ACDSee pro 2?

twinsmom

I am trying a trial version of their new pro. I'd like to hear comparisons or other options. I started using the home version awhile ago and I like the organizing features. Their editing is ok for a quick job but when I started the trial version I noticed that the pro has the layer mode options which is nice to play with and something that I can't seem to duplicate is LR. I also like the vignette options that the pro has. I found that you can do one it LR but it isn't as nice- at least in my opinion. I don't own either program but am trying to decide my next purchase. I've searched some previous threads here but can't find much info on ACDSee. Does everyone hate it? Are there much better options out there? For what it does for the price it seems ok to me but I'm easily confused by all the options. :scratch Thanks
Bonni

mrcoons

twinsmom wrote:

I am trying a trial version of their new pro. I'd like to hear comparisons or other options. I started using the home version awhile ago and I like the organizing features. Their editing is ok for a quick job but when I started the trial version I noticed that the pro has the layer mode options which is nice to play with and something that I can't seem to duplicate is LR. I also like the vignette options that the pro has. I found that you can do one it LR but it isn't as nice- at least in my opinion. I don't own either program but am trying to decide my next purchase. I've searched some previous threads here but can't find much info on ACDSee. Does everyone hate it? Are there much better options out there? For what it does for the price it seems ok to me but I'm easily confused by all the options. Thanks
Bonni

I love ACDSee Photo Manager and use it every day. But I hated the previous version of Pro. The work flow was horrible for me, the software seemed slow (conversion batch process) and the controls/options were just very strange. For me anyway. When I got the email from ACDSee about the new version I just deleted it. It's not for me.

claudermilk

It was one of the apps I tested when on my search for a DAM app. I personally disliked it a great deal. To me it really didn't do a whole lot very well. I ended up spending less on a product I like a whole lot better.

twinsmom

claudermilk wrote:

It was one of the apps I tested when on my search for a DAM app. I personally disliked it a great deal. To me it really didn't do a whole lot very well. I ended up spending less on a product I like a whole lot better.

Mind sharing what you went with?

twinsmom

mrcoons wrote:

I love ACDSee Photo Manager and use it every day. But I hated the previous version of Pro. The work flow was horrible for me, the software seemed slow (conversion batch process) and the controls/options were just very strange. For me anyway. When I got the email from ACDSee about the new version I just deleted it. It's not for me.

Mark,
I had heard about it being slow. What are you using that is quicker? I also have a trial of LR and I personally don't find it any quicker. I like the presets in LR but I like the other options that ACDSee has such as layer modes and the ability to do some quick cloning there if it is a small job. I'm just exploring options and it seems most people use LR???

mrcoons

twinsmom wrote:

Mark,
I had heard about it being slow. What are you using that is quicker? I also have a trial of LR and I personally don't find it any quicker. I like the presets in LR but I like the other options that ACDSee has such as layer modes and the ability to do some quick cloning there if it is a small job. I'm just exploring options and it seems most people use LR???

I primarily use Lightroom with the DxO Optics Pro plugin (for the heavy duty photo alterations). Version 1.2 is considerably faster than 1.0 and I don't have any complaints about processing speed at this point.

I also use Bibble Lite for photos that I want to try different things on.

I will try DPP sometimes but generally do not like it's results. I've tried just about all of the RAW converters available and settled on LR, DxO & Bibble. (I like options. )

twinsmom

mrcoons wrote:

I primarily use Lightroom with the DxO Optics Pro plugin (for the heavy duty photo alterations).

Thanks Mark. I will have to try DxO I see that it exports to a flickr account. Does it also do Smugmug? I really liked that with ACDSee. It isn't something that I couldn't do without but it is nice to select a range of photos and have it automatically load into my smugmug.

mrcoons wrote:

I will try DPP sometimes but generally do not like it's results. I've tried just about all of the RAW converters available and settled on LR, DxO & Bibble. (I like options. )

What is DPP? And are you also saying that you live without PS?? gasp! I figure I really will need PS at some point but I'm not ready to sink that much $ into 1 software program yet. thanks yet again.
Bonni

mrcoons

twinsmom wrote:

Thanks Mark. I will have to try DxO I see that it exports to a flickr account. Does it also do Smugmug? I really liked that with ACDSee. It isn't something that I couldn't do without but it is nice to select a range of photos and have it automatically load into my smugmug.





What is DPP? And are you also saying that you live without PS?? gasp! I figure I really will need PS at some point but I'm not ready to sink that much $ into 1 software program yet. thanks yet again.
Bonni

DPP is Canon's software. I will on occasion use PS Elements version 5 (never could get past the price of the full blown PS) but not very often. I generally do not tweak my photos that much.

claudermilk

twinsmom wrote:

Mind sharing what you went with?

Not at all.

For cataloging/management, I use IMatch. It's very good with the asset management part of my workflow.

Tanget warning!

Keep in mind that I seem to have a slightly unusual viewpoint on the total workflow. Most people & developers seem to be looking for bundling as many tasks into as few apps as possible, culminating in Lightroom & Aperture lately. I personally hate that concept; IMHO you end up with one huge app that in trying to do everything, does nothing well (jack-of-all-trades, master of none).

I prefer to select the best-in-breed app for each individual task in my workflow; I do look for ones with some way of communicating with the other apps. So, I have separate apps for file transfer, RAW conversion, reviewing, DAM, pixel editing, noise reduction, and eventually scanning & printing. I do have some automation between them to do limited data transfer & it took a while to get the workflow sorted. However, I feel I have the best tool available for each task.

twinsmom

claudermilk wrote:

I prefer to select the best-in-breed app for each individual task in my workflow; I do look for ones with some way of communicating with the other apps. So, I have separate apps for file transfer, RAW conversion, reviewing, DAM, pixel editing, noise reduction, and eventually scanning & printing. I do have some automation between them to do limited data transfer & it took a while to get the workflow sorted. However, I feel I have the best tool available for each task.

By way of communicating do you mean in a plug-in way? Or do you keep going back to your management software and pulling what you need from there? I'm trying to limit the amount of time I need to spend with each file. I'm new to these boards but in ones that I have spent a lot of time most of the photogs spend an enourmous amount of time editing. I prefer to limit that and work only with a really special photo or two. I would like to spend more time behind the camera than the screen so I guess I am one of those people looking to limit the # of apps that I need. But this may be because I don't know enough about what's available and how to get them to communicate effectively. As if I'm not already being a total pain in the butt- would you explain more about how you do it or point me in the direction to learn more myself? thanks again

claudermilk

No problem. For communication, I mean preferably some kind of plug-in or scripting environment, command-line switches, or at least easily-manupulated text-based settings files.

My general workflow is thus:
1) Insert card into reader & let Downloader Pro load up. Give it a job code & let it rip. It creates a directory structure based on timestamps (<root>\Photography\YYYY\YYYYMM\YYYYMMDD-Job) with "Raw," "Done," and "Working" directories within each. The files get renamed to YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS-<camer>-<original file number> and go into RAW. They also get some basic copyright & contact info stuffed into IPTC.
2) I'll go into BreezeBrowser Pro and run a slideshow to cull & rate the images.
3) Next, into IMatch and ingest the new images. I run a script to pull the ratings into the database. I then apply appropriate categories using a basic Who-What-When-Where-Why-How structure.
4) I make a selection of the better images--generally 3+ stars and run a script to build a Bibble work queue, then run Bibble.
5) In Bibble I develop the selected files. Using the work queue, I look at the list of files I'm interested in.
6) Run any additional editing in PSCS as needed.
7) Back to IMatch. Ingest the final JPEGS & run a script to pull the categorization from the RAWs. Then run a script to embed full IPTC. Keywords come from the What and Why structures, the location fields get parsed from the Where structure. I also embed the full categorization information in the Supplemental Categories field (note that I am overloading the field & this works because I only do IPTC editing within IMatch).
8) Upload files to my SM account as needed/desired. For client or event shoots, I'll set up galleries just for that, for any shoots, the very best work gets to live in the portfolio area.


It sounds a lot worse than it is in reality. Another benefit of this method is I can be simultaneously performing several steps at a time on several shoots or on a multi-day shoot (e.g., the worst was simultaneously performing batch operations in steps 1, 3, 5, 6, and 8 while doing the manual step 2).

As I get more proficient with each step, I spend less and less time editing. Many images are getting to the point that I only spend a few seconds on each as that's all it needs. It's the hero or trouble images that get the bulk of my time now. Part of that is obviously the type of shooting I typically do; a shoot of a stage show produces a large number of shots, most of which can easily be batch-edited as they share attributes & a fix for one would apply to dozen. When out doing arty shots for myself, I both have a lot fewer images and spend more time on each keeper.