Photoline Beats the Pants Off PSP

Here everybody can post his problems with PhotoLine
tknterry
Mitglied
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed 13 Dec 2006 18:37
Location: Wisconsin USA

Photoline Beats the Pants Off PSP

Post by tknterry » Thu 14 Dec 2006 09:34

Hi, Ive been using photoline for a month and just bought it. After using Paint Shop Pro XI this photo editor is a breath of fresh air. Corel has totally destroyed PSP in version XI. Photoline is very stable and has not crashed one time in the entire month Ive used it. It has excellent features and is very customizable. I love the brush editor for example. Thanks for all your great work on it. --Terry

thkn777
Mitglied
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun 14 Jan 2007 12:42

Post by thkn777 » Mon 15 Jan 2007 11:05

Hello tknterry,
this is interesting. I am a long time PSP user (started with rel3 or 4, can't remember) and am using PSP9 now mostly and PSP7 for printing (PSP9 print dialog is horrible).

Unforrtunately PSP9 doesn't support the RAW format of my Pentax *ist DL2 and that's why I am considering to buy PSP XI to have my "old" tools back plus some new tools for RAW and 16bit.

So they messed up PSP at Corel? Even more than in rel 9??? That would be bad... Jasc did such a fine job with PSP over the years, such a shame they sold to Corel :(

Can you give examples? About the bad/annoying things in PSP XI? It's either PSP XI or PL32 for me with PL32 a tad cheaper atm... but also quite slow and I would have to learn a lot where PSP feels more "at home" for me...

TIA,
Th.

Martin Huber
Entwickler
Entwickler
Posts: 3696
Joined: Tue 19 Nov 2002 15:49

Post by Martin Huber » Mon 15 Jan 2007 11:47

thkn777 wrote:It's either PSP XI or PL32 for me with PL32 a tad cheaper atm... but also quite slow
Which functions are quite slow in your opinion?

Martin

thkn777
Mitglied
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun 14 Jan 2007 12:42

Post by thkn777 » Mon 15 Jan 2007 12:31

Martin Huber wrote:
thkn777 wrote:It's either PSP XI or PL32 for me with PL32 a tad cheaper atm... but also quite slow
Which functions are quite slow in your opinion?

Martin
- comparing GIMP and PL32, same picture, in GIMP UFRAW imported.

Example:
- automatic histogram correction: GIMP: less than 2s, PL32 8bit 3-4s, PL32 16bit ca. 8s

My problem is, that I feel that complex operations work quite well/comparable in PL32, while the easy stuff which I use everyday is slower... my only guess is, that I am used to 8bit images in GIMP and PSP9 and other programs and only recently switched to 16bit images...

Btw - we can discuss this in german too - I opened a "newbie thread" in the german part of this forum (am from Germany, was responding here because of the direct comparison of PSP/PL32) --> http://www.pl32.net/forum3/viewtopic.php?t=980

Maybe this is just a setup/config thingie, I don't know. Especially if you enable the preview it's getting on my nerves to see PL32 work it's way "square by square" through the picture.

No rant here, it's more a question - again: I know that I don't have optimal hardware (2,4GHz Pentium and 1GB RAM) but still.... one always wishes for more speed :)

Regards,
Th.

Martin Huber
Entwickler
Entwickler
Posts: 3696
Joined: Tue 19 Nov 2002 15:49

Post by Martin Huber » Mon 15 Jan 2007 15:25

thkn777 wrote:- comparing GIMP and PL32, same picture, in GIMP UFRAW imported.

Example:
- automatic histogram correction: GIMP: less than 2s, PL32 8bit 3-4s, PL32 16bit ca. 8s

My problem is, that I feel that complex operations work quite well/comparable in PL32, while the easy stuff which I use everyday is slower... my only guess is, that I am used to 8bit images in GIMP and PSP9 and other programs and only recently switched to 16bit images...

Btw - we can discuss this in german too - I opened a "newbie thread" in the german part of this forum (am from Germany, was responding here because of the direct comparison of PSP/PL32) --> http://www.pl32.net/forum3/viewtopic.php?t=980

Maybe this is just a setup/config thingie, I don't know. Especially if you enable the preview it's getting on my nerves to see PL32 work it's way "square by square" through the picture.
I think the main problem is the speed of the tiled full preview. It isn't as fast as it could be because it currently doesn't utilize the full processor power. We will enhance this.

Martin

thkn777
Mitglied
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun 14 Jan 2007 12:42

Post by thkn777 » Mon 15 Jan 2007 15:44

Martin Huber wrote: I think the main problem is the speed of the tiled full preview. It isn't as fast as it could be because it currently doesn't utilize the full processor power. We will enhance this.

Martin
Ah, I see :) I will check this - if it's only a preview "problem" then it shouldn't be much of a hassle since after a while I'll have my "standard" workflows with certain types of images.

Also a "preview" should only give a good imagination of what the image would look like when applying a special effect - maybe being less exact can reduce the needed CPU power too.

Cheers,
Th.

carrozza
Mitglied
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri 19 Jan 2007 10:48

Post by carrozza » Sat 20 Jan 2007 01:04

"...It has excellent features and is very customizable. I love the brush editor for example. Thanks for all your great work on it..."

Totally agree! :P