Photoimpact VS Photoshop

[timtak]

Ulead Photoimpact is nearly 8 times less expensive than Adobe Photoshop. (Photoshop CS2 =$550, Photoimpact 10=$70 on Amazon now.) That is a saving of near $500.

I have never seen the need for a programme with more features than Photoimpact, so I have never felt the urget to fork out the sort of money that Adobe wants to charge.

But a lot of people seem to have Photoshop (how they got it is not clear!) and discussion on image processing related forums often revolves around the use of Photoshop. For that reason alone I am tempted to move but at the same time I don't want to waste money. I think that if it is just a case of a photoshop-herd thing then I will not change. But if there are real advantages to Photoshop, that I may make use of in the future, then I might consider it.

What are the comparative advantages of Photoshop and Photoimpact?

By the way, the Forum rules say

16. You may dicuss anything under the General Discussions as long as it is related to Video, Imaging, and DVD whether non-Ulead products are involved or not. This forums will also be monitored.

The poll -- which is really meant to be fun only -- asks if other members would purchase Photoshop *for the features* (not because it is a "standard"). The second response option is for those that believe that the advantages are minimal, and not worth the money.

From reading the forums I come up with
1) I hear that photoshop does "layers" as opposed to "objects." I guess that layers can contain several objects. This sounds like it could be useful. Sometimes I have wanted to change more than one object.

[Ron P.]

I don't have either program, however have used Photoshop. I do own Photo Elements 1, which is basically for photo ehancement.

The programs that I use are Paintshop Pro 9 and Corel Draw Graphics Suite 9. Corel is a very strong rivel to Photoshop, with PSP right behind. Both use layers. Corel now owns Jasc and has just released Corel Paint Shop Pro X (10).

I have tried to use PI, however couldn't get the Trial to install, and with all the problems I've read on various forums, I don't need it.

Would I shell out the money for Photoshop just because "everyone else" is using it? No. It is recoginzed as being the "standard" in the design arena, so sometimes people are pushed into using it. I think that's absurd.

There's my humble 2 cents....

[heinz-oz]

I have looked at both and still need someone to point out to me where the justification for the extra money can be found. RAW image manipulation was one area where I was tempted to look a PS, that has just been rectified by PI 11.

[Terry Stetler]

I have/use both but PhotoImpact 11 gets the vast majority of the work, especially when it comes to creating DVD menu's, lower thirds, bugs and other such images destined for video. It and Cool3D Production Studio.

[RWP]

I have used Photo Deluxe (which became Photoshop Elements) for over five years now, and so are very familiar with photo editing the Adobe way. I'll probably get PE 4.0 one of these days but would never pay all that $$$ for CS unless I won the lottery or needed it for employment.

I bought PI8.0 a few years ago, based on great reviews, but never got used to the Ulead methodology until the past few months. I'll probably buy PI11 in the next few months, since it adds features that make it more competitive with CS.

There are things I dislike with Photoshop AND things I dislike in PhotoImpact; but each of these programs ALSO have enough features that work well for me that I will continue to use them both.

If Ulead is interested in creating an "Elements killer", they need to make Object and Layer management more automated, and need uniformity in the control boxes and adjustment sliders for ALL processes and filters.

My 2 cents...

[VikingAnimations]

I've Photoshop 5.5 and CS2, plus PhotoImpact XL and Paint Shop Pro 7. Each of these have features I like, and others I dislike. Depends on what I need to do.

Most of the time I do simple editing with Ulead GIF Animator 5, believe it or not...

[J_fike]

One advantage of Photoshop, which (to me) doesn't justify the increased price, is most tutorials dealing with 3D modeling (post work, UV mapping, etc) use Photoshop. That makes it hard to follow (trying to make PI work like the tutorial instructions using Photoshop.

I wish I had the time to start a "how to do this Photoshop task in PhotoImpact" tutorial. But then I would need Photoshop.

[lonely_road]

I have never seen good artwork made in Photoimpact.
Please look at this and tell me would you do this in Photoimpact?
http://www.myart.pl/gallery.php?m=9&a=view&id=4169

[DomM4Y]

Ulead Photoimpact is nearly 8 times less expensive than Adobe Photoshop. (Photoshop CS2 =$550, Photoimpact 10=$70 on Amazon now.) That is a saving of near $500.

I have never seen the need for a programme with more features than Photoimpact, so I have never felt the urget to fork out the sort of money that Adobe wants to charge.

Raw numbers don't always tell the whole story. If I had the opportunity to start all over again as a digital imaging neophyte I would gladly spring the extra few bucks it would cost me for PS just for the benefit of the vastly superior documentation provided by Adobe. I can not begin to estimate the number of hours of frustration spent trying to figure things out. Not so much what they do, but more when to use them, how they work together and many of the finer points. Even if I conservatively value my time at $20/hr, I would be willing to wager that I would saved a bundle by going for PS to start to with.

Much of what I now know about PI is thanks in no small part to finally getting access to a PS manual! Go figure.

I have to say that by not investing in proper, comprehensive documentation of its product, Ulead is doing itself a major disservice.

[sjj1805]

I suppose it all boils down to what software you acquired first.
I came by Adobe Photoshop (forget which version now) years ago as it was bundled with something probably a scanner or may have even been one of those 'free' programs when you buy a new computer. So you get to learn how it works and keep up with newer versions.

There are even differences between the top of the range Adobe Photoshop CS and another one of their pieces of software - mine was bundled with a new scanner - Adobe Photoshop Elements.

There is something in Adobe PS Elements that isn't in CS - a quick fix button. My new scanner was purchased specifically to enable me to scan negatives. The quick fix with elements was amazing on those negatives. Something I could not mirror with CS.

Every piece of software has its drawbacks. You cannot make custom Ulead DVD Menu's with Adobe Products because they do not read or save ufo files.

When I created my tutorial here:
http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic.php?t=9664
I used Photo Impact. Here I saw a number of advantages that Photo impact had over Photoshop.

I noticed that (If you follow my tutorial exactly as I described my steps) that the copy/paste routine would paste the object exactly where it was intended to go. for this particular project it was certainly easier than doing it with Photoshop.

To sum up, Each package has its advantages and disadvantages.
When deciding which to use you have to decide upon the use to which it is being put for that particular project.

Sort of like which program shall I use to edit this video file, VS9 / MSP8 / Womble.

[Helge]

I agree with sjj1805. I also had first PS bundled with a nikon scanner and upgraded. I am not an expert of PS (who ever is?), but even as I had also PI, I still used most often PS, simply to avoid working with two complex programms. Now I do not have PS CS (my latest version is PS 7), but I upgraded to PI 11. So you could say I am just starting learning PI.

There are some similarities in handling, but also differences. Probably everything which can be done with one of them could be done also with the other. My impression is, that with PI it is easier to do some usual image corrections (like lens distorsion) while with PS artistic work might be easier.

I wished that some retouch operations would be further improved. E.g. yesterday I tried stiching scans. My images have a wide overlapping area, so there would be enough information to calculate color adjustment, rotation, zoom (all of which are minimal, but visible). Neighter PS nore PI seem to be willing of doing that. Retouching with retaining texture does also not really work. With no programm I found a way to clone so that gradient is fitting at the edges. (What I want is: fiil this shape (circle, rectangle, ...) with a smooth gradient / texture pattern with no visible transition on any edge.)

[Helge]

Addentum to my last post:
I rescanned the images very carefully. Now stitching with PI worked much better. So this is a big PLUS for PI (even if it could be improved), since PS does not have a special stich method.

On the other hand PI's crop tool makes me crazy. Even so the crop tool of both programms seem to be nearly identical at first glance, PS's is much more comfortable: While drawing with the tool, PS does fast scroll (if necessary), whereas PI scrolls very slow and you have to permanently struggle the mouse. With PS you can adjust the crop borders on any point, while with PI you have first to find the handles (which are often off screen!) and hit them very accurately.

Conclusion: it's best to have both (and eventually also some others) and switch between them while working.

[sjj1805]

Photoshop CS includes a stitch method. I am still waiting for my download link for PI 11 so am looking forward to being able to compare them with each other.

Steve J

[Helge]

Maybe it seems unfair that I compared the newest version of PI with an older of PS, but stiching images was allready available in PI 8 (or even earlier, I dont know).
The stich image dialog contains two buttons "deskew". Unfortunatly they are neighter in the manual nor in the online help explained. From the small icons I suspect, that they could cause some rotation. I played a little bit with them, but did not recognize any benefit. Perhaps I needed a CS manual ?

[alan wells]

I have been delighted with PIXL but in the belief that you should always keep up to date with the latest levels of software, I bought PI11, after all, software authors normally devote their efforts to support of the latest products. Sadly, ULead have ignored all the comments on these boards!

I have "binned" PI11, I shall continue to use PIXL but I will never, never ever, buy another Ulead product!!

Alan Wells