The following is offered as one person opinion on continuous improvement and a list of some things I hope to be considered as part of v9. In this field ACDSee, IMHO, offers the best option. (This is a tribute to the ACDSee product.) I must state up front, workflow is my primary hot-button when selecting any tool. My plan is to keep ACDSee as a part of the workflow for a long time. There are probably another 20-40 that I have removed from consideration for one reason or another. While at the same time, reducing my workflow through the efficiencies of integration These are only the external editors that I have decided to license. However, I offer the following thoughts on what ACDSee could improve that would allow me to reduce or eliminate "external editors". Of course, workflows and methods can be very personal.
Basically, I have done this as a thinly disguised "new feature request" to the ACDSee team. I was quite happy until Nikon decided to decapitate the NX2 products into a SilkyPix workflow.Īfter significant work, I have decided to write a post about the "External Editors" I use with ACDSee and why I use them. FWIW, my previous workflow used Nikon Capture NX-2 /ViewNX2 + NIK Collection. I committed my library of 150,000 images to ACDSee about 4 months ago. Thus after much research of LR, DXO, RT, PSP, and probably 15 other applications. (Comparable to GIMP/UFRAW at many levels) I have no desire to move a tree or change the sky. The only feature that seems truly unique is content aware and the workflow. Used mostly for content aware, moving objects, and changing backgrounds. * Photoshop / ACR / Bridge - industry gold standard bit level editor and RAW converter. * Lightroom and operation over a network. Why? Because of the crappy way that LR seems to want to work with combined network and local files. So it seems difficult to decide against that workflow, but I decided long ago to do so anyway. It is well known the Adobe suite is the perceived gold standard for photography.
0 kommentar(er)
