe 4.0 for some reason this has stopped working on my windows 7 and it looks like a lot of other products, I have to upgrade to the Photo Shop software. I only use the software for scanning and repairing old pictures and slides so I don't need anything professional and too difficult to use. Can you tell me what Photo Shop product would be suitable for me that will run on Windows 7.
Adobe PhotoDeluxe 4.0 to Photo shop
- Thread starter bobajob100
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Adobe Photoshop Elements 12 may satisfy your requirements:
http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-elements.html
You can download a fully functional 30 day trial from the Adobe website, so you can evaluate it before committing to the purchase price.
Corel PaintShop Pro X6 would be worth considering:
http://www.corel.com/corel/product/index.jsp?pid=prod5100069
Again, a trial version is available.
http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/photoshop-elements.html
You can download a fully functional 30 day trial from the Adobe website, so you can evaluate it before committing to the purchase price.
Corel PaintShop Pro X6 would be worth considering:
http://www.corel.com/corel/product/index.jsp?pid=prod5100069
Again, a trial version is available.
Have you tried running your PhotoDeluxe 4.0 software under Windows 7 using compatibility mode?
Right-click the PhotoDeluxe program icon, click Properties, and then click the Compatibility tab. Under Compatibility mode heading tick the box that says something along the lines of "Run this program in compatibility mode for" and choose "Windows XP (Service Pack 2)" from the drop-down list and click the Apply button.
Right-click the PhotoDeluxe program icon, click Properties, and then click the Compatibility tab. Under Compatibility mode heading tick the box that says something along the lines of "Run this program in compatibility mode for" and choose "Windows XP (Service Pack 2)" from the drop-down list and click the Apply button.
Get The Gimp
http://www.gimp.org/downloads/
It'll do everything you need, and it's free.
Lots of free plugins and filters too linked off that page.
http://www.gimp.org/downloads/
It'll do everything you need, and it's free.
Lots of free plugins and filters too linked off that page.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 25,036
- Reaction score
- 2,903
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
I have been impressed with Gimp it does have some draw backs like will not work with 16 bit files and needs a separate program to read RAW files. But the layers and layer masks works well and with latest version there is a special Gimp format allowing you to save with all layers so you can re-open and carry on where you left off.
The problem is to find help on how to use some of the more technical functions. For example with photoshop I use layers, masks and the "Apply" command with auto produces a mask which will allow you to combine two versions of an image to increase the dynamic range. Unlike using HDR it allows you to then select which bits are auto corrected and which are manual corrected.
At first glance it would appear Gimp does not have the function but as one experiments you find it does but in a different order with different command names. When creating the layer mask you are presented with 7 options plus invert mask and by selecting "Greyscale copy of layer" it does exactly the same as the "Apply" command.
Originally photographers would use UFraw with Gimp to convert RAW files. However today they use RawTherapee to do the job. Although designed for RAW files you can still load up Jpeg files and it offers some really good colour correction.
For the photographer there are two more free programs we use. Picturenaut is used for HDR and again really designed to be used with RAW images but will work to combine two jpegs. And also Hugin which is better than Photoshop at stitching images together.
Adobe have now got three programs Lightroom, Elements, and Photoshop cloud the latter is now not bought but you pay a monthly subscription so in the main photographers use Elements and Light Room.
Considering what you are doing the tools offered in the RAW part of the two programs is far better with light room and the graduated filter, adjustment brush, and spot removal is very powerful. Although designed for RAW files will work with Jpeg and the elements has a very much cut down version of RAW file handler to light room and personally I would think light room would do the job better then elements.
Only used up to CS5 with photoshop and it is extremely powerful. Droplets (Macros) can really make life easy but in the main most of use never use 1/10th of the options available and programs like "OnOne" which are add ons to Photoshop may offer automated back ground removal that most of us only dream of. But it's not cheap and it still does require skill. Personally I remember demonstrations of how to do xy and z but when I come to use the function can't remember how.
This brings me full circle Gimp is powerful but in my club there are very few one can ask as to how to use it. But light room or photoshop there are many willing to help.
The problem is to find help on how to use some of the more technical functions. For example with photoshop I use layers, masks and the "Apply" command with auto produces a mask which will allow you to combine two versions of an image to increase the dynamic range. Unlike using HDR it allows you to then select which bits are auto corrected and which are manual corrected.
