Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Archive 2013 · Corel AfterShot Pro

  
 
James_N
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Corel AfterShot Pro


What's so compelling about the Layers feature when you can't make precise selections at the pre-pixel stage in any raw converter? If you need to make precise selections of elements in an image it can't be done with brush tools on a file where actual pixels don't yet exist. The Layers function seems to me like a marketing gimmick unless you only make loose selections or global changes.


RustyBug wrote:
Is that in reference to the basis of the old Bibble, or the current AfterShot Pro?

As to behind the curve ... RAW Converter + Layers doesn't seem to be lagging too far, imo.

+1 @ IQ is a must though. My preliminary on a couple challenging files yesterday looked encouraging, and yes it is too early to emphatically commit to it being the next best thing since sliced bread. But it does look interesting enough to give it a fair shake and see if they really did retool things. Harley Davidson changed things from the Shovelhead to the Evolution ... and
...Show more



Sep 10, 2013 at 09:57 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Corel AfterShot Pro


James_N,

Ya, PS devs have a solid BG but PS isn't really the same kind of product. LR doesn't tho! Some others as well. Of course not all, it was a generalized comment.

For me the results are about the same as C1P which is better than LR by a few miles. But the real advantage comes in the form of speed. It's easily ten times faster than LR and every operation is buttery smooth. This makes it a joy to use as opposed to a frustration. At least with PS, C1P, and Aperture you can beat the frustration a little bit by throwing $10,000 of high-speed hardware at it.

But that was just my take after a few hours. My second bout with it today seems only to reconfirm. Your political comments about the company's past seem a little odd to me. Who cares about WordPerfect? The same goes for Bibble Labs which no longer even exists AFAIK. We could all get political about every hardware and software vendor and then we'd be back to using out fingers in the sand to make images. It doesn't ever seem relevant to me when I hear that kinda stuff. It's like: I stubbed my toe on that guys sidewalk last year so i hate him!! Who cares, he's cranking out delicious pies and handing out free lemonade today. Take a bite, critique the pie and forget your toe.

Thanks for the link BTW... Wow, $15... nice find.




Sep 10, 2013 at 10:16 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Corel AfterShot Pro


dcains wrote:
this software is still too flawed, and is still way behind the curve.

RustyBug wrote:
Is that in reference to the basis of the old Bibble, or the current AfterShot Pro?

As to behind the curve ... RAW Converter + Layers doesn't seem to be lagging too far, imo.

+1 @ IQ is a must though. My preliminary on a couple challenging files yesterday looked encouraging, and yes it is too early to emphatically commit to it being the next best thing since sliced bread. But it does look interesting enough to give it a fair shake and see if they really did retool things. Harley Davidson changed things from the Shovelhead to the Evolution ... and
...Show more
James_N wrote:
What's so compelling about the Layers feature when you can't make precise selections at the pre-pixel stage in any raw converter? If you need to make precise selections of elements in an image it can't be done with brush tools on a file where actual pixels don't yet exist. The Layers function seems to me like a marketing gimmick unless you only make loose selections or global changes.


What the heck is "the pre-pixel stage" and why would you wanna make selections in it? BTW, the brush is in fact pixel-accurate and the selection tools are sub-pixel accurate.

The rest of your comment shows that you have not actually tried the software yet. Selections are as accurate as you need them to be. It looks to me like a selected area is definable to a an eighth or a sixteenth of a pixel (that I can detect) and that's accurate enough - at least for me.



Sep 10, 2013 at 10:38 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Corel AfterShot Pro


James_N wrote:
So far I don't see anything demonstrates superiority to what I can obtain from ACR or Lightroom.

LR has layer/opacity functionality
+1 @ thanks for the link.


For 15 bones you can't even get a layer plug-in for LR that I know of. I also noticed the resemblance more toward C1 than ACR (just a couple files so far). C1 had put me off because I'd have to get their pro version to support my old SLR/C. I just wasn't quite up to that after shelling out $$$ to Adobe for their Suite & LR. I demo'd OnOne layers plug in a while back ... but the whole in one program, then out to another one, then back in to the first one, etc. wasn't for me.

Personally, I use layers quite a lot, for others this may be of no value to them. But, for layers fans ... a RAW converter with layers is at least worth a peek (free demo or 15 bones), especially if you've not been a fan of ACR. If you're happy with ACR, I don't think anyone is trying to make ASP out to suggest that LR is "worthless" ... just maybe "worth less" to some. I'll take a peak under the hood and an honest test ride before I toss the baby out with the bath water just because of the history.

I tried a first year Evo. If I had dismissed it as being the same as when AMF owned Harley (even though AMF designed the Evo), I'd have missed out on a great ride. We can pre-judge based on history or we can put it through its paces to find out what it's got and what it's not ... your choice. For me, I'll take it for a ride before I pass judgment, but I'm diggin' the possibility of Raw Converter + Layers ... we'll see how it goes.


Edited on Sep 10, 2013 at 11:59 AM · View previous versions



Sep 10, 2013 at 10:57 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Corel AfterShot Pro


In my case I like ACR but hate how it's kludged into LR by some monkey of a high-school programmer. ACR by itself is a little slow as it is - in LR it's enough to make one cry out loud. And dem aint tears of joy neither.

C1P produces better results than ACR in my most humble opinion but as you say unless you're sailing the high seas it's a little costly for some - depending on the camera they use. It's designed for use with their own MF digital backs tho so I guess that's a legit excuse? <shrug>



Sep 10, 2013 at 11:13 AM
OntheRez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Corel AfterShot Pro


BiFur,
(Hope you don't mind me being too familiar with the nickname )

Thanks for the heads up, the mini-review, and the Amazon purchase deal. I got the demo and while I'm still blundering around a bit (no software can look/feel like another, copyright and all that stuff) this looks quite promising. I haven't yet figured out how to layer, but then I might have to break down and read the docs. One thing that's immediately obvious is that it is blazing fast. Literally blows the doors off Lr. I've always been bothered by Lr's hunch/stumble every time you move from one module to the next. It throws up a SPOD to move from Library to Develop - this on a late model dual quad Mac Pro with max RAM and the fastest video available at time of purchase!!?

Also, with a 1DIV the RAW conversion is at least as good as ACR. Not quite to the level of Photo Ninja - which needs to get much faster. There are Adobe alternatives rapidly appearing and improving. No I see nothing that replaces Ps itself (other than GIMP perhaps), but then for press work 99% of the time I can do everything I need in either Aperture or Lr with attendant plug-ins.

On a heavy week I ingest about 2k pix which have to be winnowed to no more than 4 candidates for printing plus keep any others that have "artistic" value (or have a kid whose parents want pix at the end of the season).

In Lr I'm having real problems with catalog "irregularity" and can't get any answers from anywhere as to why it loses pix that are visible sitting in their proper file structure. Files that it use to know where they were.

I'm going to give this a good flogging over the next couple of weeks and report back.

<personal rant> <b> I think EVERYONE who hates the Adobe extortion scheme should immediately go spend the measly $15.00 USD and buy this program even if you decide you don't like it or don't want to change. REASON: it will be a huge push to Corel letting them know that there is a strong market for non-Adobe image editing programs. We rarely get a chance to vote with our wallets, so get out and vote. Geez 15 bones? What's that, 3 cups of fancy coffee?</b> </personal rant>

Robert



Sep 12, 2013 at 09:29 AM
OccAeon
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Corel AfterShot Pro


Honestly, I can't imagine why anyone is willing to invest the time to learn a program like this from Corel. They have a long history of buggy and unsupported products. Even if this version is OK, I would bet that future versions will get bigger, buggier and less stable. Consider Paint Shop Pro, which was an excellent product and a true PhotoShop competitor before Corel bought it. Now it's bloated, unstable crap, and I have to install a VM just to run the last non-Corel version. I've heard that Wordperfect was a similar story, although I never used it much myself.

I'd rather overpay Adobe for software that works and that is well supported and updated than spend my time learning software that Corel will certainly render worthless before long.



Sep 12, 2013 at 11:41 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Corel AfterShot Pro


OntheRez wrote:
<personal rant> <b> I think EVERYONE who hates the Adobe extortion scheme should immediately go spend the measly $15.00 USD and buy this program even if you decide you don't like it or don't want to change. REASON: it will be a huge push to Corel letting them know that there is a strong market for non-Adobe image editing programs. We rarely get a chance to vote with our wallets, so get out and vote. Geez 15 bones? What's that, 3 cups of fancy coffee?</b> </personal rant>

Robert


Well that $15 will allow you to use ps/Lightroom for 1.5 months, producing amazing images rather than wading through Corel muck. Your choice I guess.



