Photoshop Elements/Premiere Elements

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Eric Babula, Jul 6, 2005.

  1. Eric Babula

    Eric Babula Guest

    I'm looking at these two pieces of software in an ad from Circuit City,
    for $99.99US. Is this a good deal? The ad says it's a savings of $50.

    What's the difference between Photoshop Elements and regular Photoshop?
    At this price, I'm assuming regular Photoshop can do a whole lot more
    than PS Elements. But, what, exactly do I not get, if I buy PS Elements?
    Or, conversely, what features does regular PS have that PS Elements
    doesn't. Is it THAT much better, that I should spend $600 for it? Why
    would I use one of these programs over the other?

    Are these two pieces of software worth getting, for a hundred bucks? I
    just looked at the Adobe website, and ran thru the little video clips,
    and they both seem like very cool tools. But, I know there's a lot of
    marketing behind those videos, so I don't necessarily trust that they're
    as easy to use and powerful as the videos claim.

    I'd like to hear from those of you who have experience with PS Elements
    and Primiere Elements, vs regular Photoshop.

    TIA,

    --
    Eric Babula
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
     
    Eric Babula, Jul 6, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Eric Babula

    Kitt Guest

    Try here:

    http://graphicssoft.about.com/cs/photoshop/f/elementscompare.htm

    You might also want to check out Paint Shop Pro before you buy, as well
    as a few other alternatives.

    Kitt



    Eric Babula wrote:
    > I'm looking at these two pieces of software in an ad from Circuit City,
    > for $99.99US. Is this a good deal? The ad says it's a savings of $50.
    >
    > What's the difference between Photoshop Elements and regular Photoshop?
    > At this price, I'm assuming regular Photoshop can do a whole lot more
    > than PS Elements. But, what, exactly do I not get, if I buy PS Elements?
    > Or, conversely, what features does regular PS have that PS Elements
    > doesn't. Is it THAT much better, that I should spend $600 for it? Why
    > would I use one of these programs over the other?
    >
    > Are these two pieces of software worth getting, for a hundred bucks? I
    > just looked at the Adobe website, and ran thru the little video clips,
    > and they both seem like very cool tools. But, I know there's a lot of
    > marketing behind those videos, so I don't necessarily trust that they're
    > as easy to use and powerful as the videos claim.
    >
    > I'd like to hear from those of you who have experience with PS Elements
    > and Primiere Elements, vs regular Photoshop.
    >
    > TIA,
    >
    > --
    > Eric Babula
    > Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
     
    Kitt, Jul 6, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Eric Babula" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns968BA9E1DAF3ebabulacare2com@66.192.254.231...
    > I'm looking at these two pieces of software in an ad from Circuit City,
    > for $99.99US. Is this a good deal? The ad says it's a savings of $50.
    >
    > What's the difference between Photoshop Elements and regular Photoshop?
    > At this price, I'm assuming regular Photoshop can do a whole lot more
    > than PS Elements. But, what, exactly do I not get, if I buy PS Elements?
    > Or, conversely, what features does regular PS have that PS Elements
    > doesn't. Is it THAT much better, that I should spend $600 for it? Why
    > would I use one of these programs over the other?


    Hey, there are things in Elements 3 which are not in Photoshop CS2. I read a
    review of CS2 and while it kicked Elements but he kept referring to cool
    things that were in Elements 3.
     
    Dave R knows who, Jul 6, 2005
    #3
  4. Eric Babula

    Bill Hilton Guest

    > Eric Babula writes ...
    >
    >What's the difference between Photoshop Elements and regular
    >Photoshop? ... I'd like to hear from those of you who have
    >experience with PS Elements and Primiere Elements, vs regular
    >Photoshop.


    I don't use Premier, but I've been a Photoshop user for 7 years and
    passed the "Adobe Certified Expert" exam and recently I've been using
    Elements 3 so I could teach a friend in Holland (who has this program
    and no digital experience) how to do the basics. Basically there's
    little doubt you're better off with Elements 3 right now since it's
    aimed at hobbyists and does a good job for the money, while Photoshop
    is aimed at professionals who need the advanced features and feel it's
    a bargain at $600.

    The link Kitt provided lists the differences (I would add a couple of
    other things that are either missing or that I can't find yet in E 3
    like better support in ImageReady for web design and no Guides, but
    it's a good article) ... as a Photoshop user I would feel limited
    dropping down to E 3 (I miss LAB mode, Actions, Curves, advanced
    Shadow/Highlight tool and a lot more) but for a new user at the
    hobbyist level there's no doubt Elements will do what you need for the
    right price.

