A quickstart guide for Photoshop users transitioning to PhotoLine would be quite useful in my opinion as well. I remember when I started out (after having extensively working with Photoshop since version 3.5) I had trouble finding tools due to the non-standard English function labels (Histogram, Darker, lighter, copy brush, lasso, mask, false color, etc.), the rather odd menu structure compared to other image editors, the lasso-mask terminology/distinction, and the various hidden ("mystery meat") options (double-click on lasso tool, Harmony, double-clicking various fields, etc,) - all which were (are) non-standard compared to the "industry standards".
A quickstart guide listing all these subtle differences (but important) in workflow would have saved me precious time.
@Ken: it's awesome you were able to find your way around without too much trouble when you started out with PhotoLine. For me it was more or less the same: I loved discovering all these small hidden cool features, and I learn that way best - discovery.
However, you completely fail to understand that users fall in several categories: novices, occasional users, transfer users, experts, rote users, and perpetual intermediates. I have been teaching students for almost two decades, including Adobe applications such as Photoshop. You can't just expect users to 1) look things up in the user manual and/or 2) actually understand what is written in it. I wish it worked that way, but it doesn't - 99% of my students NEVER look things up in the manual. They Google it. They try things out. They ask peers. But actually opening a manual? Why, in the world of most users the manual is often not even considered! And even if they do, many users/students prefer tutorials. Step by step instructions, or a quick overview of the function in a short video tutorial.
I don't think you have ever actually taught a group of students (no matter their age) or created video/written tutorials before and dealt with how people learn - you would have very different view then. Your view seems to be limited to your own experience only.
Your suggestion to add a "this feature is commonly called..." is interesting, but I feel PhotoLine ought to just adopt the proper English standard names as in use by every other design application. It is just confusing to new users, and obstructs new users from transferring their existing knowledge to PhotoLine. Adding an explanatory entry in PhotoLine's manual is not going to be helpful at all in these cases. Most users will not open the user manual. Besides, PhotoLine's English user manual is quite badly written and structured as it is - making many basic mistakes from a technical writer point of view.@Ken ends
From my experience, based on students' comments, colleagues comments, and my own experience, these things stand in the way of more users adopting PhotoLine (or even considering it):
- the default interface setup is completely non-standard. It looks different compared to almost any other image editor out there. For example, the layers are located on the right. The toolbox is a horizontal two-rows based setup. The workspace is neurotic in terms of functionality (text styles are initially shown as well?)
- many functions in PhotoLine are named differently compared to - well, just about any other image editor.
- the menu structure is again quite differently structured compared to most other image editors.
- lack of presets. No image presets in the "new image" dialog is just plain silly. What is more, most other image editors have very nice start dialogs with lots of presets to quickly get up and running. Compare Photoshop and Krita, which have a wealth of useful presets. Frustrating to many types of user.
- a lack of built-in help aside from the user manual. Novice and occasional users are left to their own devices. There is no helpful starting screen with suggestions what to do next, or how to start using PhotoLine.
- almost no video tutorials. Higher quality professionally produced tutorials are non-existent for PhotoLine. Googling tutorials for PhotoLine is often a fruitless effort.
- the manual is, to put it bluntly, badly structured and badly written. This is not dissing the devs - it is just that they are not technical writers, and they do the best they can. I have written manuals and technical docs myself as an instructor, and the PhotoLine manuals could be improved so much.
Not having a web version online does not help either. Googling PhotoLine functions would at least result in the manual being shown in Google.
- the utter lack of any help or guides assisting transfer and expert users to migrate their existing knowledge and experience to PhotoLine.
- lack of exposure of high-quality work and samples on the main website. Compare Affinity's website(s): excellent quality samples of work that attracts new users like flies attracted to honey. As a matter of fact, the welcome dialog in Affinity allows users to open professional work samples directly in those applications - immediately showcasing what can be achieved in those applications. And it works.
- PhotoLine (the company) is making NO USE at all of any social networking. No Facebook, no twitter, no nothing. No pinterest showcasing work. No social connections anywhere on the web. Just this old forum. Which is an utterly outdated approach, and younger users (in their teens and twenties) do not use forums as their first point of contact anymore.
- likewise, PhotoLine (the company) has no Youtube presence.
- finally, the lack of marketing and "buzz" surrounding PhotoLine is troublesome as well, of course. Not helping at all.
A couple of these can be easily fixed (first four points, and a quick start guide for transfer users). The lack of high-quality work and tutorials are like the chicken and the egg: someone has to take the first step (in the case of Affinity Serif commissioned professional artists and designers to create work samples and tutorials).
My two cents. It is a combination of the above factors that stem the growth of PhotoLine's popularity.
)
