Jump to content


Photo

Photoshop ???????

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 10:08 AM

I still try to understand what Photoshop I would need for processing my astro-image ,but I don't understand... CS6 is $700 ,but they have Element 11 wich is $75,There is creative suite ,lightroom, Student and teachers version, Illustrator ,InDesign.... . Even the previous versions of Photoshop are expensive. Can someone explain to me wich one would be better and can take all the interesting Plug-ins available for processing astrophotos ?? Are those plug-ins free ,and where to get them ??
Thank you !
Maxx

#2 mmalik

mmalik

    DSLR camera modifications

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 5404
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2012
  • Loc: USA

Posted 24 June 2013 - 10:43 AM

You need Photoshop CS6 Extended edition; if you can get a student license, that will be the best.

Note: Plug-ins are mentioned in the instructions doc... with links; install is easy, will walk you through once you are ready.

#3 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 11:42 AM

You need Photoshop CS6 Extended edition; if you can get a student license, that will be the best.

Note: Plug-ins are mentioned the instructions doc... with links; install is easy, will walk you through once you are ready.

Is it 16 bits or 32 bits ?? CS4 or 5 would be cheaper ,they should do the job ,no? And what is the extended version ?? How much will cost the plug-ins ???

#4 TimN

TimN

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1664
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Ontario, Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 01:06 PM

Before you spend all that money on PhotoShop, I recommend that you look at a couple of packages that were written just for astronomy. PixInsight and StarTools don't require extra plug-ins and are both cheaper than PhotoShop. The best news is that they they let you test drive before you buy.

I'm not recommending that you don't use PhotoShop but that you look at the alternatives first. PhotoShop has been around the longest and most people are very familiar with it. Pixinsight came next and already has a pretty good following. StarTools is fairly new, but of the 3, I found it the best for me. YMMV.

#5 Falcon-

Falcon-

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Gambier Island, BC, Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 01:29 PM

To add to the software Tim mentioned there is also ImagesPlus to consider.

I personally chose to initially use Nebulosity and now use PixInsight rather then spend large chunks of $$ on Photoshop. I have not regretted that decision so far. :)

#6 Monadnock

Monadnock

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 268
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2012
  • Loc: SW NH

Posted 24 June 2013 - 02:41 PM

What can PS do that the other programs cannot?

Are the other programs mentioned fundamentally "all inclusive" as far as astrophotography goes? Do any of them NOT do something that would hinder success at the beginner to intermediate processing level, learning curves aside?

#7 Erskin71

Erskin71

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 13 Dec 2010

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:09 PM

I have a Photoshop subscription plan. Cost me $19.99 a month. It's CS6 extended. Works well for me.

I uses HLVG which is free and Noel Carbonies Actions which was $19.99 I believe.

#8 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:16 PM

Before you spend all that money on PhotoShop, I recommend that you look at a couple of packages that were written just for astronomy. PixInsight and StarTools don't require extra plug-ins and are both cheaper than PhotoShop. The best news is that they they let you test drive before you buy.

I'm not recommending that you don't use PhotoShop but that you look at the alternatives first. PhotoShop has been around the longest and most people are very familiar with it. Pixinsight came next and already has a pretty good following. StarTools is fairly new, but of the 3, I found it the best for me. YMMV.

Thank you Tim ! I did try Pixinsight and my 45 trial days ended today at noon ! I liked it ! I tried Startools but didn't put enough time on it ,I was lost...very lost... LOL
Both are interesting but they have a hard learning curve !
At the moment I use Gimp and since it's very similar to Photoshop ,I'm use to work those tools. But $700 is too much for me to pay. Gimp is only 8 Bits ,16 Bits is comming but when ? I don't want to wait two years. There is also MaximDL ,if I buy only the image processing it's $300 ,but I know nothing about this software. I will keep on looking ,but so far Pixinsight or Startools are the first in list !
Thanks !
Maxx

#9 piaras

piaras

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 819
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Niagara Region

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:25 PM

I side with Pixinsight. If you wish to wait for Gimp to release 32 bit version, the wait has already been over 5 yrs and counting.

PS is not required and very much too expensive. $20 a month forever? No thanks. I have CS5 and 90% is wasted for the average user.

