Why buy (or rent) Photoshop CC????

[Merlin66]

Following from discussions on another thread.....

For astronomical processing why buy Photoshop CC????

What can it do that other dedicated astro imaging programs can't do - just as well??

The prices for software like Maxim, Imagingplus, AstroArt etc. surely include sufficient pre and post processing capabilities??

What do you think?

[r3i]

I guess it attracts a lot of folks (including myself) because so many others already use it and therefore there's lots of online help to be had.  Also plenty of astro related plug-ins are available for it - though admittedly a lot of these are to provide functionality that the likes of PixInsight have already built-in.

However, I certainly would not have got it without coming across an old CS3 version at an almost reasonable price.

[Owmuchonomy]

I see your point. I pay monthly for PS CC but then I use it a lot for non- astro and my daughter uses it for studies. For me that justifies the £9 a month charge.

[ollypenrice]

I find it essential. The kind of tools available in AstroArt are primitive global things. I find layers essential. Pixinsight works by masking, which I don't like because I can never get enough control over the mask. So, for me, the joy of Photoshop comes from its layers, selection tools and the eraser. This is where I do all the cosmetic finishing of an image and its an environment which suits my way of thinking and which I enjoy using because I can see what I'm doing. I find that working with the all numerical PI interface feels like mending a mechanical watch in gloves. I haven't tried Images Plus.

An old copy of CS3 is all you need and they come up at reasonable prices.

Another plus is that it is so widely used that imagers can easily share techniques. Ps is a lingua franca, really.

I think Adobe are greedy but I like Photoshop. In fact I love it!

Olly

[Merlin66]

Olly,

What about PaintShopPro for layers, selection tools and eraser - tenth of the price and probably just as functional....

Why don't the "professional" astro imaging programs offer the same capacity???

[PeterCPC]

I use Paintshop Pro V5 and it works for me.

Peter

[tony210]

Hi - I love Photoshop for its layers masks  and tools- eraser, history etc. - I only have PS3 but its great !- best wishes -Tony

[GuillermoBarrancos]

Olly,

What about PaintShopPro for layers, selection tools and eraser - tenth of the price and probably just as functional....

Why don't the "professional" astro imaging programs offer the same capacity???

Paintshop Pro is a very basic photo editing program. It competes with Adobe Lightroom.

PhotoShop CC is in a completely different leage with a vast superior toolset. Much more Advanced.

It's like comparing Microsoft Paint to Corel Painter X3. MS Paint is free and Corel Painter X3 costs 400 dollars.

[ollypenrice]

Olly,

What about PaintShopPro for layers, selection tools and eraser - tenth of the price and probably just as functional....

Why don't the "professional" astro imaging programs offer the same capacity???

I don't know, Ken, I haven't tried it. I can't comment beyond that.

Olly

[steppenwolf]

I use the old CS3 version as it was reasonably priced (for an Adobe product!!) and does everything I require for astro-photography with some great free plugins available too. As others have already mentioned above, it's the layers and 16 bit file handling that does it for me but I see no need for upgrading past CS3.