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

pixelmator final release

andiwm2003

andiwm2003

macrumors 601
Original poster
Mar 29, 2004
4,479
620
Boston, MA
because of the lack of a universal photoshop elements i think about getting pixelmator. it's supposed to be released soon and i didn't do the beta test. is it worth $49? how does it compare to photoshop elements? does it run good on a G4 powerbook as well as on a C2D?

thanks for the input.

andi
 
$49 for beta testers only. $59 is the standard list price. I have not yet installed the second beta, but I was not blown away by the first, which was less intuitive than it looked.
I think I would prefer Adobe to get its skates on.
The one good thing I would say is that the store is not charging $1=£1, unlike Adobe, so the £25 it would cost me represents less than the $49 charged to Americans.
 
Correct, the $49 is for beta testers only (of which I am one). But I think it's totally worth the money of the full price. It is truly a worthy PhotoShop competitor.
 
ghall said:
Correct, the $49 is for beta testers only (of which I am one). But I think it's totally worth the money of the full price. It is truly a worthy PhotoShop competitor.
Click to expand...

i have the beta via the mac heist bundle and they offer me the $49 deal. i'm just not sure if i should wait for adobe elements for ~$90. i know adobe PS quite well (for an amateur) and you get a lot for your money. it's also some kind of world standard. pixelmator would be an alternative if it would be easier, faster.

can i load it on both of my computers or do they have some annoying policy that forces me to buy two licences? i mean i use it only on one computer a time. and i'm the sole user of both computers.
 
The program was released today and there is a demo download available.
 
I had a copy of the beta in the bundle deal from a month or two ago, but never got around to installing... shame as the finished article looks quite nice! May suggest it to my other half who doesn't need CS for her minor editing...
 
After a few minutes of playing with this program, I'm fairly impressed. Overall it works well, and has a nice clean interface.

... but I think it needs:

  • precise cursors like Photoshop has, so you can see where you're painting/erasing/editing
  • some of the filters could use finer controls
  • should have a curves adjustment
  • channel mixer needs a monochrome option (for converting photos to black and white)
  • filters need a "Preview" toggle so you can see the before/after effects

I don't really need all that Photoshop has - so I'll probably either be buying Pixelmator or Photoshop Elements when it gets released early next year.
 
Whilst we are on the subject of image editors, Acorn, from the same guys that wrote the fantastic VoodooPad, has also just been released. Although on the surface it looks simple it is very powerful and at the moment I am liking it even more than Pixelmator. My final choice will be one of these until the much touted Iris following the Leopard release that is.

We Mac users are spoilt sometimes with the quality of the software we get to play with. :D
 
tryed it out and love what it can do except it is missing a few key things, i need all the layer effects like shadows, bevels, strokes. Without that stuff it is a none start witch is a shame because it seems to have everything else i need.
 
Slumbercub said:
We Mac users are spoilt sometimes with the quality of the software we get to play with. :D
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how the release of two immature and not-quite ready for prime-time apps, to fill a gaping hole in the Mac software line-up, makes us spoiled.

These are early releases to fill a application gap; Windows has had good software for hobbyist and quick-and-easy image editing for years. I can't figure why I can't find a decent little editor for my new Mac.

Pixelmator and Acorn look promising. And they could be spoil-a-licious in short order. But at the moment they're both missing basic features. Even if they were free, I'd still opt for Seashore. They're definitely not worth $40-$60 to me yet. But soon, hopefully. Acorn is very promising; it just needs a few little additions... Same for Pixelmator...
 
wow, just downloaded pixelmator demo. nice application but much less features than photoshop elements 2.0.

and more importantly on my 1.5GHz PB G4 with 2 GB Ram, 5400rpm HD and core image GPU 9700 64 MB it's unusably slow. Photoshop elements screams on my PB, Pixelmator crawls. It takes a second to respond to simple mouse clicks on the menu bar or tool selection. i worked with a 3 MB Jpeg on 2 layers.

so i will wait till i have a MBP in january before i try again and buy it.

if it runs fast on a intel machine then it is high on my software purchase list. for a G4 machine unfortunately not.
 
I played with it a while this morning and I love the interface but it is slow. . .surprisingly slow on my MBP 2.2GH, 2GB. I was doing a clone stamp of a small area and it would go to beach ball for 5 seconds or so every time I stamped.

Unusable unless this gets fixed.
 
I guess fast/slow maybe depends on perspective? I haven't tried it on my iMac yet, but on my iBook G4/800/1.125GB, it actually seems as fast or faster than PSE3 (after the comments above, I expected it to be an utter nightmare). The featureset is very limited though, although the things that are there work well.

For instance, it has an unsharp mask that cannot use a radius smaller than one pixel? Mmm... What? :confused: :rolleyes:
 
Well, after reading some of the reviews decided to try again. . .but restarted my Mac and with it being the only thing running (other than Firefox) I did the following:

1. Opened two files - one a photoshop file of a portrait with two layers and minimal editing, and two, a scenic photoshop file with a 3 layers and some masking, etc.
2. Select a brush - solid, around 20
3. Draw a line about 3 inches

It took 2-3 seconds to draw a simple solid line. This can't be right - it is instant in PSE and PS under Rosetta. . .similar to my earlier test where clone stamps took 5 seconds.

Any ideas?
 
acrafton said:
of course that doesn't explain why PSE and PS don't have the same problem. . .
Click to expand...

Actually it does. Neither Adobe application uses CoreImage.

Although deeply ironic, it might also explain why I was pleasantly surprised with (good) performance on my (non-CoreImage-GPU) iBook, while many others were unpleasantly surprised with (poor) performance on their CoreImage hardware! :rolleyes: :eek:
 
mkrishnan said:
Actually it does. Neither Adobe application uses CoreImage.

Although deeply ironic, it might also explain why I was pleasantly surprised with (good) performance on my (non-CoreImage-GPU) iBook, while many others were unpleasantly surprised with (poor) performance on their CoreImage hardware! :rolleyes: :eek:
Click to expand...

I guess I meant, if it is so slow. . .why would Pixelmator choose to use it instead of what Adobe has done. Is there some benefit to using the technology? I am guessing that it "should" be faster with the bug fixes...? Otherwise why push it as a benefit (which the do) if it is slower. . .
 
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
Back