Photoshop Elements - is it really this bad?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roger S.
  • Start date Start date
R

Roger S.

Elements is a scaled down version of Photoshop and inherits Photoshop's
look, so don't expect it to look like word. The photo editing features
are the heart of the program, and I think they're better and offer more
control than Microsoft PictureIt or similar consumer programs. I use
the full version of Photoshop, myself.

You don't seem to be interested in what Elements does best, but rather
secondary features, like organizing pictures and resizing the windows,
so use the program best suited to your needs.
 
I just had a look at Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 that came 'free'
with my V700 scanner. Is this really supposed to be one of the best
programs around (or even a subset of it)? I'm very unimpressed.

The 'Organizer' takes a long time to load and doesn't look as good
as Picasa which loads much more quickly.

All the various parts use a non-standard 'look' which is simply
confusing (why, oh why, oh why do so many programs do this?).

The 'Editor' comes up in a non resizeable window! It occupies the
whole of my screen whether I like it or not. For ?$£!$&**&^'s
sake, Windows is a multitasking, multi-window system, if I can't
resize windows it make a nonsense of the whole point of a GUI
system.



I think I'll just ignore it then.
Click to expand...

Chris,

I use Photoshop (6.0) but thought Elements looked pretty good when I
got a copy of version 2.0 with my scanner. I'd like to take a look at
version 3 if you're really not going to use it. If interested in
selling it cheaply, drop me a note at: charliehoffp at yahoo dot com.
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
Message board:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec?htx=board&r=rw&p=surnames.hoffpauir
Mail list:
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/h/hoffpauir.html
DNA project:
<http://www.familytreedna.com/(153dme45ewxtrs45rzxk5z2x)/public/Hoffpauir/index.aspx>
 
I just had a look at Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 that came 'free'
with my V700 scanner. Is this really supposed to be one of the best
programs around (or even a subset of it)? I'm very unimpressed.

The 'Organizer' takes a long time to load and doesn't look as good
as Picasa which loads much more quickly.

All the various parts use a non-standard 'look' which is simply
confusing (why, oh why, oh why do so many programs do this?).

The 'Editor' comes up in a non resizeable window! It occupies the
whole of my screen whether I like it or not. For ?$£!$&**&^'s
sake, Windows is a multitasking, multi-window system, if I can't
resize windows it make a nonsense of the whole point of a GUI
system.


I think I'll just ignore it then.
 
Roger S. said:
Elements is a scaled down version of Photoshop and inherits Photoshop's
look, so don't expect it to look like word.
Click to expand...

I don't expect it to look like Word in particular, I expect it to look
like most other Windows applications with the same frame, icon types,
functions, etc. so that I don't have to relearn the fundamentals of
using an applicaiton in windows. Why does it have a non-standard
frame etc.? This adds nothing except confusion.
The photo editing features
are the heart of the program, and I think they're better and offer more
control than Microsoft PictureIt or similar consumer programs. I use
the full version of Photoshop, myself.
Click to expand...

Yes, and my fundamental problem with the Editor window is that it
isn't resizeable and thus breaks one of the fundamental ways that a
GUI works. WHY can't I resize the window so that I can use other
programs at the same time - that's the whole point of a GUI system, we
might as well go back to DOS otherwise.
You don't seem to be interested in what Elements does best, but rather
secondary features, like organizing pictures and resizing the windows,
so use the program best suited to your needs.
Click to expand...
Resizing isn't a 'secondary feature', it's fundamental to any program
that is going to live with others in Windows. It's like having a road
vehicle that won't turn round corners, it's fundamental to the places
where you use a vehicle. You then have different sorts of vehicles to
do different things (cars, buses, lorries/trucks, whatever) but for
them to work they *all* have to be able to steer. To my mind being
able to resize a window is like steering.
 
I just had a look at Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 that came 'free'
with my V700 scanner. Is this really supposed to be one of the best
programs around (or even a subset of it)? I'm very unimpressed.

The 'Organizer' takes a long time to load and doesn't look as good
as Picasa which loads much more quickly.

All the various parts use a non-standard 'look' which is simply
confusing (why, oh why, oh why do so many programs do this?).

The 'Editor' comes up in a non resizeable window! It occupies the
whole of my screen whether I like it or not. For ?$£!$&**&^'s
sake, Windows is a multitasking, multi-window system, if I can't
resize windows it make a nonsense of the whole point of a GUI
system.


I think I'll just ignore it then.
Click to expand...


Yeh. You just carry on and do that.

Roy G
 
I don't know why anyone else commented on this, but usenet@ is using tin
on Linux. As such, usenet@'s complaints about "nonstandard look" seem
really strange. If usenet@ is a Linux user, he's obviously familiar
with the fact that GTK+ programs like Gimp look different from Qt
programs like Konqueror and Athena programs like xterm, so different
widgets shouldn't faze him at all.

Also, Windows programs built by larger companies often use nonstandard
(and difficult-to-change) widget themes. I'd guess this is done to
"establish a brand identity" or something.

Seems idiotic to me as well, but you've got to think like an entry-level
user (Photoslop Elements's target market) here. Many less experienced
users have *all* their GUI programs maximized by default. This may be
because that reduces the appearance of clutter, or it may be because
they don't multitask very well. And there are some programs that need
as much screen space as you can throw at them (IDEs, CAD programs,
games, and movie players at least). Image editors may fall into that
category.

That and I've noticed many Windows programs make windows non-resizable
when they don't need to be. The system-provided "Open File" and "Open
Directory" dialogs aren't resizable, and they're awfully small compared
to the 1400x1050 or 1600x1200 screens many people have now. (Or the
programmers and their managers were on crack and working 15-hour days to
meet deadline, and they made stupid decisions. That explains a lot of
things about a lot of programs, come to think of it....)
I notice that no one is actually defending the way that PhotoShop
elements works. OK, so it may be the only horse in town, but that
doesn't make the way it works right or good.
Click to expand...

Eh. Most people hate learning new stuff. So when people are familiar
with N, they'll ignore or vigorously defend N's deficiencies, instead of
trying to fix them (or in the case of proprietary stuff, asking the
manufacturer to fix them). You can see this in your local political
system, your local Mac/x86 flamewar, and your local vim/emacs flamewar.
 
Roy G said:
Yeh. You just carry on and do that.
Click to expand...
I notice that no one is actually defending the way that PhotoShop
elements works. OK, so it may be the only horse in town, but that
doesn't make the way it works right or good.
 
I just had a look at Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 that came 'free'
with my V700 scanner. Is this really supposed to be one of the best
programs around (or even a subset of it)? I'm very unimpressed.

The 'Organizer' takes a long time to load and doesn't look as good
as Picasa which loads much more quickly.

All the various parts use a non-standard 'look' which is simply
confusing (why, oh why, oh why do so many programs do this?).

The 'Editor' comes up in a non resizeable window! It occupies the
whole of my screen whether I like it or not. For ?$£!$&**&^'s
sake, Windows is a multitasking, multi-window system, if I can't
resize windows it make a nonsense of the whole point of a GUI
system.
Click to expand...

I don't have any problem resizeing the editer part PSE 3, which is the
only part I use BTW.

It also looks like a standard app to me.

For a very low cost (free in your case) editer it is pretty good. And
I take photoshop plugins which is pretty handy. It also does 16
bit/color editing and it can import most raw formats, it uses the same
raw converter that is in the full version of Photoshop.

If I where you I would speed some time with it before dismissing it,
you might find you like it.

Scott
 
I just had a look at Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 that came 'free'
with my V700 scanner. Is this really supposed to be one of the best
programs around (or even a subset of it)? I'm very unimpressed.

The 'Organizer' takes a long time to load and doesn't look as good
as Picasa which loads much more quickly.

All the various parts use a non-standard 'look' which is simply
confusing (why, oh why, oh why do so many programs do this?).

The 'Editor' comes up in a non resizeable window! It occupies the
whole of my screen whether I like it or not. For ?$£!$&**&^'s
sake, Windows is a multitasking, multi-window system, if I can't
resize windows it make a nonsense of the whole point of a GUI
system.


I think I'll just ignore it then.
Click to expand...
Chris,

As long as you don't have the window maximized you can grab the lower
right-hand corner and make it smaller. It does seem to have a fixed
minimum size though.

I just did this on my copy of Elements 3 so if you'd like to see a
screen shot, post a functioning E-Mail address and I'll send you one.

Hope this helps,
Dave
 
Dances With Crows said:
I don't know why anyone else commented on this, but usenet@ is using tin
on Linux. As such, usenet@'s complaints about "nonstandard look" seem
really strange. If usenet@ is a Linux user, he's obviously familiar
with the fact that GTK+ programs like Gimp look different from Qt
programs like Konqueror and Athena programs like xterm, so different
widgets shouldn't faze him at all.
Click to expand...
I don't use a huge range of stuff on Linux but anyway the window
manager tends to dictate the basic look and feel there and I use the
same window manager all the time so my frames, buttons, etc. are
pretty consistent across all applications.

You seem generally in agreement with me about Elements though! :-)
 
I just had a look at Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0 that came 'free'
with my V700 scanner. Is this really supposed to be one of the best
programs around (or even a subset of it)? I'm very unimpressed.

The 'Organizer' takes a long time to load and doesn't look as good
as Picasa which loads much more quickly.

All the various parts use a non-standard 'look' which is simply
confusing (why, oh why, oh why do so many programs do this?).

The 'Editor' comes up in a non resizeable window! It occupies the
whole of my screen whether I like it or not. For ?$£!$&**&^'s
sake, Windows is a multitasking, multi-window system, if I can't
resize windows it make a nonsense of the whole point of a GUI
system.


I think I'll just ignore it then.
Click to expand...

Elements does take time to load and makes a pretense about how difficult
it is to load with the progress text on the splash screen. Getting past
that, you have a completely configurable photo editor that will satisfy
all but the professional photo figeter. It supports most of the plugins
that Photoshop CS does at a fraction of the cost.

Q
 
Many less experienced
users have *all* their GUI programs maximized by default.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with experience but with personal preference.

My observation is exactly the opposite. Less experienced users tend to
spend most of their time arranging windows into "pretty layouts" and
generally waste time constantly fiddling with such cosmetic and
unimportant things rather than actually use what's in the windows.

<pedant more on>

Either way, window size and position preference is neither a function
of experience nor lack thereof. There's simply no link between them.

This may be
because that reduces the appearance of clutter, or it may be because
they don't multitask very well.
Click to expand...

Or because some people (fx: raises hand!) like to see as much
information as possible (instead of fiddling with scrolling bars) and
when they want to switch tasks they use a shortcut rather then leave
the keyboard and mess with the mouse. On Windows that may be Alt/Tab
on HP Unix (if memory serves) it's Control/#, etc. but the bottom line
is window size and position are simply a case of personal preference.

Which means any program with fixed-size windows violates one of the
fundamental prime directives of software design.

Anyway... real men don't even use windows! They use a command line
interface! ;o)

Don.
 
I have four editors on my computer: Minolta Dimage Master, Elements
3.0, Microsoft Digital Image Suite 2006, and Corel (formerly jasc)
Paint shop Pro X. With the exception of Dimage Master, I can't claim
to have really mastered any of them, but i do find the other three all
have their good points and all have features the others either lack or
make harder to use. (Elements and PSP also take plug-ins; I forget
whether Microsoft does).

Unless you're prepared to run out and buy a better editor, I'd suggest
taking the time to really learn Elements--not just because you have it,
but because you'll develop some good skills which you can transfer
(after a brief relearning period) to any other program you get.

When and if you do get another program, you will probably find yourself
biased toward Elements, as that's the one you know. But after you get
over that, you'll probably find some things the new one is better at,
some things the old one is. It's like having a well-stocked workbench,
where you rarely discard a tool, just build up your collection.

As to not being able to resize the window, I think you'll find that the
bigger the window, the easier it is to see just what you're editing.
So why would you want to resize it down? For that matter, editing gets
intense enough that you'll probably not want to have other windows open
while you do it.
 
Hey, you're right! :-) The first really useful answer! A classic
case of why the non-standard interface is bad, every normal Windows
application allows you to grab any part of the frame and resize it.
For some reason Elements only allows you to resize it from the bottom
RH corner.
Click to expand...

That sounds very strange! My copy of Elements 2.0 allows you to resize
the window from anywhere.... I wonder why they changed it on 3.0, and
also wonder if it's the same way on 4.0? I tried downloading the 4.0
demo, but can't access the Adobe web site. I don't know if it's
DirecWay that's blocking me, or if Adobe site is just down.
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
Message board:
http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec?htx=board&r=rw&p=surnames.hoffpauir
Mail list:
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/h/hoffpauir.html
DNA project:
<http://www.familytreedna.com/(153dme45ewxtrs45rzxk5z2x)/public/Hoffpauir/index.aspx>
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote:
[Various things]

I have used and do use some other picture editing software, so using
Elements is just an 'add on' rather than a first program.
As to not being able to resize the window, I think you'll find that the
bigger the window, the easier it is to see just what you're editing.
So why would you want to resize it down? For that matter, editing gets
intense enough that you'll probably not want to have other windows open
while you do it.
Click to expand...
How about if I want to look at a folder/directory to choose picture?
How about if I happen to want to see if any new mail is arriving? How
about a thousand other things I might want to do. The whole point of a
GUI is to aloow you to see and do different things on the same screen.
Cutting and pasting bits of pictures and text about the place
virtually dictates that you have mulitple windows open, having to pop
windows up and own to do it makes it incredibly clumsy.

If Elements is usable on (say) a 1024x768 screen then it can work well
on a portion of my 1600x1200 screen and allow me to see other things
on other parts of the screen.
 
Dave said:
Chris,

As long as you don't have the window maximized you can grab the lower
right-hand corner and make it smaller. It does seem to have a fixed
minimum size though.

I just did this on my copy of Elements 3 so if you'd like to see a
screen shot, post a functioning E-Mail address and I'll send you one.
Click to expand...
Hey, you're right! :-) The first really useful answer! A classic
case of why the non-standard interface is bad, every normal Windows
application allows you to grab any part of the frame and resize it.
For some reason Elements only allows you to resize it from the bottom
RH corner.

Thanks anyway, now I can at least resize the window and get on with
learning more. Yet *another* reason for resizing the window, I can
have a help file, FAQ or HowTo visible at the same time as I can see
the whole of the Elements window while I play and learn.
 
Hey, you're right! :-) The first really useful answer! A classic
case of why the non-standard interface is bad, every normal Windows
application allows you to grab any part of the frame and resize it.
For some reason Elements only allows you to resize it from the bottom
RH corner.
Click to expand...

Mine lets me do it from bottom, side, or bottom RH corner, but the
positioning of the cursor is critical for the side and bottom.

You can also select "Tile" windows from the task bar and then resize
them to suit.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
 
That sounds very strange! My copy of Elements 2.0 allows you to resize
the window from anywhere.... I wonder why they changed it on 3.0, and
also wonder if it's the same way on 4.0? I tried downloading the 4.0
demo, but can't access the Adobe web site. I don't know if it's
DirecWay that's blocking me, or if Adobe site is just down.
Charlie Hoffpauir
Click to expand...

2.0 looks like a windows app [i.e., it uses windows appearance settings].
How sensible -- play nice with the environment you're running in.

3.0 looks like a mac app [you know -- 'I don't give a damn what your system
colors are, I'll use air-brushed silver and the hell with your defaults'.
Think of itunes.]

However, 3.0 will still resize from all corners, so long as the window size
toggle icon [center of the three in the upper right] is showing a single
window [i.e., not maximized]. If it is showing two overlaid windows, then
it is already maximized, and cannot be resized -- but that's just standard
window behavior.
 
SamSez said:
That sounds very strange! My copy of Elements 2.0 allows you to resize
the window from anywhere.... I wonder why they changed it on 3.0, and
also wonder if it's the same way on 4.0? I tried downloading the 4.0
demo, but can't access the Adobe web site. I don't know if it's
DirecWay that's blocking me, or if Adobe site is just down.
Charlie Hoffpauir
Click to expand...

2.0 looks like a windows app [i.e., it uses windows appearance settings].
How sensible -- play nice with the environment you're running in.

3.0 looks like a mac app [you know -- 'I don't give a damn what your system
colors are, I'll use air-brushed silver and the hell with your defaults'.
Think of itunes.]

However, 3.0 will still resize from all corners, so long as the window size
toggle icon [center of the three in the upper right] is showing a single
window [i.e., not maximized]. If it is showing two overlaid windows, then
it is already maximized, and cannot be resized -- but that's just standard
window behavior.
Click to expand...
I can't get my 3.0 to resize from all corners, only when I use the
bottom RH corner as the earlier poster suggested. It's only that
corner that has a little 'stippled' marker to click on to resize it.

.... and no, my Elements 3.0 is set to 'full screen'.
 
Back
Top