Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Photo-Brush, DCE, Plugins and other mediachance graphics apps
Post Reply
OldRadioGuy
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:07 am

Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by OldRadioGuy »

First, I agree with another post contending PhotoBrush deserves its own forum category.

Now, the question. When is levels scheduled to be implemented in PhotoBrush? Levels are badly needed to extend the range of this potentially useful editing tool. I noted the "new in..." note back in version 4.x referred to levels being next.

I am doing some of the restoration work on an old black and white photo that was in PSD format that had three layers -- thumbnail, background and copy of background, which I was editing in another program. I opened the file in PB, and it looks like I'm seeing the copy of the background. However, I won't save any of my work in PB of this file for fear of damaging some of the earlier work done in another program.

I am impressed by PB as an entry-level editor or as an alternative for someone with some simple editing to do and doesn't want to deal with the complexity of a bigger application. I like the color scheme, and I love the large brush/tool icons at the bottom of the screen and the use of tabs to call the set needed for a specific kind of job. This concept of making specific tools available for specific jobs has been implemented by at least one other photo editing application, but I think the PB approach is better.

The Spot repair and Scratch tools are great. Perhaps, as good as those in PaintShop Photo Pro X3, and I've said for years their spot and scratch tools were better than the bigger guys. But they have a competitor now in PB.

I have noted that PB will crash when I open a folder containing Olympus camera Raw files in the Image Browser.

Here's hoping we see continued improvement on this product. Oscar makes good stuff for us little guys!

Bob

another_two
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 4:39 am

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by another_two »

OldRadioGuy wrote: Now, the question. When is levels scheduled to be implemented in PhotoBrush? Levels are badly needed to extend the range of this potentially useful editing tool. I noted the "new in..." note back in version 4.x referred to levels being next.
But it is implemented (Adjust > Levels). Plus curves with SmartCurve plugin.
OldRadioGuy wrote: I am doing some of the restoration work on an old black and white photo that was in PSD format that had three layers -- thumbnail, background and copy of background, which I was editing in
There is no layer support in PB. You need to flatten image in PSD file to see everything in PB.
OldRadioGuy wrote: I have noted that PB will crash when I open a folder containing Olympus camera Raw files in the Image Browser.
Known problem (well, at least in forums...)

OldRadioGuy
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:07 am

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by OldRadioGuy »

another_two wrote:
OldRadioGuy wrote: Now, the question. When is levels scheduled to be implemented in PhotoBrush? Levels are badly needed to extend the range of this potentially useful editing tool. I noted the "new in..." note back in version 4.x referred to levels being next.
But it is implemented (Adjust > Levels). Plus curves with SmartCurve plugin.
Sorry, I meant to say LAYERS!

another_two
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 4:39 am

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by another_two »

Well, it seems that Oscar is concentrating these days on other parts of his software portfolio, so the date is really unknown.

Most problems stem from the fact, that he is one-man-army now.

Oscar
Site Admin
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:54 am

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by Oscar »

My question is: Is PB really strong tool to afford layers? Or in other words, would you use PB for the work that require layers if there are already inexpensive tools like PS elements that are essentially layer-centric? Because even if we have layers there is also plenty of other features and tools missing to make layers usable and effective. I am not saying no, but just to have layers for their own sake... I see from time to time they would be useful (we still have the strange semi-layer that is the floating object) but if user needs layers for whatever he works with, it would be simply mistake to grab PB or any other similar tools. Just look at the CD that come with your digital camera - there could be PS elements as a freebee.

andydansby
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:00 am
Location: Syracuse, NY

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by andydansby »

I for one would say yes to that, with one exception, would it make photobrush too bulky.

I use both Photobrush and PSP X2 and I like both. PSP is rather affordable when compared to Photoshop and is "layer-centric". However the program (PSP) is bulky and certainly Photobrush can do many of the image enhancements that PSP can handle. However, that lack of layers on Photobrush means that I end up using PSP more often that Photobrush. It not even really of true image composition that I use PSP more often. Sometimes I just want to add a second layer, erase the forground and perform a multiply, or a selective enhancement. I know that it's possible with photobrush, however much easier to perform that task in PSP for me.

A basic support of layers in Photobrush I'm certain will generate more sales, especially if it maintains its price point. What other imaging program can be had for under $50(other than GIMP)?

Oscar also, I'm sure you already them or can easily find them, but if not, I have just about every blending formula, plus a few more that there are out there.

Rocambole
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 4:06 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by Rocambole »

For me PhotoBrush is useless for most purposes because it deletes all IPTC info. I usually tag the images before making modifications to keep the same IPTC info in both original and modified copy but PhotoBrush deletes everything. The same problem with PureImage which I often used to begin with but had to abandon when I discovered it deleted my IPTC info. So these days I usually work with PSP X2 which I soon will upgrade to X4.

another_two
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 4:39 am

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by another_two »

Oscar,

Please fix at least the most nagging PB bugs reported here and in the previous forum :/

Even if you are not going to invest in PB any further, it would be nice to have the final version in a fixed state...

Regards,

KevinlBRX
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 1:37 am

Re: Question and comments about PhotoBrush

Post by KevinlBRX »

OldRadioGuy wrote:
another_two wrote:
OldRadioGuy wrote: Now, the question. When is levels scheduled to be implemented in PhotoBrush? Levels are badly needed to extend the range of this potentially useful editing tool. I noted the "new in..." note back in version 4.x referred to levels being next.
But it is implemented (Adjust > Levels). Plus curves with SmartCurve plugin.
Sorry, I meant to say LAYERS!
Oscar wrote:My question is: Is PB really strong tool to afford layers? Or in other words, would you use PB for the work that require layers if there are already inexpensive tools like PS elements that are essentially layer-centric? Because even if we have layers there is also plenty of other features and tools missing to make layers usable and effective. I am not saying no, but just to have layers for their own sake... I see from time to time they would be useful (we still have the strange semi-layer that is the floating object) but if user needs layers for whatever he works with, it would be simply mistake to grab PB or any other similar tools. Just look at the CD that come with your digital camera - there could be PS elements as a freebee.

Photbrush and RealDraw already share some of the same bitmap effects and brush sets. Each program stands on its own. Perhaps a file format allowing images to be saved and transferred back & forth between the two programs...I've always wondered why Rd never had PB listed in the import format list.

Post Reply