Impact of Photoline's website

[Herbert123]

Wow - I almost spilled my coffee reading this post. Tataaaaa - it appears to me the PL web site will be connected to the future by next year.

If you should plan to implement some customer reviews/ratings, count me in.
If you set up a reference list, feel free to link to my web site. People love to see that professionals use the software.

Let the good times roll - PL deserves it.

Thanks for the comment - may I ask you something? I posted a "what do you use Photoline for?" question on the English forum. Could you post the same question on the German side? This is to get a better understanding of the current user base.

And a customer reviews/rating/testimonial element is a good idea.

[marco.molteni]

Herbert,

just wanted to thank you for your effort, PL really deserves a new look. As other people have mentioned, there are also other lacking areas (English documentation, tutorials, UI look, ...) but probably a web site is the most urgent one.

[Herbert123]

Thanks! Btw, I have been posting the news about the new version on a couple of forums, and got some interesting feedback (dare I say I posted on the Adobe forums )

Some comments:
- the interface looks unprofessional, and the devs should switch to a different GUI framework like QT.
- PL's multi-monitor support is lacking (" It (different GUI framework) would also make multi-monitor-support possible which PL's current architecture does not allow for. A must have for fine-grained work on details while having the overview visible on another screen. ")
- PL's main issue is not supporting the major Photoshop plugins
- PL's viewport anti-aliasing is lacking: rotating a layer causes a jagged look. Also, at certain zoom levels anti-aliasing is problematic. ("it's a pity that Photoline's display quality is quite ragged. Anti-aliasing can look poor on screen despite it being good in the document as is seen by copying and pasting into another app")

Also very positive comments:
"I have been using photoLine since V15, and agree with nearly everything mentioned. While I still maintain my Photoshop license (because for some things, only Photoshop will do, IMO), I find photoLine a far more efficient option for many, many tasks, and in many ways, superior to Photoshop."

"I've had a quick play with the current trial version of Photoline and I'm extremely impressed by the non-destructiveness of so many things done to layers in a document. Filters as adjustment layers, instanced layers/groups as virtual layers and non-destructive transformations as editable attributes of a layer are a more elegant and usable solution than Photoshop's SO system (which is useful for encapsulating entire files within a document). The simple guides manager is a huge improvement over Photoshop's complete absence of one (other than third party extensions). Photoshop is hobbled by its nearly 25-year baggage, of course, and it's amazing that the developers have extended it to where it is today." (Adobe forum, experienced user)

"I've been searching for a Photoshop alternative with Open EXR support for a while now, but I haven't found any. Photoline might be what I'm looking for after all. "

Hundreds of views on several forums, so hopefully the Martin and Gerhard will see this translated into more licenses.

[bkh]

- PL's viewport anti-aliasing is lacking: rotating a layer causes a jagged look. Also, at certain zoom levels anti-aliasing is problematic. ("it's a pity that Photoline's display quality is quite ragged. Anti-aliasing can look poor on screen despite it being good in the document as is seen by copying and pasting into another app")

Indeed, there seems to be a bug: when global anti-aliasing is on and the layer antialiasing is set to standard, then the layer behaves as if the layer antialiasing was set to "off". Changing the layer setting to "Always" will greatly improve the display quality.

Cheers

Burkhard.

[Twindaddy]

From the help file:

Antialiasing defines whether layers will be antialiased/smoothed when displayed onscreen, when printed and when saved. Default means that layers will only be antialiased, if Antialias (see chapter 7.10.2) is turned on. Onscreen the layer will only be antialiased, if it doesn‘t cost too much time, on printing and saving always. Never means that the layer will never be antialiased even if Antialias is turned on. When using Always it will always be antialiased even if Antialias is turned off. and even if displaying onscreen is slow.

Seems to work as intended. Perhaps on nowadays computers PL possibly needs a reevalution of "if doesn't cost too much time".

[akeller]

*

[Herbert123]

Been working on it, but last three weeks were quite busy. I should have something up and running by the beginning of next week.

[greenmorpher]

Herbert -- read you stuff on the other site. Didn’t understand nearly all of it. Good grief. I wonder how many other users are as technically capable as you and how many are as challenged as I am? Hmmm.

