F
Flyboy73
I need ACDSEE32 software .... can someone help me pls.
Z
Zepos
Flyboy73 said:
Did you perform a web search? I guess not.
Zepos
V
Vrodok the Piglet lover
Once Upon A Time (on or around 25 Jul 2006 06:33:56 -0700), in
Ah, but _Freeware_ (as legally-defined) ?
by way of Message-iD said:
Ah, but _Freeware_ (as legally-defined) ?
R
rich
Rich_on 25-Jul-2006 said:
For some reason there is some interest in acdsee at the moment
For some reason there is some interest in old versions of acdsee at the
moment
usual advice goto
http://www.oldversion.com
R
rich
rich said:
for some reason my b. multiclipboard is doubling everything up.
J
John Corliss
Flyboy73 said:
Rather than expecting to find that non-freeware here, why don't you try
either Irfanview:
http://irfanview.tuwien.ac.at/
(it will try to install some toolbar or whatever, but you just tell it
not to)
or the excellent XnView:
http://perso.orange.fr/pierre.g/xnview/enhome.html
C
Craig
John (et al);John said:
Which do you prefer (and for what tasks)? Reason I ask is that I'm more
familiar w/the Gimp-Irfanview-Picassa2 cabal and haven't played much
w/XnView.
tia,
-Craig
M
Michael Laplante
XnView matches Irfanview almost feature for feature. (In fact, the author of
Irfanview takes a shot at his competitor on his website, implying that they
have been lifting their features from his program for several years.)
However, each has just enough strong individual features that I use them
both. Irfanview is better for the image batch process features but I like
XnView export features better. Both good programs. . .
HTH
M
C
Craig
Excellent,Michael said:
thx!
-Craig
B
badgolferman
Michael Laplante, 7/25/2006, 12:15:49 PM,
I prefer Irfanview for day-to-day use but XnView seems to have better
print options.
I prefer Irfanview for day-to-day use but XnView seems to have better
print options.
F
Flyboy73
Thank u 
John said:
B
Bill Day
For my purposes, the major difference is that Irfanview uses two
windows, and allows opening one file without having to 'load' all the
thumbnails. Sometimes I like the thumbnails, but sometimes in a large
folder, it takes forever.
....and the FastStone viewer is fast overtaking both of them.
M
Morten Skarstad
Bill Day skrev:
[Irfan vs XN]
Well, FastStone may be very nice and all, but if it's one thing it's
_not_ I would say, well, fast.
[Irfan vs XN]
Well, FastStone may be very nice and all, but if it's one thing it's
_not_ I would say, well, fast.
M
Michael Wardreau
Amen!
J
John Corliss
Craig said:
Craig,
I use Irfanview version 3.92 because it seems to be the last version
where the image view (not the thumbnail view, although it does too)
opens maximized by default if you set it there. The current version is
3.98 and although I tried newer versions than 3.92, I kept having to
maximize the viewing window and decided that none of the improvements in
newer versions were compelling enough to lead me to update.
I've used XnView and as others have pointed out, found it to be a
more or less duplicate of Irfanview. Since I only need one such program
and had been using Irfanview longer, XnView got removed.
Also, I have several commercial graphics editing programs installed
since, over the years, I've bought several scanners and they all come
with such programs. Thus, the editing features Irfanview includes are of
little use to me. I have tried them out though, and found them to work
just fine.
Frankly though, for my purposes, it's half a dozen to one, six to the
other.
J
John Corliss
Flyboy73 said:Thank u
You're very welcome. My brother was a long time user of ACDSEE and kept
putting up with the nag screens until one day I installed Irfanview on
his system. After a few minutes of trying it out, he told me to go ahead
and remove ACDSEE and has never looked back.
G
Garrapata
I like Irfanview for minor editing if only because it is already open
for viewing, if there is a problem with a picture then resizing,
adjusting contrast, gamma, simple color etc is very easy and fast.
More serious editing requires other software but I still have not found
the ideal freeware. I have tried all of the ones commonly recommended
here but I mostly use Polaroid's Photo Max which came with an early
printer and may not qualify as freeware.
F
FTR
You tried the free photofiltre ?Garrapata said:
M
Mark Ciochetto
Was there a freeware version og Acdsee32?Flyboy73 said:
--
Friday, July 21st,2006
/'^'\ /'^'\
( o o ) ( o o )
---oOOO--(_)--OOOo------oOOO--(_)--OOOo---
! Man who run behind car get exhausted. !
L
lugnut
IIRC, acdsee32 was the designation when it went from 16 bit
to 32 bit for Win 98. There was never actually a v3.2 or
"32". The latest 32 designation I ever saw was v3.1 which
was designated acdsee32 v3.1. After that, there was no
longer a reference to "32". Somewhere along the line I seem
to recall that one version was freeware. Sorry, I do not
recall which. You may be able to learn more about this on
their site. Is there some particular feature you are
looking to get? Maybe, there is a more recent freeware that
can do the job for you.
Lugnut