Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Graphic Converter vs. Photoshop

C

cricketbird

macrumors member
Original poster
Feb 17, 2008
85
0
For a hobby photographer who takes a lot of backyard photos of birds, flowers and family, and likes to play with photos (mirror photos, blend photos together) what does Adobe Photoshop offer that Graphic Converter doesn't?

Both can read RAW images, adjust colors, remove things like powerlines and red-eye, apply things like reflections, water ripples and other silly effects, flip images, allow you to combine images, etc.

Basically, my mom has and knows how to use GC, but all her photography buddies are telling her to get PS. I'd happily get it for her, but (1) it's incredibly expensive (2) I've never used it, so can't help her troubleshoot it and (3) it sounds just like GC which she already has and knows how to use.

So what photo features is she missing out on by just having GC? Thanks!
 
MacDawg

MacDawg

Moderator emeritus
Mar 20, 2004
19,823
4,503
"Between the Hedges"
I can't give you all of the differences, but you might want to consider Photoshop Elements instead of the full blown Photoshop. It would probably meet your needs for a lot less money.

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif
 
B

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,929
265
Photoshop Elements might be more useful for your mother. The full version of Photoshop contains extremely powerful and deeply complex features that your mother is extremely unlikely to use... e.g. working in colour-managed 16bit workflows and in CMYK, for instance. From the sound of your mother's needs, it would be complete overkill.
 
MisterMe

MisterMe

macrumors G4
Jul 17, 2002
10,709
69
USA
cricketbird said:
For a hobby photographer who takes a lot of backyard photos of birds, flowers and family, and likes to play with photos (mirror photos, blend photos together) what does Adobe Photoshop offer that Graphic Converter doesn't?

Both can read RAW images, adjust colors, remove things like powerlines and red-eye, apply things like reflections, water ripples and other silly effects, flip images, allow you to combine images, etc.

...
Click to expand...
I am a paid user of Photoshop Elements 6.0 and GraphicConverter 6.3. Quite frankly, I believe that every Mac user should pay the shareware fee for GC. That said, many of the things that you are asking about can be done in iPhoto.
 
C

cricketbird

macrumors member
Original poster
Feb 17, 2008
85
0
Thanks everyone - I agree that kind of image processing is often "horrible", but she loves it.

I didn't know about the Photoshop Elements, but that seems a logical choice now.

Next question: If her photo buddies give her advice on how to edit a photo in Photoshop, will she be able to follow those instructions in PSE? Is PSE just a slimmed-down version of PS, or is it a completely different software package?
 
PCMacUser

PCMacUser

macrumors 68000
Jan 13, 2005
1,702
23
cricketbird said:
Next question: If her photo buddies give her advice on how to edit a photo in Photoshop, will she be able to follow those instructions in PSE? Is PSE just a slimmed-down version of PS, or is it a completely different software package?
Click to expand...

Some of the menu items might be in different places, but yes, most instructions should translate through to PSE without too many problems. PSE is indeed a slimmed down version of PS - it also offers a lot more 'wizard' type features than PS, because it is aimed more at the home user rather than the pro.
 
A

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68040
Apr 26, 2008
3,503
13,361
Alaska
Well, I use both GC and Elements 6. I can do the same with each one of these applications, including download photos from the camera, printer, etc. While PSE6 uses Bridge to download photos, GC downloads them by itself. Both are very fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom