On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Larry Hodgson wrote: > Hi Alex, > You wrote: > > >I use C1DSLR for my conversions. > > >alex > > How do like C1DSLR? Have you compared it to the results from Photoshop? Is > it worth the money? Please give some thoughts on your experience with this > product.
It is pretty good. I'm using the $99 version which has some annoying limitations to try and make you buy the $250 version. 1) The batch conversion queue can't have more than 20 images in it at a time. If I convert after reviewing or adjusting each image then this isn't a big problem. 2) You can't easily copy image settings from one image to another. This is one good reason to get the white balance right up front. I don't use Photoshop so I haven't done any comparisons. So far I'm very happy. From inside the tool I can do 90% of the image edits that I ever made (cropping, change contrast/exposure/saturation) from inside it. If I need to work in something else then I export the image to work in Picture Window Pro (my image editor). I think that it is expensive for what it does, but then again it is a tool for a niche market. The current version has some memory leaks and general flakiness, but they claim to be fixing this in the next dot release. It is good enough that I bought it now anyway, because I haven't seen anything better. I do have a comment on Picture Window Pro. I own version 3.0. They just came out with version 3.5 a few months ago. They have deleted all patches that they ever made for 3.0 to force people to upgrade (for $35). I think that this is a terrible business practice and it makes me wonder if I'm going to continue using the product (which is still much cheaper than Photoshop) or if I should find an alternative. I've evaluated 3.5 and don't see any new features that I want, but I would like the patches that they already made for 3.0 and which I had on my old PC. This came up when I moved stuff over to a new laptop. alex
