# XYZ vs Adobe Photoshop: Which one is the best alternate choice?



## cayenne (May 9, 2013)

I'll start off by asking...what about 
Pixelmator (the latest version just released) vs Photoshop

What can Photoshop do that Pixelmator is lacking?

Also, can someone tell me what the difference is between:

Photoshop Extended vs Photoshop vs Photoshop Essentials?


Thanks in advance,

cayenne


----------



## mdmphoto (May 10, 2013)

Extended includes video and 3d capabilities way beyond ps; at least back when I last used it (CS 3).
Additionally, can we add to this discussion software that also runs on pc, please? I've used gimp in the past, and just downloaded gimpshop, but it doesn't seem to read my 6- or 7d raw files. I know there are external programs to open & convert to dng, or I could just use Canon sw, but bridge-ps, and LR have spoiled me in that regard...


----------



## Tanja (May 10, 2013)

paintshop pro from corel maybe.
it even works with photoshop plugins.. not all but some.

i think many people could be living with photoshop elements just fine.

but with the recent stuff going on i can understand that adobe software is no choice.


----------



## wsheldon (May 10, 2013)

Tanja said:


> i think many people could be living with photoshop elements just fine.
> 
> but with the recent stuff going on i can understand that adobe software is no choice.



+1 

Photoshop Elements was actually developed for photographers, removing some of the esoteric graphics arts features not needed for photo editing and adding cataloging. It even includes some widgets not included with the full app. It's a powerful and cheap tool that pairs well with Lightroom.

However I agree that it may be an unpalatable choice to some after this CC debacle.


----------



## jm977 (May 10, 2013)

Elements is a little to restrictive with respect to raw processing and minimal 16 bit support. That's a shame. It's come a long way over the years but it's not a replacement for the real thing (for me). And of course, the real thing is more than I and most need. Rather than try to wean us photographers onto Lightroom, why didn't/can't Adobe give us a "Photoshop Lite"? Take out all the bells, leave us with our layers, raw converter and 16 bit support and we're done. I do not need nor have I ever made a mosaic from one of my photos. What do we still have all those lame filters? Leave this stuff to elements for those who want to scrap book and give the photographers back their PHOTOshop. 
Sadly right now, I don't see an alternative other than to stay with CS6 and plod along for as long as I can. Even if I had CS5 or 4, I'd stick with it and get another raw converter (dxo maybe?) and finish processing in photoshop. Tedious but I've got to wait it out to see if someone else will step up and de-throne Adobe. Anyone out there have the brass ones for it?


----------



## RLPhoto (May 10, 2013)

The best alternative is to buy CS6 before they dry up and/or continue to use your copy of CS until adobe reverses the CC policy. 

Then again, adobe could just be bluffing about CC to sell the shelves of CS6 lying around.


----------



## wsmith96 (May 10, 2013)

I'll second the Corel option - their paintshop pro lies somewhere inbetween elements and photoshop, leaning more towards photoshop in capabilities. It's a nice piece of software.

-w


----------



## RGomezPhotos (May 10, 2013)

Well.. Hopefully they won't require a subscription for Lightroom! But Lightroom 5 is going to be even better for photographers. I really like the features I've seen improved and added.

It still won't have the compositing and other hardcore features of PS. But for most photographers, Lightroom 5 is going to be hard to beat.


----------



## Dantana (May 10, 2013)

A whole lot of this will depend on what you do, and your workflow, but maybe that's obvious.

I've got Pixelmator on an old Mac at home and it seemed okay for what it is. I've messed with Gimp and Paint.net on the free side of things. I've barely touched Elements, Corel, and recent versions of Paintshop.

These all may be fine programs on their own. The problems that I have run into (and have had co-workers run into when they didn't have a PS license) is that nothing I have found is 100 percent compatible with existing PS files. Sometimes it's text layers. Sometimes it's vector shapes or masks, or something else. It gets to the point where it's not worth it for me, at least not on a professional level.

If you work in a bubble and don't have to exchange layered files with clients/subcontractors/etc., there is probably something else you can use. If you're not in a bubble, you have to be careful.


----------



## cayenne (May 10, 2013)

So far,

I've looked at the tutorial pages for Pixelmator, and it seems to not be looking much like a 'pro' tool like PS.
The interface seems a bit cartoonish, and from the little I've seen of the demos there, they look to be most presets to select from and that's it...

Am I missing something? Others had said it may be the next best thing at this point to PS as an alternative.


Thanx,

cayenne


----------



## Dantana (May 10, 2013)

cayenne said:


> So far,
> 
> I've looked at the tutorial pages for Pixelmator, and it seems to not be looking much like a 'pro' tool like PS.
> The interface seems a bit cartoonish, and from the little I've seen of the demos there, they look to be most presets to select from and that's it...
> ...



Well, next best thing for $15, maybe, on a good day. 

I needed to edit a few things on a Mac with no PS and bought it. It was okay in a pinch for some simple work.


----------

