ACDSee Pro 2 and 2.5

Back to Topic OverviewPost New Reply

Some improvements I would like to see here at 2.5!

(24 posts)
1 2

  • dennisg
    Member

    I have been using 2.5 for about three months and I am getting to know and like it more and more. But I think there are some additions should be made to make it even better.

    For one, I would like to see Acdsee add HDR to the program. In addition, I would like to see panoramas added as well. I think that to be a strong contender, not only the database features should separate this product out from others! In addition, maybe layers.

    What do you out there feel should be added to 2.5 to make it a better and a more rounded photo editing application?

     

    Thanks!

     

    Dennis G

     

    Posted On January 19, 2009 - 03:00 AM (10 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • Green Baron
    Member

    I am a Adobe Bridge and EXIFPro user and have just started ACDSee Pro 2.5.  I really like this program and i think I will switch over to ACDSee !  Some of the things I like :

    - The batch rename is much better than Brdige and Rename4U.  Search and Replace is great.
    - The Built-in editor is fast and easy to use.  Great for quick editing.
    - The ability to add tags while importing
    - Integration with Flickr for upload. This is a great time saver
    - Image Compare, can handle more than 2 images
    -  Program is fast and responsive

    Area for improvements.  As this is a more of a photo viewer/manager than editor, I would like to see enhancements in the area of viewing, comparing and managing photos.

    - A shortcut key (e.g. Alt Enter) to launch external editor.
    - Support for Virtual collection and photo stacking ala Bridge 4. 
    - An  option to show files in all subfolder.  ACDSee can currently do this but it is very tedious.  EXIFPro and Bridge4 has a single command to turn this on and off
    -  Text created in the editor looks fat and short.  Not sure why this is so.  Would like to see support for kerning.
    - Support for Photo collage. 

    For serious editing, you should get the ACDSee Photoeditor or Photoshop.

     

     

     

    Posted On January 20, 2009 - 10:11 AM (10 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • tbark
    Member

    I've found the editing capabilities of Pro2.5 to be excellent with two exceptions. However, I know I have to be aware of program "bloat" and the problems that can cause. I'm using an older computer, and Pro2.5 runs very slowly at present. Additional features might cause it to run even more slowly. Nevertheless, I'd like to have the ability to correct vignetting in the RAW editor, and chromatic aberration in the standard editor.

    Posted On January 20, 2009 - 10:29 PM (10 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • w3dw
    Member

    I'm still advocating for the addition of dodge and burn tools.  This is the only reason that I go back to Photoshop these days.

    Posted On January 27, 2009 - 12:14 PM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • Marc Sabatella
    Moderator

    ACDSee Pro is primariy an image management application that happens to have some editing capabilities.  And as such, most the enhancements I'd like to see are in the image management area, not the eiting area.  however, I totally concur that dodge/burn and vignetting correction (also lens distortion correction in RAW) are the most obviously missing features that could be added without turning the program into something totally different (eg, something that supported layers or Photoshop plug-ins).

    On the image management side, some that occur to me include:

    - ability to embed and work with (not just view) previews in DNG files, also to view previews in all RAW formats

    - abiity to work with IPTC for multiple files

    - some sort of scheme to support hierarchical organization of keywords and/or preservation of hierarchy info when embedding categories into an IPTC field

    - support for full the IPTC spec, including the "new" fields introduced several years ago with XMP, plus other XMP "standard" fields such as ratings

    - an improved search facility with boolean search, and/or an improved quick search that can be limited to keywords *only* (or whatever field you want to search)

    - fuller support for EXIF, including lens info and better integration of info from makernotes where appropriate (eg, for cameras that store ISO there rather than in the standard place)

    - fix for a few bugs/quirks such as the EXIF/XMP time zone issue, unexpected behavior with respect to EXIF & IPTC fields that map to the same XMP field, GPS and field truncations issues - all of which have been reported here

    - an open db architecture that better suports multi-user multi-computer usage

     

    Posted On January 28, 2009 - 04:51 PM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • ravenswings
    Member

    Burn and dodge would be great additions as well as a wider variety of frames, HDR too.

    Posted On February 1, 2009 - 08:34 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • SteveCop
    Member

    I'd to see the import function actually work!! It is unusable because it freezes at some stage during most imports and brings the computer down at the same time. Very unsatisfactory.