All I want right now a good tool to extract fluffy haired persons from unwanted backgrounds. PL hasn’t got it. i wouldn’t mind an HDR tool that actually worked, either -- I've tried quite a few times and never got a satisfactory HDR result. Did you know PL offered HDR about two years before PS announced it with a flourish -- but we ordinary users didn’t know partly because it was called something else in PL?

And not actually "announced", of course Sigh.

As for DTP -- sorry -- while PL does some nice little things, I'm afraid it doesn't even begin to cut it in that area. ACD stopped supporting Canvas at v.X on Mac seven years ago -- and it is still way superior to PL in that area while providing very decent photo capabilities.

ACD continues to support Canvas in Windows -- it’s now at v.14 -- but hasn't done much for its photo/raster capabilities.

Cheers, geoff

[Herbert123]

Some may have noticed my absence on these boards for the last couple of weeks: two family members passed away, and life got in the way of things a bit.

Still working on the website, though. I am hoping for a first version in the next two weeks to show to the brothers.

[ellhel]

Some may have noticed my absence on these boards for the last couple of weeks: two family members passed away, and life got in the way of things a bit.

Still working on the website, though. I am hoping for a first version in the next two weeks to show to the brothers.

Hello Herbert,

the main thing you are well. Everything else can wait.

Regards
Helmut

[plugsnpixels]

This is an important topic to keep going. I have been aware of and helping promote PhotoLine for some time now since I recognize its value in the scheme of things as a top alternative to Photoshop, and a great deal even apart from that. Very important to me is the ability to load and use PS plug-ins.

I've always thought and agree that the interface is unwittingly drawing attention away from a really serious imaging app. From a Mac user perspective (where things like GUI design carry more weight), it looks childish, cheap and outdated (OS9-like). Based on the stories told above, how many potential customers have been lost because of this?

I see there are minimal means of changing the interface (edge width color), but even that helps darken the now-passe light gray.

As for the website, yes, this is a problem as well but IMO the lesser of the two. I've seen better and I've seen worse. But if it is keeping people from even trying PhotoLine, it too is a priority. Remember, the pretty girl gets the dates .

Obviously these issues (GUI and website) are Gerhard's "problems", not ours, and if he can live with them so be it. But I think it's great users want to help out where the devs may be too busy or not focused enough to give it their attention. If these issues can be addressed, PhotoLine should easily ramp up in popularity, especially at this particular time when Adobe is bleeding customers.

[OldRadioGuy]

Some may have noticed my absence on these boards for the last couple of weeks: two family members passed away, and life got in the way of things a bit.

Still working on the website, though. I am hoping for a first version in the next two weeks to show to the brothers.

Herbert, sorry for your losses. Obviously your personal and family obligations must take priority.

Bob

[Herbert123]

Things have settled down a bit, and I have been working on getting my (paid) projects finished first. With a bit of luck I should be able to continue next week. Finishing up a large project this week.

As for the interface: even just the option to have a dark grey/anthracite colour scheme would probably satisfy most people as a "modern looking" GUI.

This is Gimp in dark colours:
http://www.partha.com/images/screenshot ... 60x540.jpg

It is interesting to note that suddenly a lot of users seem to stop complaining about the overall interface. Unfortunately, we are all a superficial lot

[Wayland]

I have to admit, I would prefer a darker interface.

It helps you to concentrate on the tones of the image better in my opinion.

I like just about everything else though.

[emri]

In addition to the web site, the documentation is startlingly amateurish (I would be happy to do editing and submit suggestions, as an editor and native English speaker) if the devs are open to it.

I say that even pre-purchase because I need features Photoline offers (EPS, CMYK, and some that even Photoshop doesn't, i.e., saving specified resolution in JPG and PNG files), but I must say this thing is a bitch to try to figure out. I've been an artist all my life, and always amused by people who say "I can't draw a straight line" (as if nature does!), but here I am completely stuck trying to figure out something that simple: the manual refers to a Line Style Field without telling you where or how to find it, the "help" that comes with the program gives information that is simply wrong.

Did I not absolutely need what Photoline (and no other program) offers, between the web site, the look and feel, and the pathetic documentation, I wouldn't have given it five minutes of my attention.