Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyP
There is nothing to touch Photoshop at the moment in terms of performance.
|
As I said, I don't want to start a war
, but I'll have to argue. I don't think that Adobe-centricity does us any favours at all, and I'll do my best to persuade newcomers to photography that they don't need to spend £650 on an image editor to achieve results equal to (or even better than) CS3/ACR. Many people claim to get better results from other software (DxO, Bibble, Silkypix, LightZone, Capture NX, etc) than from ACR, and have posted comparative images (on other forums) to back this up.
Photoshop CS3 is a very competent, comprehensive and expensive application, but I wonder how many of its users have looked at the alternatives recently - it's very easy to get locked into Photoshop, which suits Adobe just fine. However, there really are other products which come very close to touching CS3 and cost a fraction as much. Elements is always going to be hamstrung as it can't take revenue away from CS3, and Lightroom is still a long way from being the all-in-one package that it set out to be.
From a personal perspective, I've not used Photoshop since version 3 and have never felt deprived - just a little richer.