    As to enhancements - I'd like the batch renaming tool to be a bit more flexible. Having renamed a load of files with the wrong date and time I needed to remove parts of the file name, not add, thus:

    From DSC_9876 20-10-2008 14-19-21.jpg    to   DSC_9876.jpg

    There did not seem to be a way to achieve this which made a lot of work using an external program and then re-entering database info.

    Posted On February 1, 2009 - 11:33 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • Marc Sabatella
    Moderator

    SteveCop said:

    I'd to see the import function actually work!! It is unusable because it freezes at some stage during most imports

    I see this from time to time, but not on most imports.  Just curious - what camera, and what file format are you using?  Are you writing to IPTC while importing?  I too would love to see this fixed, and if there is anything I can do to help figure out what conditions trigger it, I'm willing to do what I can.

    As to enhancements - I'd like the batch renaming tool to be a bit more flexible. Having renamed a load of files with the wrong date and time I needed to remove parts of the file name, not add, thus:

    From DSC_9876 20-10-2008 14-19-21.jpg    to   DSC_9876.jpg

    There did not seem to be a way to achieve this

    If it hadn't been for the time info, you could have deleted the date info easily enough using the Search/Replace feature of the batch rename operation.  but between loack of support for wildcards and some other limitations (like no search/replace at all during import, and the fact that the last used template is not remembered during batch rename), there is indeed considerable room for improvement in the rename operation.

    which made a lot of work using an external program and then re-entering database info.

    If this happens again, embed the db info in the file.  Then, after the rename, you can get it back by running Catalog Files.  beats having to re-enter it all, at least if we're talking about any significant amount of info.

    Posted On February 2, 2009 - 06:16 PM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • w3dw
    Member

    Marc said:

    "ACDSee Pro is primariy an image management application that happens to have some editing capabilities.  And as such, most the enhancements I'd like to see are in the image management area, not the eiting area."

    It is true that ACDSee sees this product in this way, but I sure don't!  I use none of the image management stuff - keywords, rating system, etc - but I find it an excellent no-bull editor which gives me almost all of what I am looking for quickly and accurately.  Yes, I can use Photoshop (well, 6.0 anyway) but many functions of ACDSee 2.5 are quicker and more accurate for me.  And all the other stuff Photoshop does are rarely needed.  Well, except burn and dodge!

    I have always managed photos by careful use of directories, and a very good sense of when things were photographed, so maybe I learned my own image management system back in the pre-windows dark ages.  I can (and for a long time DID) work very nicely just using Windows Explorer.  However, now I find that editing internally rather than highlighting in Windows Explorer and opening in another application is a real time saver.  And the ACDSee navigation screens are SO much prettier that Windows Explorer!  I bet that there are a lot of customers out there who use the product more as an editor than an orgainzer.

    And you are right - full DNG support would be great...

    Posted On February 3, 2009 - 01:11 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • woofa
    Member

    The primary thing it needs is stability. And honestly stability has been an issue with many versions ACDSee. I've tried out the trials for years and I like the program but stability has always been an issue. In Pro 2.5 it's virtually unusable as a photo manager. I don't know if it's because of the number of images I have (over a terabyte) or what but it's just never been a stable product and I have wanted it to be for many years going back many versions. I've been relegated time and again to using a free manager that works similarly but is not nearly as good as ACDSee if it just didn't crash.

    Posted On February 3, 2009 - 01:48 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • John Radcliffe
    Member

    Marc said

    and the fact that the last used template is not remembered during batch rename

    There is the "Save current settings as default" option on the "Advanced" tab. This will effectively "remember" the last settings. That, for me, is the big problem with the dialogs that have this option: there's no way to clear it once you've used it, as its setting (i.e. selected) is saved with the defaults.

    Suggestion to ACD Systems:

    Add a "Save current settings as default" button to all dialogs that currently have that as a selectable option. Then rename the existing option: "Remember last settings". Users could then deselect the "Remember" option and use the "Save defaults" button to save the settings without the "Remember" option. At the moment I have to remember to deselect the "Save defaults" option whenever I make settings changes that I don't want to become the new defaults. Of course I sometimes forget to do this, and end up with defaults that I don't want.

    Posted On February 3, 2009 - 01:50 PM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • Marc Sabatella
    Moderator

    John Radcliffe said:

    Marc said

    and the fact that the last used template is not remembered during batch rename

    There is the "Save current settings as default" option on the "Advanced" tab. This will effectively "remember" the last settings.

    Works for Search/Replace settings but not, for some reason, on the template.  The template keeps resetting to something that looks more or less the *effect* of the last used template, but with the useful stuff like <Image:Date/time original> replaced with whatever the date/time actually was on the last file I renamed.

    That, for me, is the big problem with the dialogs that have this option: there's no way to clear it once you've used it, as its setting (i.e. selected) is saved with the defaults.

    True.  That situation rarely comes up for me, as in most of the dialogs where I use this, I never need to change the defaults.  Also, in ones where I do, like Batch Set Information, it's often the case that doing a Reset before making changes clears that option.  And also, in cases where a final dialog comes up at the end telling you your operation succeeded - like Batch Processor - hitting "Cancel" instead of "OK" or "Finish" to exit the dialog at the end also nullifies the "Save current settings" option.  That's something I discovered accidentally and rely on quite a bit.

    But life would be easier if this option were actually a "Save settings as default  *except for this one*" option, or presumably with your suggestion (I confess I haven't really thought it through).

    Posted On February 3, 2009 - 08:35 PM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • murech
    Member

    Hello all,

    Since this thread has turned into some kind of a wishlist for a next version of ACDSee Pro, and hoping ACDSee staff will take a look at it, I will add my 2 cents.

    As I wrote some time ago in this other thread:

    http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/how-to-find-processed-raw-images#post-29131

    - An icon or checkmark on thumbnails (similarly to Lightroom badges that indicate if an image has been adjusted and/or cropped) would help to visually identify processed images without having to select them one by one and look at the status bar to see if it shows [Processed] next to the file name or if the "Revert RAW Processing" option is enabled in toolbar or menu.

    - In 2.5 you can now save original of non-RAW images when you edit them. How can you tell if a non-RAW has been processed and if the original is available? Unless I have missed something I think the only way is to select each thumbnail and see if the Tools/Restore Original menu option is enabled.

    - Don't you think that a powerful organiser as ACDSee is, with a powerful database, capable of managing so many manual and automatic categories, with powerful searches, etc., should be able to somehow easily show or filter Processed (or unprocessed) images?

    - Finally, at least for the moment, I wish that the Revert RAW  Processing option had a warning/confirmation dialog similar to the one you get with the Restore Original  for non-raw images.

    Regards,

    Miguel

    Posted On February 6, 2009 - 11:40 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • dennisg
    Member

    Hope this gets onto the post here! (third time writing this)

    Acdsee Pro has a lot going for it as it relates to a deep database for one's photographs so that they can be found easily! But there's more to photography then just databases. In addition the ability to batch is also a very useful tool when doing multiple images.

    Nevertheless, the deal about photography is to take good photographs and use an application that can bring out the very best that each photograph has to off! To this point, Acdsee Pro needs to exhibit these attributes as well. To say that it is more of a database application only limits its usefulness.

    The reason why I started this session several weeks ago is that I was curious to see what others wanted as well to improve Pro. Many of the other competitors in the field of image manipulation are adding a host of tools to help the photogrpaher get around the shortfalls of digital phography. These include dynamic range and thus offer HDR so that multiple images can be taken to get the maximum dynamic range and get the best scenario as possible from a photograph.

    To say that we use Pro 2.5 first as database and then second for editing is really a shallow view of what can be done. The purpose of photography is photograph type, subject matter, and the message sent while viewing them! Thus we need to be artists and get it right.

    To say that we use this program for database usage and then where the program cannot negotiate the need for more tools so we go to competitors application is not good marketing. Pro should keep us all engaged in its use from the setting up of databases to the art and editing of the photographs themsleves. Thus a more rounded packkage is a win, win for the end user and Acdsee!

    So in closing let's concentrate on photographs and see how we can get the very best from what we photograph and improve the application, Pro, so that we need not go anywhere else to get all of this accomplished!

    Dennis G and I hope this third time gets posted!

    Posted On February 7, 2009 - 02:33 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • ACDDM
    Member

    Biggest changes that would benefit me:

    1. Making the database a true multi-user database -- so that after a shoot, I can put files on a network drive, and have both me AND my assistant keyword indexing different parts of the shoot while updating the database.  (My personal preference would be a Microsoft SQL Server DB - they do have a free version - but quite frankly I don't think I really care - just make it be true multi-user).

    Basically the idea here is that you either add the ability to "place" the database in a central location then be able to point any ACDClient to that centrally located set of files and have it be truly multi-user, OR you "designate" a computer with ACDSee installed to run as a "server", then it loads up in memory of that computer as a system service and is then able to feed requests from other ACDsee clients.    If you run it this way then you can add other cool features like DLNA support (see #5 below).

    Think of it this way: I'd definately buy more ACDSee licenses if I could share the common database.  Right now it's risky to use the same database from different computers.  So instead of having just one licenses, maybe I'd buy one for the server, one for my machine, one for my assistant's machine and/or any other staff I may hire.

    2. Add support for uploading to more / different sites.  Flickr is great, why not add picasaweb, facebook, and other sites that have APIs for uploading images?

    3. Ditto on basically everything Marc Sabatella said.

    4. GPS integration - Ever since purchasing a GPS device for my Nikon camera ALL my files embed GPS data.  I'd love to have a way to quickly visualize and work with my images using that data. 

    a) To start with, give me a Google Map / Microsoft Live Map or something like it with my images overlaid.

    b) Let me select images visually:  Imaging you've got a map where you've zoomed in and can drag a selection box around all the images you took by some landmark like a waterfall.  Now that you have the images selected, quickly add ACDDatabase info, IPTC info, etc. -- that would be so powerful.

    c) If the above is too difficult to implement, then maybe add a button option to a menu like: "select images with GPS co-ordinates within ___ kilometers/miles of this photo.  Maybe with an option to limit to the current folder or current items that are visible.  Then do that selection using the GPS data and some math.

    5. DLNA (Digital Living Network Alliance) support: Have the ability to designate one of the computers where you have ACDSee installed as a "server" then have it serve up images and things in the database to DLNA compliant devices. And make it work on a Server operating system since Microsoft's Windows Media Player's DLNA server only works on XP/Vista.  This would allow users to browse their ACD image collections without having to re-index it a 2nd or 3rd time using a 3rd party DLNA server from any DLNA compliant device -- Playstaytion 3, X-Box 360 for example.

    In my case, I've got a Playstation 3 and it does an absolutely increadible job of showing a slideshow of images.  I've been toying with the idea of using it to show clients a quick preview of their photos instead of the "boring" slideshow they get at my desk.

     

    Posted On February 13, 2009 - 07:26 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • w3dw
    Member

    Dennis G said:

    "To say that we use Pro 2.5 first as database and then second for editing is really a shallow view of what can be done. The purpose of photography is ... the message sent while viewing them! ... To say that we use this program for database usage and then where the program cannot negotiate the need for more tools so we go to competitors application is not good marketing."

    I think this is the core of the thread.  Pro will always be a good database, but why stop there?  Why not address the reason that many of us also buy Photoshop, Dynamic Photo, Neat Image and the rest, and put them in one (crash-free, fairly priced) application.  Boy, THAT would get word-of-mouth advertising that no money could buy!

    Daniel

    Posted On February 23, 2009 - 07:49 PM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • carlos
    Member

    A lot that I would suggest is already said. So here is my wish.

    Make the look more like lightroom. To me it looks almost perfect.
    The dark look of ACDSee looks and feels not right, not finished somehow. As I said, Lightroom looks really nice.
    Of course, it would be nice to have the complete control of customizing the colors of the GUI.

    Posted On February 24, 2009 - 07:51 AM (9 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • murech
    Member

    carlos said:

    Of course, it would be nice to have the complete control of customizing the colors of the GUI.

    That's the way to go to satisfy everyone. You love lightroom's look but I know people who just hate it.

    Miguel

    Posted On February 24, 2009 - 10:50 AM (8 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • carlos
    Member

    murech said:

    carlos said:

    Of course, it would be nice to have the complete control of customizing the colors of the GUI.

    That's the way to go to satisfy everyone. You love lightroom's look but I know people who just hate it.

    Miguel

    Right. I should have mentioned that I only want the dark option to look more like lightroom.  Not that ACDSee should have only one look.

    What do the people hate about it? The dark look, or some more specific things?
    I dont mean the position of the windows etc.. ACDSee has done a great job here by letting the user place and scale the windows where and how he wants them to be. But the detail in lightroom is what I think looks better. Edges are rounded, scrollbars matching the colors etc.. It looks more complete, more sophisticated.

    Posted On February 24, 2009 - 11:09 AM (8 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

  • murech
    Member

    carlos said:

    What do the people hate about it? The dark look, or some more specific things?

     

    "Hate" is just a way of talking. Why do some people drink Budwiser when there is real beer out there? ;-)

    BTW, I also like the look of Lightroom.

     

    Posted On February 24, 2009 - 01:06 PM (8 months ago) (Permalink to this post)

Subscribe to this topic via RSS

1 2

Reply »

You must log in to post.