I use PHD, BackyardEOS, Pixinsight and ECU for my planetarium program. This is all I need.
Pierre

#10 shawnhar

shawnhar

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5737
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Knoxville, TN

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:44 PM

Photoshop CS2 and Star Tools is a great combo for me.
Fitswork is free and very powerful but the masks kinda suck and it has a steep learning curve.

#11 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 04:46 PM

I side with Pixinsight. If you wish to wait for Gimp to release 32 bit version, the wait has already been over 5 yrs and counting.

PS is not required and very much too expensive. $20 a month forever? No thanks. I have CS5 and 90% is wasted for the average user.

I use PHD, BackyardEOS, Pixinsight and ECU for my planetarium program. This is all I need.
Pierre

Thanks Pierre ! I use PHD and BackyardEOS too and I love it !

#12 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 04:48 PM

To add to the software Tim mentioned there is also ImagesPlus to consider.

I personally chose to initially use Nebulosity and now use PixInsight rather then spend large chunks of $$ on Photoshop. I have not regretted that decision so far. :)

That's probably where I will go too !
Thanks !
Maxx

#13 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 04:49 PM

What can PS do that the other programs cannot?

Are the other programs mentioned fundamentally "all inclusive" as far as astrophotography goes? Do any of them NOT do something that would hinder success at the beginner to intermediate processing level, learning curves aside?

You are right ! Thanks Mike !
Maxx

#14 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 04:51 PM

I have a Photoshop subscription plan. Cost me $19.99 a month. It's CS6 extended. Works well for me.

I uses HLVG which is free and Noel Carbonies Actions which was $19.99 I believe.

$20 a month will come too expensive for me...But thank you for helping !
Maxx

#15 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 04:52 PM

Photoshop CS2 and Star Tools is a great combo for me.
Fitswork is free and very powerful but the masks kinda suck and it has a steep learning curve.

Thank you Shawn !

#16 frito

frito

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1183
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Fremont, CA

Posted 24 June 2013 - 04:58 PM

i'd say many use photoshop because they already had it, with adobe going to a subscription based model those who don't already own a version of PS should probably look into something like pixinsight or startools as in the long run it will be cheaper. photoshop in the right hands is very powerful but it has a steep learning curve, i use it for work and i won't claim to be a master by any means at it.

#17 Alex McConahay

Alex McConahay

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2430
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Moreno Valley, CA

Posted 24 June 2013 - 05:02 PM

Photoshop is terribly expensive. That is true. So, take advantage of older editions, and student editions, and subscription plans if you can.

You can probably even get away without it if you want to try other things. Some of the other packages approach what it can do.

But, when you want to operate at the top of this astroimaging thing, you will find that nearly all the top people do something in Photoshop, even those who really like Pixinsight.

I remember once being in a workshop with one of the developers of one of the most popular programs out there. It was getting later in the afternoon, and he had not yet gotten to the last finishing of the image. And he had a ton of menu choices related to stretching, noise reduction, color balance, and a whole lot of things written into his program. And somebody said-----Hey---"How do we use these things to finish up the image?" and the developer said "Well, I go to Photoshop to do that stuff, and so do most other people!"

Now that was some years ago. I think Photoshop, which was never very good at some of the things we have to do (calibration, registration, stacking, etc.), has been approached by many other programs. But, I still see people heading to it eventually when it is time to really finish off the project. (And yes, this includes many Pixinsight afficianados.)

I think it will be replaced someday by AstroImaging specific software.....and Pixinsight is a good candidate for that as it gets developed more. It already does lots of things better than Photoshop.

So, do you need it? Nope. But really, you could get by with a less expensive mount, and an uncooled camera, and ........

Get a sixteen bit version if you can, and use what you can of it.
Alex

#18 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 05:33 PM

Photoshop is terribly expensive. That is true. So, take advantage of older editions, and student editions, and subscription plans if you can.

You can probably even get away without it if you want to try other things. Some of the other packages approach what it can do.

But, when you want to operate at the top of this astroimaging thing, you will find that nearly all the top people do something in Photoshop, even those who really like Pixinsight.