Sep 12, 2013 at 12:08 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Corel AfterShot Pro


Why would anyone buy a Harley ... you had to work on them more than you rode them and they'd leave you stranded more than a Honda ever would. Sometimes things change, sometimes not. If ASP shows to be buggy, etc. ... well then, that would be the "not". But a peek under the hood for a ride isn't the end of the world.

That being said, there doesn't seem to be an obvious way to separate RAW from JPG like in Bridge. Having Noise Ninja built in is interesting (never used NN before). Doesn't seem to have an "auto advance" when culling (haven't found it yet). Keystroke commands seem easy enough so far, but it takes one to cull/label/flag/rate, one to advance.

But, I think the thing to remember is that for those who DON'T LIKE ACR/LR ... it's worth a peek @ looking into. If you DO LIKE ACR/LR ... likely not much to see (except the addition of layers/NoiseNinja/possible performance diff) and you should stick with ACR/LR. As mentioned earlier, I don't see this as an LR Killer, just a possible option for those who don't like ACR/LR.



Sep 12, 2013 at 12:16 PM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Corel AfterShot Pro


OccAeon,
No time investment needed tho. Or maybe I'm a freaking Einstein or something (not!). It took me all of 15sec. to know exactly what to do. Within 20min. I had tried every tool. Within 2 hours I have timed and compared it's output to two other RAW processors. Unless you live in a heavily fluoridated community the learning curve here is very close to zero! At least it was for me and I ain't no genius.



Chez,
Yeah and in the 1.5 months you'll have exactly one tenth the amount of work done using LR.



Robert,
There's an on-line manual too which is handy for looking stuff up: http://product.corel.com/help/AfterShot/540111115/Main/EN/Doc/getting_started.html

Gimp is nice yeah. Aperature is another slow one tho. It starts off much faster than LR (of course!) but after you have adjusted 10 or 20 sliders and etc it starts to slow up noticeably.

2K pics a week, wow. That's probably the most I've ever done - and occurs about twice a year. Typically I do about half that. Typically 300 shots a day and 3 or sometimes 4 days per week. With ASP's speed you're going to be digging life! Sorry to hear that you had to sacrifice three fancy coffees tho.

BTW, the layers are controlled by opening the layer window which is accomplished by that button in the upper-right. From there you add layers and choose your mask-building tools. You can do a bunch or selections all on one layer or use a separate layer for each selection slash brush-stroke. To re-edit (even after quitting the app or whatever) the splines and lines that define the selection mask just select that layer click on the tool type at bottom-centerish. The mouse wheel will expand and contract both the selection splines and also it's feather edge width. There's other gadgets and operations available but they should be obvious by looking at the GUI elements. Or check out that on-line manual - it's a 30min skim job.

Edited on Sep 12, 2013 at 12:56 PM · View previous versions



Sep 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM
ggreene
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Corel AfterShot Pro


A lot of comments/reviews about lack of support. Recent versions lost Noise Ninja. I can see why Amazon is dumping it at $15.

No 1DX support is a killer for me.

To bad as LR needs competition. v4+ has become quite boggy in responsiveness.



Sep 12, 2013 at 12:55 PM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Corel AfterShot Pro


Bifurcator wrote:
Chez,
Yeah and in the 1.5 months you'll have exactly one tenth the amount of work done using LR.

.



Then I guess it is the big Gimper for you. Good luck with that.



Sep 12, 2013 at 01:01 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Corel AfterShot Pro


ggreene wrote:
Recent versions lost Noise Ninja.


I downloaded the demo ... then saw the link for Amazon and bought the code for $15. When I registered the Amazon code, I was prompted of a newer version. Got the update ... NN (basic, I guess) is built in.



Sep 12, 2013 at 01:04 PM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Corel AfterShot Pro


ggreene ,
The Amazon version comes with NoiseNinga and once you have it, it carries over to all future version upgrades automatically. And screw the ney-sayers talking out of their asses with nothing to back up their claims. Aren't we all hip to that crap by now - I would have thought so anyway. Grumpy old men and wanna-be-important noisy children... heh safely ignored. This is competition for LR and that's that. Actually LR can't compete with this particular app so maybe it's more appropriate to call it an LR-Killer.

As for support just go to the Corel site. They have active forums and if you don't wanna do the forum thing they have skilled techs in pop-up chat windows right on their home-page.



Rusty,
Yeah, the reason I called NN "souped up" in the OP is cuz it moves so much faster than in the Adobe products.

Edited on Sep 12, 2013 at 01:25 PM · View previous versions



Sep 12, 2013 at 01:05 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Corel AfterShot Pro


I guess I should install LR on my laptop to do a performance comparison, but before I go to that trouble ... what would constitute an appropriate performance comparison test to run between the two programs? One that would be deemed fair by both ney-sayers (chime in here) and LR-killer advocates (chime in here too) since they will obviously have been written differently.

While I gather it won't prove anything to anyone who has already made up their mind (either way) ... I would like to be fair/objective with regard to my own assessment @ performance gains/losses.






Sep 12, 2013 at 01:12 PM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Corel AfterShot Pro


RustyBug wrote:
I guess I should install LR on my laptop to do a performance comparison, but before I go to that trouble ... what would constitute an appropriate performance comparison test to run between the two programs? One that would be deemed fair by both ney-sayers (chime in here) and LR-killer advocates (chime in here too) since they will obviously have been written differently.

While I gather it won't prove anything to anyone who has already made up their mind (either way) ... I would like to be fair/objective with regard to my own assessment @ performance gains/losses.



The true test is how fast can you complete a job. Benchmarks are one thing, but as far as I'm concerned, meaningless if the fastest one to load 250 images takes twice as long to fully edit those same images.

You need to be totally proficient with both products to judge their true performance.



Sep 12, 2013 at 01:35 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Corel AfterShot Pro


Well, I'm inefficient with both until I learn them better (although ASP seems a bit more intuitive to me) ... does that make it equitable?


Sep 12, 2013 at 01:53 PM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Corel AfterShot Pro


Rusty,
Yeah, I don't think anyone will care. Fanboys will be fanboys and those who fear change just do and that's that.

But if you wanna know for yourself just copy a full 8 or 16GB card of raw images to your hard drive. Navigate around in them with your cursor keys in both apps, process a few, maybe apply a similar process (With Auto WB, Sharpening, NR, and a crop - or something like that) to all 500 or 1000 images via copy settings and then export them.

I guess you'll see quite a lot of difference on your single core laptop but where (I guess) the speed advantage will be overwhelmingly obvious is on a multi-core system. ASP's CPU usage scales linearly with each additional core whereas LR scales at about 80% for the 1st two cares and then about 40% for each additional core - as shown is some other threads here. If the system in question is equipped with any GPU(s) capable of supporting OpenCL then there's another big speed increase to be had there as well. So there are three things at play here. CPU linearity, GPU availability, and just the fact that AfterShot is faster (having been written by an intelligent programmer and not kludged together from pieces of another app by chimpanzees).

I don't have a single core system to try out but I imagine you'll see and/or feel about a 2x to 3x overall speed increase. It could be a lot more tho - I'm trying to be conservative.


Edited on Sep 12, 2013 at 02:08 PM · View previous versions



Sep 12, 2013 at 01:57 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Corel AfterShot Pro


I figured that something like a WB adjustment would be pretty straightforward between the two programs, whereas a sharpening algorithm could be rather different. Apply a couple of "similar" adjustments to a few hundred images and monitor with my sundial as to how each program handles it. If one needs a calendar instead of a sundial, well then I'll know.

That, or go the opposite route and just hit the big "auto" button and then export the whole thing and see what comes out on the other side (and how fast).



Sep 12, 2013 at 02:05 PM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Corel AfterShot Pro


Sure, or try both. Whatever, like you seem to already know it probably won't matter much. Some folks have a lot of emotional content invested in their software selections and there's no way over or around that wall. Even the negative comments here at FM are all coming from folks who haven't tried the software and probably never will unless LR or whichever app they're in love with seises to exist or something.

Hehe... "App-Luv".

Also your proficiency doesn't matter much. In ASP your user experience will be fluid, fast, and fun while in LR you'll probably become frustrated by constant lags with just about everything you try to do.



Sep 12, 2013 at 02:11 PM
1      
2
       3       end




FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.