Your Photography Software Reviews

[Photo-John]

You may or may not know this, but user reviews are the foundation of PhotographyREVIEW.com. The forums, galleries, articles, etc. are all important, but the site was built on the user reviews and they're how most people find us. My point? We need all of you to write reviews for your camera gear! Right now I'm looking for photography software reviews. If you have a digital camera, you're using some kind of software. Please write a review for whatever you're using. We need you software reviews!

Write A Review >>
Photography Software Review Categories >>

If you have software questions, we also have a dedicated photography software forum:

Photography Software & Post Processing Forum >>

Thanks for your reviews!

If you're using something that isn't listed, please let me know and I'll make sure it gets added to the reviews

[Photo-John]

No one here uses software on their photos, huh?

[GB1]

If you're using something that isn't listed, please let me know and I'll make sure it gets added to the reviews

John, Try adding

* Photomatix

* Portrait Professional

* Fluid Mask

All should be under Editing Software.

Gb

[GB1]

Also add

* Topaz editing tools

These can be used as a plug-in.

[WesternGuy]

John, you might want to add a category for HDR software. This would include Photomatix Pro, HDR Efex Pro, FDR Tools (various versions), Oloneo, Dynamic Photo HDR, Artizen HDR, Photoshop CS3, CS4 and CS5, and probably others that I do not know about yet. Just a thought as HDR is becoming a quick growing component of a lot of people's photography today. You also might want to think about a new sub-forum that would cover the subject.

I just noticed that you have these, or some of them under "Editing Software". I would like to make the argument that they are really not editing software as things like Lightroom and Photoshop are, rather they are very specialized software designed to assist the photographer in the creation of HDR images - is that editing - maybe, but I would wonder if anyone would think to look under editing software for HDR software and you do have a separate category for panoramas, which is also a form of editing software. My 0.02¢ worth.

Regards,

WesternGuy

[Photo-John]

John, you might want to add a category for HDR software. This would include Photomatix Pro, HDR Efex Pro, FDR Tools (various versions), Oloneo, Dynamic Photo HDR, Artizen HDR, Photoshop CS3, CS4 and CS5, and probably others that I do not know about yet. Just a thought as HDR is becoming a quick growing component of a lot of people's photography today. You also might want to think about a new sub-forum that would cover the subject. My 0.02¢ worth.

Thanks. I was actually wondering about adding a new review category. I wouldn't add Photoshop since it's already in the editing category. But with that many other options it seems like it deserves its own category. I already added Photomatix Pro and Light (they'll be available for review tomorrow). I'll see about adding an HDR software category, too.

[jetrim]

No one here uses software on their photos, huh?

I was so busy using it, I didn't have time to look at your post

I promise, after I get these last 5000 shots from the weekend corrected and off to the various recipients I'll sit down and write reviews for:

Photoshop CS5
Lightroom 3
Aperture 3
Nik plugins
OnOne plugins
PSP X3

[Photo-John]

I was so busy using it, I didn't have time to look at your post

I promise, after I get these last 5000 shots from the weekend corrected and off to the various recipients I'll sit down and write reviews for:

Photoshop CS5
Lightroom 3
Aperture 3
Nik plugins
OnOne plugins
PSP X3

Touche, sir!

[draymorton]

What the hell is PSP X3?

Sounds like a bodybuilding supplement.

[armando_m]

Is this a new section ?
I seem to recall I had reviewed capture nx2 in the past ...
anyhow I posted a review on CNX2

[n8]

Yup photomatix. Also, I don't see filter forge or any of the topaz plugin's.

[Photo-John]

Is this a new section ?
I seem to recall I had reviewed capture nx2 in the past ...
anyhow I posted a review on CNX2

Nope, it's been there for years and years. Here's a link to the main user reviews page where you can browse all the review categories:

http://www.photographyreview.com/reviewscrx.aspx

If you click on that "Reviews" tab at the top of any page it will take you there

[SmartWombat]

I nearly bought Topaz plugins last weekend at the Focus on Imaging show.
Because they made them work with Lightroom

[Photo-John]

Yup photomatix. Also, I don't see filter forge or any of the topaz plugin's.

Photomatix Pro and Light were both added last night are now available for review! now get to work!

Photomatix User Review Pages >>

After I add some more HDR software I am planning to create a separate HDR software review category. But for now I'll be adding them to the editing software category.

[GB1]

I nearly bought Topaz plugins last weekend at the Focus on Imaging show.
Because they made them work with Lightroom

Topaz plug-ins are OK but not super high-quality. It's like buying a Chevy; decent, but don't expect a Porsche.

[freygr]

It would be nice to be able to enter the software you are writing the review about.

[Photo-John]

It would be nice to be able to enter the software you are writing the review about.

We've tried that and what happens is we get ten versions of the same product, all with different names. It's too difficult to manage. We try to stay on top of new products but we aren't perfect. You can always post new product requests on the Site Feedback forum

[aquadog]

New photography software products added that are ready for your reviews

Topaz Labs Products
http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr...3_4288crx.aspx

Filter Forge
http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr...4_4288crx.aspx

Vertus Tech
http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr...2_3078crx.aspx

Anthropics Portrait Professional
http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr...1_3078crx.aspx

[JETA]

Topaz plug-ins are OK but not super high-quality. It's like buying a Chevy; decent, but don't expect a Porsche.

I'd love to know & be very grateful as to what you consider a Porsche. I bought the Topaz plugins. Some of them are so slow it drives me nuts. Even with 16 gigs of ram on a brand new machine.

[Photo-John]

Still waiting for Photomatix reviews. As soon as you posted that it was missing I added it. That was a mjor ommision in the software reviews and I'd really like us to get some reviews for it...

We could also really use some more reviews for Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS5.

[jetrim]

John, as promised I've gone ahead and written reviews for Lightroom3, Bibble 5, ACDSee, and Corel PSP X2 & 3 so far.
I was somewhat surprised to find no entries for Apple Aperture 3 (a direct competitor to Lightroom3) or x-rite's color checker passport (color management) - 2 items common enough that they'd warrant adding to the list.
Will continue later this evening with photoshop cs4 & 5 and the plug-ins

[GB1]

Ok PJ, I went ahead and put in a review for Photomatix. Had a problem finding it, then realized that you're proceeding the name with the company. If you want to do this, I suggest that you make two entries for each - w/ and w/o the company name - and link them to the same review. For example, "Adobe Photoshop" and "Photoshop."

[Photo-John]

If you want to do this, I suggest that you make two entries for each - w/ and w/o the company name - and link them to the same review. For example, "Adobe Photoshop" and "Photoshop."

That would be nice but technically it's not possible. Sorry about that.

Thanks for the review. It's excellent!

On a sidenote - we need an image to represent the Photomatix product on the review page. I looked at the company logo and it wasn't compelling. They don't seem to have a boxed version, either. Any ideas about what we could use at about 150x150 pixels to represent the software? Right now there's no photo and that's no good.

[GB1]

On a sidenote - we need an image to represent the Photomatix product on the review page. I looked at the company logo and it wasn't compelling. They don't seem to have a boxed version, either. Any ideas about what we could use at about 150x150 pixels to represent the software? Right now there's no photo and that's no good.

I see online that they use this:



which yes, shows they didn't put much time into deciding a logo