![]() ![]() While it doesn't currently offer the ability to add layer masks, Pixelmator for iOS already offers a bunch of tools for manipulating layers, layer styles, effects, brush-based retouching tools and we have more new features on the roadmap. If we're comparing layer-based image editors, Pixelmator for iOS is probably a more suitable contender to put on the other side of the scale. And thanks to batch processing capability, you can do all of this with multiple images at a time with just a few taps. You can use it to adjust image colors, shadows, and contrast, crop and scale photos, and more. As Cantisani mentioned, Pixelmator Photo is not an image manipulation app but rather a photo editor that works both with RAW and regular JPEG, PNG, TIFF images. Pixelmator Photo and Affinity Photo are, indeed, two different apps that serve slightly different purposes. I’m sad to say I can’t recommend getting Pixelmator Photo if you want anything more than what I just said. If all you want is a simple RAW developer with no local adjustments, Pixelmator Photo does the job. My humble advise is, if you want layers and powerful image manipulation, get Affinity Photo. I come to the forum every now and then to see if there are any news about Pixelmator Photo, but there’s nothing yet. The last update was several months ago, the team seems focused on Pixelmator Pro for the Mac. They have added a few little things in that time, but nothing to rave about. Sorry, but I’ve been waiting for them to update it with local adjustments for too long now. Affinity Photo is super powerful, and once you get the hang of it, it is actually friendly. Affinity is an Image manipulation app, much more like Photoshop. Pixelmator is solely a RAW developer app (like a very light Lightroom). Incidentally, I'm also upset that Chrome removed JPEG XL, which promises to be a common format with proper HDR support.- Affinity Photo and Pixelmator Photo are two different kind of apps. Adobe has started adding some HDR stuff this year, and that's the only thing Adobe offers that Capture One lacks that I'm even remotely interested in. I want to be able to edit and view my RAW photos with extended dynamic range, not be limited to viewing an 8-bit SDR image while editing, and not be limited to exporting crappy 8-bit JPEGs that are missing so much dynamic range (or gargantuan TIFF files that have limited use cases). Even the common iPhone captures HDR photos (and I don't just mean HDR processing that gets stuffed into an 8-bit JPEG, I mean an actual HDR photo in 10-bit HEIF with an HDR curve). The RAW files contain a stunning amount of dynamic range. The one thing I disliked about both Capture One and Lightroom at the time is that neither supported proper, end-to-end HDR workflows. I also strongly appreciate being able to have a perpetual license, instead of being forced to subscribe for the rest of my life if I want to be able to continue accessing all of my RAWs with the adjustments I make, and not just the exported photos. I did not consider Lightroom CC to be a valid option for various reasons. I don't remember all the details as I did this comparison about a year ago. Capture One handled importing new batches of photos surprisingly better than Lightroom Classic, which actually locked up for long periods of time, and all sorts of other operations seemed faster, as if the underlying engine was not ancient. Even though it is more expensive for people who intend to upgrade regularly, it is worth every penny in my opinion, but I also think a lot of people will be able to get along fine on the freeware license. Regardless, I tried Capture One and Lightroom Classic side by side, and I liked Capture One a lot better. Capture One does sell perpetual licenses, so I guess it depends on how often you upgrade. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |