PSP versus PSE and PS

[Cassel]

I am looking into making a little video of various advantages of PSP over the Adobe counterparts.
I know that some (or many) PSP users are either past Adobe product users or still current users.
I am not familiar enough with PS and PSE to be able to compare the two myself.

I know of some advantages like these:
- picture tubes
- ability to undo selective commands
- ability to create custom menus
- ability to place any command icon in other locations (like in the layer palette)
- ability to create vectors (which is totally missing from PSE! Imagine that!)

Can anyone add to this list? Commands, tools, functions, features, anything.
I would also like a few ideas of what "processes" might be clearly faster (fewer clicks) in PSP than in Adobe.
I don't want simple "preferences" like (I like to have this function work I this way instead of that way in Adobe).

At this point, I don't need a list of things Adobe has more/better than PSP, but what PSP has more/better than Adobe.

Thanks in advance.

[photodrawken]

Can anyone add to this list?

When I abandoned PSE a couple of years ago, I also ended my participation in its user forum by explaining my reasons for switching to PSPX5, and I said at the time that PSP's Editor was "a thousand times better" than PSE's Editor.

That's still true, despite PSP's problems and limitations.

The main reasons:
1. PSE's Editor has almost zero support for 16 bit per pixel images. This is increasingly important as consumers begin shooting in RAW.
2. PSE has zero control over type, such as kerning, tracking, baseline shift, etc., etc.
3. PSE does not have a Curves adjustment.
4. PSE has only a few adjustment layers available.
5. PSE does not allow saving the parameters of the adjustments it does have.
6. The PSP User Interface is much more customizable; and the PSE interface, besides being ugly as sin, wastes a lot of screen space with its overly large icons and unused space between icons.

Don't feel too smug, though, PSP fans. As many of you know, I've switched to PhotoLine as my primary image editing application because it's a thousand times better than PSP....

[Cassel]

Don't feel too smug, though, PSP fans. As many of you know, I've switched to PhotoLine as my primary image editing application because it's a thousand times better than PSP....

Thanks, but don't worry, I am not looking specifically at image editing, but it will be in the context of digital scrapbooking and designing for scrapbooking.

[photodrawken]

Thanks, but don't worry, I am not looking specifically at image editing, but it will be in the context of digital scrapbooking and designing for scrapbooking.

Then I don't think a compelling case can be made for any software vs. another, since that context is so simplistic that most of the necessary features are available everywhere, including free software....

[hartpaul]

I will only consider Edit mode as Manage is more comparable with Lightroom in organisation and Adjust is more a watered down Edit.

PSP has a very useful screen capture which can also capture the location of the cursor.
PSP is so easy that you can clone with one hand tied behind your back. Try cloning in Photoshop with one hand.
PSP Erase tool can unerase if made mistakes using right click drag.
PSP a number of tools can do one function with left click and opposite with right click including Lighten / Darken, Dodge / Burn, Soften / Sharpen, Saturation / Desaturation,
PSP image straighten tool is so much simpler than straightening an image in Photoshop.
PSP choosing a brush color or text color is 1 click while in photoshop it is 3 clicks. You can choose a foreground and background colour in just a left and right click while in photoshop you are up to 6 clicks.
PSP has coloured tool icons making it easier to locate tools.
PSP text can have a different stroke and fill color to give text with one color for the outline and another color for the inside. A quick search showed not available in Phootoshop as there is no Stroke width feature.
PSP window matches image size when reducing, you have to separately make the window smaller in Photoshop.
PSP you can save an image over top of a copy with two clicks (Click the X and hit Enter) in Photoshop you get a dialog box, hit yes to save then goes to the save quality box before you can hit OK to do final save.
IN PSP this would be like bringing up the save options box every time you want to do a save even though there will be no change with a group of images. IN PSP we can set those options and they are kept unless we physically go to change them. PSP saves a click per image.
PSP has had customisable menus for some time, and when I looked that up fro Photoshop it said that Photoshop has just introduced the ability to customise Menus (as distinct from customise shortcut keys) in CS6. PSP had that long ago.

Also found a couple of videos on youtube with some comparisons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLxOmtK1Eys which points out the Time Machine effect is unique to PSP.
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWtGXTxlyw0 which suggests that even the simplest things are so much more complicated under Photoshop.

Also in that first video the person complains that PSP took longer to restore because it did not have a guide to show where the clone tool was at in the image. She had obviously not heard of precise cursors.
This points out that when doing a comparison you probably need to do comparisons with someone that either knows each program expertly or two people that know their different programs expertly. I have looked at Photoshop a number of times and in so many operations PSP is faster and more convenient. It seems that most people that use Photoshop were told it was the best and never looked at alternatives thus they are ignorant of other features that Photoshop should have for its price. Many will not need the unique features that Photoshop provides , Ever!!.

Ken has mentioned Photoline as a successor to booth and I suppose I will have to have a look at that as well, but it will have to be very good to compete with PSP in the specific features I use regularly.

[photodrawken]

Ken has mentioned Photoline as a successor to booth and I suppose I will have to have a look at that as well, but it will have to be very good to compete with PSP in the specific features I use regularly.

Just to be clear about my opinions, I'm not comparing the "big" Photoshop to the other programs -- Photoshop has a huge number of features, and a correspondingly huge price. The proper comparison is between the $80 image editing applications.

[MarkZ]

I've been using PSP for a number of reasons and investigated PSE just this year when a version came with a tablet I received. I've had no experience with real versions of Photoshop. In particular I've been experimenting in the last few weeks in order to learn enough to help a friend figure out how to use layers.

Some comments based on my perception, what I've been able to figure out:

- I find PSE interface terrible. The font is very small and there is insufficient contrast to make out the values, for example brush size.
- it takes for ever for the description to appear when hovering over a tool.
- far less flexibility in masks.
- help is dreadful. I've had very little success in finding suitable information.
- I don't like Organizer in PSE. Manage in PSP works far better in that you get immediate access to your folders. In PSE they have to be imported, even if you want to use one only once.

There are some nice features in PSE, of course, but not even close to making me want to switch.

[Cassel]

Thanks all for your input.
Keep them coming. It will help me make a more accurate "comparison" to show off PSP's features to non-PSP users.

[brucet]

Here's a site I often refer folks to. It would be nice to see an up todate version. A lot of work for someone but it would make for some interesting comparisons.

http://video-books.net/paintshoppro/tut ... ionary.htm

I know PSP is often unfairly compared to Photoshop. But that's a fact of life. Many folks simply chose to ignore the $$$ difference and believe that they are somehow in the same category. The problem is often the terminology used to describe a program. Just because they can both 'do' photo work doesn't mean they are the same.

regards

[Joelle]

I wouldn't touch anything Adobe with a barge pole, yes, I know, it's irrational.
For me PSP delivers very well and should be better appreciated, even if there are a few bugs now and again
Almost every PS user I know seems to have an inflated opinion of himself, just because he uses PS.
Hmm, that doesn't get me excited at all.
Hartpaul 's list is very excellent, well summed up! I'll second that

Joelle

[hartpaul]

I think some people say we can't compare PSP to Photoshop because of the rare features that Photoshop has. The main point I would like to make is that the 80-90 % of functions that most people will use in editing photos , scrap booking, are more efficient, easier to use, intuitive in PSP than in Photoshop. Sure Photoshop has gradient mapping, clipping masks, history brush and other features, but how often does the average person use that feature.
When you look at a dictionary comparing the photoshop commands with the equivalent in PSP you can see a 1 to 1 match for a majority of commands. I have seen a lot of people that have this formula one racing car (Photoshop) but don't know how to drive it any better than a mini (PSP but perhaps a better vehicle would be more relevant) . Both vehicles will get them to the shopping centres and also on trips at the speed limit. The racing car only outperforms in specialised conditions (the race track) .
I suppose the question could be asked of the average user , what do you use Photoshop for that could not be done in Paintshop Pro or other programs. I heard of one person in a camera club that was Photoshop all the way and was heard to comment at one time, 'I hope to learn about layers next.' What was this person doing with photoshop that could not have been done in a simpler to understand program. Perhaps a lot have heard "Its the best" and like the hero character Edward in the movie Pretty Woman , always has the best just for vanity reasons.

Cassel, when you do your videos I would suggest doing them as short visual comparisons of 1 or two activities at a time rather than make it too complex. Have a whole series of videos. That way you can have the advantage of individual sections as well as grouping them together. You could advertise with a lot of small segnments of youtube where people arr more likely to come across them than just one segment. When I searched for comparisions I could only find 2 videos there.

[Cassel]

Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, I am hoping to make short videos to compare individual features.

I love the input of anyone who knows Photoshop or PSE more than I do.

[hartpaul]

Some additional adds to my list above.
PSP you can drag a layer thumb onto an empty part of the desktop and produce an image copy there.
PSP you can right click copy a full image or Control C copy and in both cases paste as a new image using right click or Control V while in Photoshop you have to do a control A first because Photoshop does not automatically assume that you want to copy the whole image which is the default in PSP. An extra tw keys to be pressed to get the same result as in PSP.
PSP uses the right click context functions to the fullest while Photoshop almost ignores the right click function (it does have quite a few rightclick context menus but in other parts ignores the right click) .
Will edit this to add more as I come across them.

[photodrawken]

I'm in a very bad mood tonight because the Blackhawks lost to the Maple Leafs, so I'll take the bait and play a bit of devil's advocate:

I think some people say we can't compare PSP to Photoshop because of the rare features that Photoshop has..

Nope. It's pointless to try to deny the fact that Photoshop has many more features than PSP. One can try to minimize Photoshop's rich feature set by claiming its features are "rare" (whatever that's supposed to mean...), but doing so just proves the fact that PS far exceeds PSP in terms of function.

I'll say it again, PSP's Adobe competitor is PSE; and if one can't accept that, then doing any "comparisons" between PS and PSP will be laughable and only make any potential PSP customer say "So what? I'm looking to buy the much cheaper PSE."

The main point I would like to make is that the 80-90 % of functions that most people will use in editing photos , scrap booking, are more efficient, easier to use, intuitive in PSP than in Photoshop..

Unless one can provide research to back up that statement, it will only be seen as fanboi hyperbole and ignored.

Sure Photoshop has gradient mapping, clipping masks, history brush and other features, but how often does the average person use that feature..

Quite often, it would seem, since Adobe claims PSE has averaged about 1 million users per version.

Oh, and by the by, PSE has those features and also has Content-Aware Fill and Content-Aware Move and a real Gradient tool and Refine Edge for object extraction and excellent layer styles.

One can blather on and on about "It's only two clicks instead of three clicks", but once someone has tried PSE's Content-Aware Fill and the real Gradient tool, it's game over....

[Cassel]

Ken, I really didn't start this thread to find out which is better between PS and PSE and PSP . I just wanted to find out WHICH tools or features are better/easier or even just present in PSP and NOT in the Adobe competitor. I don't plan on convincing the world that PSP is better. We all know that some things PSP does better (or just does), than PS and some things PS does better than PSP.

I don't want to get into the common "heated discussion" between Corel and Adobe products. I only want facts on what PSP has to offer. I want to show Adobe users that PSP ALSO has things to offer so that PSP might also sit alongside Photoshop or PSE as another tool in the toolbox. Thanks for your input on those points, but please, let's keep it to those points, like you did initially.