![]() ![]() The manual is fairly understandable and doesn't have too many pages. There help pages are also a lot better than they used to be. There are a lot of GIMP tutorials about on the web. The GIMP also has a lot of graphic artist facilities that may look pointless to photographers. Generally doing some things in the GIMP involves using more layers than PS. The GIMP is a full blown layers package and many people reckon it's just as capable as PS - if some one knows how to use it. That's left to the GIMP and there is a button available to export to other editors directly. ![]() Rawtherapee will do just about everything you might want to do to a raw file, jpg, png or tiff except local editing with what people usually call brushes, dodging, burning, cloning, healing and also selection work. I used RT before I bought DxO Optics because I felt it offered me more and I found it excellent to use. No big deal unless you can't be bothered with all that 'faffing' about, or you're in a hurry. It's about have to save it as a TIFF, open up Elements, open the TIFF and then carry on from there. You can't just hit the button and, by magic going on under the hood, have it appear ready for further, final work in Elements. If that seems like a good idea to you, then, yes, RT will have something to offer.īut as Manfred says, it's not as seamlessly integrated with the packages that come next e.g. Some of us to subscribe to the notion that you should do as much as you can at the RAW stage. The question for you is whether you want/need that. So, yes, there will be the opportunity for more work to be done at the RAW stage with Raw Therapee than with the ACR you have. With Elements it is indeed a basic model of ACR that's included, so you are not getting some of the features of the ACR that's packaged with the full-blown Photoshop. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |