Self-Designer
10-05-2003, 07:29 PM
Yoopi! And there was much joy :shrug:
http://www.acdsystems.com/English/index.htm
http://www.acdsystems.com/English/index.htm
View Full Version : ACDSee 6 is out there
|
|
mikkermik
10-05-2003, 07:53 PM
That's pretty good news!
However, they still refuse to support viewing alpha channels which drives me insane. :banghead:
However, they still refuse to support viewing alpha channels which drives me insane. :banghead:
Self-Designer
10-05-2003, 08:37 PM
I'd like to see a sort by brightness and by color
I'd like to see a similiar pictures search engine (i know it will be very heavy... but it can fake sometimes, i don't care to search within the errors).
- edit -
And sort by proportions and dimensions like in CompuPic
I'd like to see a similiar pictures search engine (i know it will be very heavy... but it can fake sometimes, i don't care to search within the errors).
- edit -
And sort by proportions and dimensions like in CompuPic
klingspor
10-06-2003, 05:52 PM
What did they include this time, a toaster?
Last time I've tried ACDSee was version 4 or so, and the bloat was just unbelieveable. I really don't see why a photo cataloguer needs image manipulation features... that's what I got Photoshop for.
They had a "classic" version back then with only the somewhat useful features, but I don't know if that's still available.
Quite frankly I don't care to check either... I'm not touching their software with a 10ft stick!
Unfortunately, most of the competitors have also chosen to go with the feature-bloat... so if anyone knows of a nice image organizing software that doesn't feed your hampster, please let me know...
Last time I've tried ACDSee was version 4 or so, and the bloat was just unbelieveable. I really don't see why a photo cataloguer needs image manipulation features... that's what I got Photoshop for.
They had a "classic" version back then with only the somewhat useful features, but I don't know if that's still available.
Quite frankly I don't care to check either... I'm not touching their software with a 10ft stick!
Unfortunately, most of the competitors have also chosen to go with the feature-bloat... so if anyone knows of a nice image organizing software that doesn't feed your hampster, please let me know...
MonkeyNinja
10-06-2003, 05:54 PM
I prefer lowtek stuff like IrfanView
http://www.irfanview.com/
http://www.irfanview.com/
Self-Designer
10-06-2003, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by stefanminning
What did they include this time, a toaster?
Last time I've tried ACDSee was version 4 or so, and the bloat was just unbelieveable. I really don't see why a photo cataloguer needs image manipulation features... that's what I got Photoshop for.
They had a "classic" version back then with only the somewhat useful features, but I don't know if that's still available.
Quite frankly I don't care to check either... I'm not touching their software with a 10ft stick!
Unfortunately, most of the competitors have also chosen to go with the feature-bloat... so if anyone knows of a nice image organizing software that doesn't feed your hampster, please let me know...
U know, adobe has a very good browser (i think they call it... ah... photoshop?), unfortunately they did develop a way too heavy full of tools photo-manipualting-program around it... :D (kidding, love that program!)
By the way, what about JPEG 2000?? why don't they support it yet? That format looked so great... I've tried it with some demos - fast and puts old good jpeg in the small packet...
What did they include this time, a toaster?
Last time I've tried ACDSee was version 4 or so, and the bloat was just unbelieveable. I really don't see why a photo cataloguer needs image manipulation features... that's what I got Photoshop for.
They had a "classic" version back then with only the somewhat useful features, but I don't know if that's still available.
Quite frankly I don't care to check either... I'm not touching their software with a 10ft stick!
Unfortunately, most of the competitors have also chosen to go with the feature-bloat... so if anyone knows of a nice image organizing software that doesn't feed your hampster, please let me know...
U know, adobe has a very good browser (i think they call it... ah... photoshop?), unfortunately they did develop a way too heavy full of tools photo-manipualting-program around it... :D (kidding, love that program!)
By the way, what about JPEG 2000?? why don't they support it yet? That format looked so great... I've tried it with some demos - fast and puts old good jpeg in the small packet...
luceric
10-06-2003, 08:06 PM
Is it just me or the user interface is getting worse each version? The old 'classic' version was light, fast and the user interface was very clean. Now, there are a thousand toolbar, folders, overlays, etc, to turn off, and even then it is still a very distracting UI.
soulburn3d
10-06-2003, 08:15 PM
What sort of features in v6 do you think would be useful? I really couldn't find any new features worth upgrading for, seemed most of the new features are aimed at grandma who want to take digital photos instead of professionals.
- Neil
- Neil
gnz
10-06-2003, 08:44 PM
I agree they have been focusing on bloating the program with redundant features. It could be such a great tool if they focused on refining it instead.
Ive been staying with version 2.4 for the last three or four years, it works great!
I think I might check that new version but something tells me I will be dissapointed too. I just hope it is not a pain to uninstall!
Ive been staying with version 2.4 for the last three or four years, it works great!
I think I might check that new version but something tells me I will be dissapointed too. I just hope it is not a pain to uninstall!
nikita
10-06-2003, 10:40 PM
This little tool called "SlowView" replaced Acdsee years ago on my desktop. Exactly what it is supposed to do: view images of all formats. Quickly with few resources. Have a look:
http://www.slowview.at/
And did I mention it's free?
http://www.slowview.at/
And did I mention it's free?
Lunatique
10-07-2003, 06:07 AM
I use Compupic Pro and XnView along with ACDSee Classic and 5. They all have their strengths.
Self-Designer
10-07-2003, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Lunatique
I use Compupic Pro and XnView along with ACDSee Classic and 5. They all have their strengths.
OMG 4 picture browsers (not counting photoshop's - i guess u use it, not only painter)
Anyway, I'll check XnView and SlowView (I want my viewing experience fast, what kind of name is slow view??)