At first glance it would appear Gimp does not have the function but as one experiments you find it does but in a different order with different command names. When creating the layer mask you are presented with 7 options plus invert mask and by selecting "Greyscale copy of layer" it does exactly the same as the "Apply" command.
Originally photographers would use UFraw with Gimp to convert RAW files. However today they use RawTherapee to do the job. Although designed for RAW files you can still load up Jpeg files and it offers some really good colour correction.
For the photographer there are two more free programs we use. Picturenaut is used for HDR and again really designed to be used with RAW images but will work to combine two jpegs. And also Hugin which is better than Photoshop at stitching images together.
Adobe have now got three programs Lightroom, Elements, and Photoshop cloud the latter is now not bought but you pay a monthly subscription so in the main photographers use Elements and Light Room.
Considering what you are doing the tools offered in the RAW part of the two programs is far better with light room and the graduated filter, adjustment brush, and spot removal is very powerful. Although designed for RAW files will work with Jpeg and the elements has a very much cut down version of RAW file handler to light room and personally I would think light room would do the job better then elements.
Only used up to CS5 with photoshop and it is extremely powerful. Droplets (Macros) can really make life easy but in the main most of use never use 1/10th of the options available and programs like "OnOne" which are add ons to Photoshop may offer automated back ground removal that most of us only dream of. But it's not cheap and it still does require skill. Personally I remember demonstrations of how to do xy and z but when I come to use the function can't remember how.
This brings me full circle Gimp is powerful but in my club there are very few one can ask as to how to use it. But light room or photoshop there are many willing to help.
Hi Eric. Couple of points. XCF has been available as Gimp's native format for some time now. It's only in the latest versions that you have been forced to save in that format, other formats being exported. You can also export a tiff with layers, if you want to keep the layer information.
As I think I've said before, the 16 bit issue isn't really as important as sometimes stated in a lot of "real world" situations, where most "final" images are either jpg which is 8 bit, or print. The stage where big changes such as shadow recovery are made which could cause degradation such as "banding" are done in the converter with the original raw file at (for instance) 14 bit.
If you haven't looked at RawTherapee for a while it now has gradients and vignettes, as well as many other improvements. It handles CA and fringing very well. It doesn't (yet) have the retouching / editing abilities of LR.
It's all a matter of choice though, and what you are used to using etc.
As I think I've said before, the 16 bit issue isn't really as important as sometimes stated in a lot of "real world" situations, where most "final" images are either jpg which is 8 bit, or print. The stage where big changes such as shadow recovery are made which could cause degradation such as "banding" are done in the converter with the original raw file at (for instance) 14 bit.
If you haven't looked at RawTherapee for a while it now has gradients and vignettes, as well as many other improvements. It handles CA and fringing very well. It doesn't (yet) have the retouching / editing abilities of LR.
It's all a matter of choice though, and what you are used to using etc.
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 25,036
- Reaction score
- 2,903
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
My version of RawTherapee 4.0.11.1 we are now on 4.0.12 so yes mine is not up to date.
I would agree my 12 (Pentex) and 14 (Nikon) bit files plus 32 bit where HDR is used are not normally found with lower end cameras and scanners so likely the 8 bit limit with Gimp is not an issue.
To be frank there are ways around the lack of RAW files and I will when trying to restore using a scanner there is very little control of the scanner so any layers are likely made from the same scan.
The biggest problem with Gimp is because of the lack of high end tools the pros don't use it. So asking for help is hard as very quickly you become the expert and no one can help.
I find it's the fact I normally use CS5 which means I look for the same tools with Gimp and if I did not use CS5 many of the finer tools would be lost to me with Gimp because I would not look for them.
I would agree my 12 (Pentex) and 14 (Nikon) bit files plus 32 bit where HDR is used are not normally found with lower end cameras and scanners so likely the 8 bit limit with Gimp is not an issue.
To be frank there are ways around the lack of RAW files and I will when trying to restore using a scanner there is very little control of the scanner so any layers are likely made from the same scan.
The biggest problem with Gimp is because of the lack of high end tools the pros don't use it. So asking for help is hard as very quickly you become the expert and no one can help.
I find it's the fact I normally use CS5 which means I look for the same tools with Gimp and if I did not use CS5 many of the finer tools would be lost to me with Gimp because I would not look for them.