I remember once being in a workshop with one of the developers of one of the most popular programs out there. It was getting later in the afternoon, and he had not yet gotten to the last finishing of the image. And he had a ton of menu choices related to stretching, noise reduction, color balance, and a whole lot of things written into his program. And somebody said-----Hey---"How do we use these things to finish up the image?" and the developer said "Well, I go to Photoshop to do that stuff, and so do most other people!"

Now that was some years ago. I think Photoshop, which was never very good at some of the things we have to do (calibration, registration, stacking, etc.), has been approached by many other programs. But, I still see people heading to it eventually when it is time to really finish off the project. (And yes, this includes many Pixinsight afficianados.)

I think it will be replaced someday by AstroImaging specific software.....and Pixinsight is a good candidate for that as it gets developed more. It already does lots of things better than Photoshop.

So, do you need it? Nope. But really, you could get by with a less expensive mount, and an uncooled camera, and ........

Get a sixteen bit version if you can, and use what you can of it.
Alex

Thanks Alex ! Much appreciated !

#19 Monadnock

Monadnock

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 268
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2012
  • Loc: SW NH

Posted 24 June 2013 - 05:49 PM

What can PS do that the other programs cannot?

Are the other programs mentioned fundamentally "all inclusive" as far as astrophotography goes? Do any of them NOT do something that would hinder success at the beginner to intermediate processing level, learning curves aside?

You are right ! Thanks Mike !
Maxx


Maxx, they weren't sarcastic questions, LOL! I probably should've been a little more polite and stated I had a few questions of my own to add to your thread.

Anyway, what say you guys?

#20 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 05:56 PM

What can PS do that the other programs cannot?

Are the other programs mentioned fundamentally "all inclusive" as far as astrophotography goes? Do any of them NOT do something that would hinder success at the beginner to intermediate processing level, learning curves aside?

You are right ! Thanks Mike !
Maxx


Maxx, they weren't sarcastic questions, LOL! I probably should've been a little more polite and stated I had a few questions of my own to add to your thread.

Anyway, what say you guys?

:grin: To be honest ,since English is not my first language ,I didn't quite understand the question, so I just agreed without really knowing to what... :lol:

#21 pfile

pfile

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3168
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009

Posted 24 June 2013 - 05:56 PM

not sure if the idea that even PI users use PS is really true anymore. i've certainly never found a reason to use photoshop.

#22 bluedandelion

bluedandelion

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1906
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Hazy Hollow, Western WA

Posted 24 June 2013 - 06:43 PM

Licenses for older versions of PS can be picked up on Ebay for less. CS5 should be sufficient. You can get licenses for under $200.

That said, Pixinsight is all I use for AP although I do own CS5. I even use PI for processing some daylight pictures.

GIMP is not even up to 16 bits, forget 32. Even Duke Nukem has seen a release. GIMP 16bit is going to out do that long wait.

Ajay

#23 bouffetout

bouffetout

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 978
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 June 2013 - 06:47 PM

Licenses for older versions of PS can be picked up on Ebay for less. CS5 should be sufficient. You can get licenses for under $200.

That said, Pixinsight is all I use for AP although I do own CS5. I even use PI for processing some daylight pictures.

GIMP is not even up to 16 bits, forget 32. Even Duke Nukem has seen a release. GIMP 16bit is going to out do that long wait.

Ajay

Thank you Ajay ,I will take a look at EBay !
Maxx

#24 nofxrx

nofxrx

    Vendor (HyperCams & Mods)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 5241
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Palm Bay,Florida

Posted 25 June 2013 - 05:41 PM

You do NOT need the latest version of PS (CS6)...

Do not bother with Elements. IMHO it is worthless.
I would much rather spend my money on Adobe LR (LightRoom) for image/file management and LIGHT processing...this is really only usable for processing(again, simple/light processing) for daytime images.
But, after having used it now for 6 months, I LOVE LR...and with CS6 I am in heaven.

Just my 2:penny:'s..

But for starting out, or even experienced users on a budget, CS2 and DSS, both , will be perfect and just as "good" as CS6, CS5(do not bother IMHO), CS4(better than CS5), and ImagesPlus, or Maxim, or CCDstack, etc...


Good luck!

#25 Dan478

Dan478

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 189
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008
  • Loc: So. Cal.

Posted 25 June 2013 - 07:28 PM

Post Deleted.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics