ACDSee Pro 2 and 2.5

Edit Image improvements

• 

  RobotDude
  Member

  Having just processed 2000+ images, I thought I would share my experience and hopefully improve future releases of ACDSee Pro.

   

  1. Delete

  Allow the image to be deleted when in Edit Mode.  I go through all my images and crop as required (following a Batch Process to auto adjust all the images) and I would like to be able to delete the image displayed.  My workaround is to Rate the image as "1" and then to delete all images rated as "1" later.

   

  2. Crop

  Default the settings to those previously set.  For every crop I have to tick the "Constrain cropping proportion" checkbox.  There is the Preset "Last Used" but this needs to be selected and so is stil an action I need to do.

  Posted On October 10, 2008 - 08:53 AM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Anonymous
  

  RobotDude said:

  2. Crop

  Default the settings to those previously set.  For every crop I have to tick the "Constrain cropping proportion" checkbox.  There is the Preset "Last Used" but this needs to be selected and so is stil an action I need to do.

  I made this recommendation with 2.0, but alas, no one listened. (or so it seems because no one ever responds).  Actually, it would be nice if most of the edit options would default to previously used to save time, like saturation, sharpening, etc.  And it would be nice if someone would let you know if they even read your post on a feature request, or if they even received your emails to the development team when sent that way.  Customer service... it's a dieing art.
  

   

  Posted On October 13, 2008 - 12:25 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  RobotDude
  Member

  Its a shame that ACDSee gives the impression that no one is listening as they have, on the whole, a positive user base which should be used to improve their products.  My suggestions are just minor improvements which would help me (and hopefully others) greatly bearing in mind the repetitive nature of processing 1000s of images.

  Posted On October 13, 2008 - 02:51 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Marc Sabatella
  Moderator

  I agree they are great suggestions, and hopefully at some point they will be incorporated into the editor.  I'd just like to add that if your camera has the ability to shoot RAW, it is *MUCH* easier to process these in ACDSee than it is for JPEG.  Lots of options available to copy processing from one file to another, to apply  given setting to a whole bunch of files, to access the Last Used settings, etc.  Plus everything is non-destructive, and you can go back and alter your settings at any time.

  Of course, some applications manage to provide something similar even for JPEG, and I hope ACDSee moves in that direction too.

   

  Posted On October 13, 2008 - 03:29 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Anonymous
  

  I use ACDSee to process .jpg's, never much liked working with RAW for my own reasons.  Actually I love Pro and the workflow that it presents and for me it is much faster than working with Photoshop.  I have not encountered any serious problems in installing and using the software.  Sure it crashes, more than it should, but only when you really need it to not crash.  Not near as often as I hear from other people.

  But, similar to RobotDude here, I just shot 1000 photos at a wedding on Saturday, and for me, they all deserve my personal attention.  Sure a few changes to the batch processing and I could do them that way, but without being able to run all available process on one batch run, I'd have to do multiple runs (you cant correct color cast and increase saturation on one batch run) and doing multiples to jpg's just isn't good.  They degrade too quickly.  So every photo gets my personal attention, and when you have to click a pulldown and then select the pulldown on sharpening, saturation, brightness, etc., that takes time.

  So you write a request in the forums a year ago, and no reply.  You email it to ACDSee, no reply.  You write the request in this new blog thingy and no reply.  You email it to the developers directly and no reply.  You begin to feel like the little kid in the store who spent his only dollar on some toy and then the shopkeeper says "There. Now get the hell out of my store."  Heck someone may have said "Gee that's something we never thought of and for our customers, the skies the limit and lets get that working right away" and put a whole team on it.  Or they may never check the blog thingy or their email and not even have a clue... who really knows?  THAT, is bad business and tells me loud and clear that my opinion, my needs, just don't matter.

  Posted On October 13, 2008 - 05:47 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  RobotDude
  Member

  It does beg the question as to what the purpose of these forums are.  If users raise concerns that are not being acknowledged by ACDSee, what is the point of raising them?  My understanding is that the moderators are not ACDSee staff and are experienced ACDSee users willing to help others out.  Perhaps someone, moderators and/or ACDSee, could clarify the purpose of these forums and to what extent the concerns raised here are fed back into the ACDSee development process.

  Posted On October 14, 2008 - 06:35 AM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  plugsnpixels
  Member

  I was discussing this very thing with Marc recently, letting him know that ACD continues to waste a real-time communication resource for interacting with their customers by ignoring these forums and using volunteers to do the work they should be doing.

  But this is nothing new; ACD Canvas (may it RIP) users got clued into this long ago. Now the rest of you are catching on.

  Posted On October 14, 2008 - 06:54 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Anonymous
  

  [X] marks the spot, Mel.

  Posted On October 15, 2008 - 12:27 AM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Marc Sabatella
  Moderator

  RobotDude said:

  Perhaps someone, moderators and/or ACDSee, could clarify the purpose of these forums and to what extent the concerns raised here are fed back into the ACDSee development process.

  To my mind, the purpose is quite straightforward: it allows users to help other users.  Period.  Someone has a problem, they post it it, others users may know the answer and can solve it for them.  Saves the trouble of submitting a support ticket for things are not clearly out-and-out bugs in the program.  The forums - in any format - seem to me to be useful for this purpose.

  Of course, when clear trends come up regarding suggestions for product improvement, it seems quite clear to me that that folks at ACDSee notice and take them into consideration.  As, for instance, happened with 2.5 - pretty much everything that went into that release was something that had been requested on this forum.  Was *every* request ever made incorporated?  Of course not.  Did ACDSee respond inidividually to each suggestion ever made here in the forum to say "yes, this one we're going to do, this one we're not"?  Of course not. But that doesn't mean the suggestions weren't heard - clearly, they were.

  Could ACDSee do themselves a favor by participating more actively?  I personally *do* think so.  But really, I don't think their failure to do so makes these forums worthless, nor does it strike me as proof that they "don't care".

   

  Posted On October 15, 2008 - 03:13 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Marc Sabatella
  Moderator

  kthompson said:

  I use ACDSee to process .jpg's, never much liked working with RAW for my own reasons.

  It might be useful to go into those a little bit.  Because right now the RAW processing facility looks to me like the most obvious model for how one one might go about implementing some sort of non-destructive editing facility for JPEG too.  And if you don't like something about how it works with RAW, chances are, you wouldn't like how it worked with JPEG either if they followed the same model.

   

  Posted On October 15, 2008 - 03:18 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Anonymous
  

  Marc Sabatella said:

  kthompson said:

  I use ACDSee to process .jpg's, never much liked working with RAW for my own reasons.

  And if you don't like something about how it works with RAW, chances are, you wouldn't like how it worked with JPEG either if they followed the same model.

  That's not what I said.

   

  Posted On October 15, 2008 - 03:52 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)
• 

  Marc Sabatella
  Moderator

  kthompson said:

  And if you don't like something about how it works with RAW, chances are, you wouldn't like how it worked with JPEG either if they followed the same model.

  That's not what I said.

  I realize that.  That's why I asked what it was you didn't like about working with RAW, to better understand what sort of things you'd like or not like in an improved editing facility.

   

  Posted On October 22, 2008 - 06:02 PM (1 year ago) (Permalink to this post)

Subscribe to this topic via RSS

Reply

You must log in to post.