--- edit ---
I've done a fast check for XnView and SlowView... Yes XnView can compress to JPEG 2000 but it's useless - it compress it worse then jpg... and for a 1MB compress jpg file i've tried it stacked for a long time and gave me a 7MB jp2 or was it jpc format... anyway... no good :thumbsdow
I use Compupic Pro and XnView along with ACDSee Classic and 5. They all have their strengths.
OMG 4 picture browsers (not counting photoshop's - i guess u use it, not only painter)
Anyway, I'll check XnView and SlowView (I want my viewing experience fast, what kind of name is slow view??)
--- edit ---
I've done a fast check for XnView and SlowView... Yes XnView can compress to JPEG 2000 but it's useless - it compress it worse then jpg... and for a 1MB compress jpg file i've tried it stacked for a long time and gave me a 7MB jp2 or was it jpc format... anyway... no good :thumbsdow
leigh
10-07-2003, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by mikkermik
However, they still refuse to support viewing alpha channels
Yeah I think it's pretty silly that they don't have it :surprised
In fact, it was one of the main reasons I never bought it, and got Deep Exploration instead.
Not being able to view alpha channels is quite a handicap when browsing through renders and stuff. Incidently, XnView that Lunatique mentioned can view alpha channels too - and as far as I remember, it's free... (I could be wrong there though) :)
However, they still refuse to support viewing alpha channels
Yeah I think it's pretty silly that they don't have it :surprised
In fact, it was one of the main reasons I never bought it, and got Deep Exploration instead.
Not being able to view alpha channels is quite a handicap when browsing through renders and stuff. Incidently, XnView that Lunatique mentioned can view alpha channels too - and as far as I remember, it's free... (I could be wrong there though) :)
Lunatique
10-08-2003, 06:33 AM
Originally posted by Artist 3D
I've done a fast check for XnView and SlowView... Yes XnView can compress to JPEG 2000 but it's useless - it compress it worse then jpg... and for a 1MB compress jpg file i've tried it stacked for a long time and gave me a 7MB jp2 or was it jpc format... anyway... no good :thumbsdow
Are you kidding me?! I use XnView ESPECIALLY for the awesome compression that it does on jpg's! I can ALWAYS compress smaller files with better image quality than any other app I've ever tried.
I've done a fast check for XnView and SlowView... Yes XnView can compress to JPEG 2000 but it's useless - it compress it worse then jpg... and for a 1MB compress jpg file i've tried it stacked for a long time and gave me a 7MB jp2 or was it jpc format... anyway... no good :thumbsdow
Are you kidding me?! I use XnView ESPECIALLY for the awesome compression that it does on jpg's! I can ALWAYS compress smaller files with better image quality than any other app I've ever tried.
urgaffel
10-08-2003, 02:34 PM
Using ACDSee 3.1 over here. That's about the last upgrade that was usefull...
Xnview sounds nice, time to check it out. Thanks for the tip
Xnview sounds nice, time to check it out. Thanks for the tip
Self-Designer
10-08-2003, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by Lunatique
Are you kidding me?! I use XnView ESPECIALLY for the awesome compression that it does on jpg's! I can ALWAYS compress smaller files with better image quality than any other app I've ever tried.
So maybe i've done something wrong... The problem I can see is that It has several JPEG 2000 formats supported. More then that, it doesn't change the parameters interface according to the format you choose, but you have to click a buttom and enter another window there you can change the JPEG 2000 parameters. The strange thing is that I've tried the highest quality and the lowest one and they both compressed it to the same size.... I tried it on a 34KB pic (from the internet) and then on a 1.9MB file (thinking maybe there's not much to compress in such small files)... Can you please direct me what to do? maybe i've done a mistake...
Are you kidding me?! I use XnView ESPECIALLY for the awesome compression that it does on jpg's! I can ALWAYS compress smaller files with better image quality than any other app I've ever tried.
So maybe i've done something wrong... The problem I can see is that It has several JPEG 2000 formats supported. More then that, it doesn't change the parameters interface according to the format you choose, but you have to click a buttom and enter another window there you can change the JPEG 2000 parameters. The strange thing is that I've tried the highest quality and the lowest one and they both compressed it to the same size.... I tried it on a 34KB pic (from the internet) and then on a 1.9MB file (thinking maybe there's not much to compress in such small files)... Can you please direct me what to do? maybe i've done a mistake...
slaughters
10-09-2003, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by MonkeyNinja
I prefer lowtek stuff like IrfanView
http://www.irfanview.com/ IrfanView is great! It even lets you create screen savers from your AVI files. Cool (non-adware) feature.
I prefer lowtek stuff like IrfanView
http://www.irfanview.com/ IrfanView is great! It even lets you create screen savers from your AVI files. Cool (non-adware) feature.
Self-Designer
10-18-2003, 01:54 PM
I want to correct a mistake i made: there are many, but many new ways of sorting the images!
So many i could die! (not really, but do many):
Sort by author, notes, rating, camera parameters, Canon/Fuji/Nikon/Olympus notes, GPS data, exposure, birghtness, contrast etc. etc.!
However, I tried to sort by brightness and i'm not sure how does it calculate it... but it didn't give the expected result. :hmm:
So many i could die! (not really, but do many):
Sort by author, notes, rating, camera parameters, Canon/Fuji/Nikon/Olympus notes, GPS data, exposure, birghtness, contrast etc. etc.!
However, I tried to sort by brightness and i'm not sure how does it calculate it... but it didn't give the expected result. :hmm:
CGTalk Moderation
01-16-2006, 07:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
vBulletin v3.0.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.