Freeware windows digital photo editors (did we miss any)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wlm Singleton
  • Start date Start date
if you search various freeware sites you'll find that a multitude of
photo editor apps are missing from your list.
Click to expand...

The original point (which was somewhat contaminated) wasn't to compile an
exhaustive list of all the free windows photo editors but to list the top
handful of two four or five BEST free windows photo editors.

I think we've accomplished our task!

Thanks everyone!
 
90+ Online Photography Tools and Resources, from Mashable:
http://mashable.com/2007/06/23/photography-toolbox/

Online Image Editors Compared:
http://www.smileycat.com/miaow/archives/000267.php

Photo Freeware website:
http://www.photo-freeware.net/
Click to expand...

Here's my really short list of highly recommended free downloadable windows
photo editors ...

MY RECOMMENDATIONS (based mostly on this thread & some quick tests)
1. http://www.irfanview.com/ (use Irfanview as your primary viewer)
2. http://www.getpaint.net/ (use Paint.Net as your primary editor)
3. http://www.gimp.org/ (use The Gimp as your very functional editor)
4. http://www.artweaver.de (use Artweaver to create digital paintings)
 
Wlm said:
The purpose of this question was to list the handful of generally
recommended freely available freely downloadable freely usable windows
digital photo editors.

The reason for that quest was I personally wanted to know which two or
three or four programs I should personally use and recommend to others.

In addition, as I am want to do, I wanted the general populace of digital
photo enthusiasts to benefit from the discussion (hence the specific cross
posted newsgroups).

Lastly, I wanted myself and the others to avoid the pitfalls of the
dangerous software, such as that from Corel which has already been
identified and the others which were mentioned that are nearly broken to
the point of not being as useful as the recommended software.
Click to expand...

Hi. You may know and loathe me from further up the thread. For what it's
worth, I heartily endorse Irfanview, and The Gimp, starting with Version
2 for Windows. You may also want to play around with a thing called
GimpShop, which attempts to corral the approximately 516 little widgets
that open up when starting The Gimp.

Among the new programs listed here, I'm kinda digging PhotoScape so far.
 
How was that list compiled, and what is the point of separating Often
The list was compiled by googling and asking.

I googled for the top few programs, and asked about the rest.

The community kindly answered the questions and we came up with a
short list of three or four highly recommended programs; the rest of
which being less recommended by virtue of not showing up in the
original googling.
Click to expand...

My issue with your lists is that by separating them into Often and
Sometimes categories of recommendation you are leading readers to
believe that the apps in the *Often* list are preferred over others. But
you have offered no quantitative proof of those results. You could be
doing a disservice to those seeking the most recommended software in
A.C.F. if your results are merely impressionistic. I still want proof
that Paint.Net is more popular here than XNview, for example.
The programs that dropped to the not recommended section had proven
themselves to be onerous (eg snapfire) to at least one poster and not
argued vehemently by the majority.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with your Not Recommended app since you provided
reasons behind that result.
I believe, in just a few posts, this list has served its purpose in
listing the top handful of free windows graphic editor programs (many
of which I was not aware of personally until now).
Click to expand...

But you haven't done that if your list is merely impressionistic. I've
been lurking and posting to A.C.F. a lot longer than most, and my
impression is that your listing is inaccurate and does not serve your
intended purpose. Finally, I think your categorization efforts would be
better expended on separating the many apples and oranges within your
list instead of trying to determine which are more highly recommended.

<opinion>
Paint.Net is not a more competent app than Photoplus6.
</opinion>

OFTEN RECOMMENDED
http://www.gimp.org/ (The Gimp, functional editor)
http://www.irfanview.com/ (Irfanview, fast viewer)
http://www.getpaint.net/ (Paint.Net, functional MS Paint replacement)

SOMETIMES RECOMMENDED
https://sourceforge.net/projects/cinepaint/ (CinePaint, GIMP+)
http://www.xnview.com/ (XnView, fast viewer on Mac & Linux too)
http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm (Faststone, great cropping)
http://picasa.google.com/ (Picasa, what is it's claim to fame?)
http://photoscape.en.softonic.com/ (Photoscape, functional editor)
http://photofiltre.free.fr/ (Photofiltre, claim to fame?)
http://www.artweaver.de/index.php?en_version (Artweaver, creates too)
http://www.freeserifsoftware.com (PhotoPlus6, claim to fame?)
http://www.vicman.net/ (Vicman, claim to fame?)
http://www.mediachance.com/dce/index.html (DigitalEnhancer, claim to
fame?)

NOT RECOMMENDED:
http://www.snapfire.com/ (Snapfire, suspect Corel bait-n-switchware)
 
Cribbed from another thread, here are the freeware digital photo editors.
Did we miss any?
Click to expand...
[snip]

I'm not adding to the list of freeware digital photo editors. But I'm
identifying freely-available tools that may be useful in combination
with such editors.

Example: Photoscape v3.0 (which is on the list) doesn't appear to
convert the X3F raw files from a Sigma SD14 camera. (I just tried it).
But ....

Convert that X3F to DNG using Adobe's (free) DNG Converter, and
PhotoScape can convert the DNG to JPEG, and edit it. So I suggest 2
free tools that may be useful in some cases:

Adobe's DNG Converter (comes packaged with ACR):
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html
DNG Recover Edges (to get a few extra pixels all round before
conversion):
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/contents/DNG-Recover-Edges.shtml
 
(free) Digital Enhancer:
The comparison chart is on the website. Here it is again. View with a
fixed pitch font:

Buyware Freeware

Single Image mode yes yes
Basic Enhancing yes yes
Advanced Enhancing yes No
Batch Processing yes No
Fast, responsive preview yes Partially
EXIF aware yes No
Resize option yes No
Optimize Size/Quality yes No
Can add Text to image yes No
Can add Date to image yes No
Loseless rotation yes No
Portrait De-Focus Smoother yes No
HotPixels Removal yes No
Blue Cast Removal yes No
Black Frame HP Eliminator yes No
Filter Simulator yes No
RAW support yes No
Keep Exif data in output yes No
Color Match Minolta to sRGB yes No
Click to expand...

The comparison chart merely shows that sometimes it's not a good idea to
know what you're missing. Digital Camera Enhancer was always intended to
be a one-trick pony (like several other freebie apps on the mediachance
website). And it's very good at what it does. I've never missed those
extra features - except for batch processing. Still, I don't consider
DCE to be crippled.

If you want a decent photo-editing/correction app that handles batch
processing, try Photomeister.
http://www.photomeister.com

Photomeister can do quite a bit more than DCE, but I found DCE's
automatic image-correction results to be more competent than any image
app I've used, freebie or not.
Which group? there are 4 in the ng field.
alt.comp.freeware

This thread is a good example why x-posting out of acf is usually a
bad idea.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I did not originate the x-posting.
 
(free) Digital Enhancer:
I'll move it to the not recommended section.
Click to expand...

Disrecommending an app that has received numerous high praises in acf
will make your list do more harm than good. I doubt the person calling
it crippled has ever used the app. That's just another reason why I find
your list useless.
 
if you search various freeware sites you'll find that a multitude of
The original point (which was somewhat contaminated) wasn't to
compile an exhaustive list of all the free windows photo editors but
to list the top handful of two four or five BEST free windows photo
editors.

I think we've accomplished our task!
Click to expand...

You've done no such thing. There are too many feature variations under
the umbrella of *photo editors* to narrow the BEST down to a field of
five. This is a *discussion* newsgroup. Software features of various
apps need to be *discussed* and recommended on a case by case basis. How
on earth do you think we managed before you got here?
 
I'll move it to the not recommended section.
Click to expand...

I agree with M.L on this...

Putting Digital Enhancer on to your "not recommended section" based
on the comments of one other poster who has never used it (by his own
admission) is unfair and will detract from the integrity of your list.

The point is that different users have different needs, and for some
DE will be just what they want. We can probably find shortcomings
for every image editing product, so it should be an issue of 'horses
for courses' not of 'which program has the most features'.

--
1.John Corliss says people should publish who they're filtering out:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/4be29402fbf31c0e
I don't like publicising such things but here's my list so far:
1,John Corliss 2,Franklin 3,Mike Dee (killfiled)

2.I do not killfile googlegroups posts.
 
Ron said:
A new one I got recently, called PhotoScape looks VERY good. Still
exploring its many features and options.
Looks like a keeper.
Click to expand...

http://www.photoscape.org/ps/main/index.php

??

--
John Corliss BS206. I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett, Bear
Bottoms, Hummingbird or proteanthread.
Due to all the spam coming from that service, I use NFilter to
filter out all posts from Google Groups.
No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, NAGWARE, share, spy, time-limited,
trial or web wares or warez for me, please.
 
You've done no such thing. There are too many feature variations under
the umbrella of *photo editors* to narrow the BEST down to a field of
five. This is a *discussion* newsgroup. Software features of various
apps need to be *discussed* and recommended on a case by case basis. How
on earth do you think we managed before you got here?
Click to expand...

Very well put.


--
1.John Corliss says people should publish who they're filtering out:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/4be29402fbf31c0e
I don't like publicising such things but here's my list so far:
1,John Corliss 2,Franklin 3,Mike Dee (killfiled)

2.I do not killfile googlegroups posts.
 
The original point (which was somewhat contaminated) wasn't to compile an
exhaustive list of all the free windows photo editors but to list the top
handful of two four or five BEST free windows photo editors.

I think we've accomplished our task!

Thanks everyone!
Click to expand...

No offense, but you OP failed to mention that you were limiting yourself
to MS platforms.
 
jon said:
True.
Click to expand...

Depending on how an individual user actually uses a program, the
'cripple' may be either insignificant, or 'hopeless'. If the crippling
is in the area a user really wants to use, then for him, it is
'hopelessly crippled', while another may not ever want to use that feature.
It's all in the user's perception, and needs.
 
Back
Top