    >I'm looking at these two pieces of software in an ad from Circuit
    >City, for $99.99US. Is this a good deal?


    You can get Photoshop Elements 3 for about $60 on sale (or with a
    rebate) at many places and it's also bundled as a freebie with a fairly
    large number of devices (I got mine free with a new Wacom tablet, my
    friend got his free with a scanner purchase, for example). $100 for
    both programs sounds about right, but only if you *really* need
    Premier.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Jul 6, 2005
    #4
  5. Eric Babula

    Bill Funk Guest

    On 06 Jul 2005 21:39:23 GMT, Eric Babula <> wrote:

    >I'm looking at these two pieces of software in an ad from Circuit City,
    >for $99.99US. Is this a good deal? The ad says it's a savings of $50.
    >
    >What's the difference between Photoshop Elements and regular Photoshop?
    >At this price, I'm assuming regular Photoshop can do a whole lot more
    >than PS Elements. But, what, exactly do I not get, if I buy PS Elements?
    >Or, conversely, what features does regular PS have that PS Elements
    >doesn't. Is it THAT much better, that I should spend $600 for it? Why
    >would I use one of these programs over the other?
    >
    >Are these two pieces of software worth getting, for a hundred bucks? I
    >just looked at the Adobe website, and ran thru the little video clips,
    >and they both seem like very cool tools. But, I know there's a lot of
    >marketing behind those videos, so I don't necessarily trust that they're
    >as easy to use and powerful as the videos claim.
    >
    >I'd like to hear from those of you who have experience with PS Elements
    >and Primiere Elements, vs regular Photoshop.
    >
    >TIA,


    I still use PSP and PS Elephants 2

    I've tried Premiere Elements (I got it for free as a giveaway at a
    conference); it will only recognize video it's imported. Any video you
    already have will not be compatible.

    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
    funktionality.blogspot.com
     
    Bill Funk, Jul 7, 2005
    #5
  6. "Bill Funk" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > I still use PSP and PS Elephants 2


    How is that spell checker working? :)
     
    Dave R knows who, Jul 7, 2005
    #6
  7. Eric Babula

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Dave R knows who wrote:
    > "Eric Babula" <> wrote in message
    > news:Xns968BA9E1DAF3ebabulacare2com@66.192.254.231...
    >
    >>I'm looking at these two pieces of software in an ad from Circuit City,
    >>for $99.99US. Is this a good deal? The ad says it's a savings of $50.
    >>
    >>What's the difference between Photoshop Elements and regular Photoshop?
    >>At this price, I'm assuming regular Photoshop can do a whole lot more
    >>than PS Elements. But, what, exactly do I not get, if I buy PS Elements?
    >>Or, conversely, what features does regular PS have that PS Elements
    >>doesn't. Is it THAT much better, that I should spend $600 for it? Why
    >>would I use one of these programs over the other?

    >
    >
    > Hey, there are things in Elements 3 which are not in Photoshop CS2. I read a
    > review of CS2 and while it kicked Elements but he kept referring to cool
    > things that were in Elements 3.
    >
    >
    >

    PSE3 has a photo organizer, which makes keeping track of your pictures
    easy, and a couple of features that aren't in PhotoShop CS, but if you
    need the 'hard core' editing features, then PSE probably isn't for you.
    IF your needs are less stringent, then you might find PSE3 a great
    value. I certainly do.


    --
    Ron Hunter
     
    Ron Hunter, Jul 7, 2005
    #7
  8. How deeply is Eric involved with still photography (Photoshop Elements
    3) and video photography (Premiere Elements)?

    I've discovered that still images titillate me, but I have neither
    talent nor interest in making video (moving pictures). Two horses for
    different courses. I obviously have little I can say about Adobe
    "Premiere Elements."

    Bill H's post says a good deal about consumer-grade "Elements 3" (and
    its competitor "Paint Shop Pro") versus industrial-strength "Photoshop
    CS2."

    If Eric needs to ask a newsgroup whether he will be served better by
    either "Elements 3" or "Photoshop CS2," then I suggest that he first
    learn the utility of the less expensive ($60 at discount - $100 full
    price) software.

    Adobe does offer an upgrade path (about US$400) to get from "Elements"
    to "Photoshop," so what money he spends on the introduction isn't
    totally lost.

    I suspect that many users of Photoshop CS2 reasonably expect to make
    money with their skills.

    I do chuckle over Bill F's simile of "PS Elephants 2," for I have
    several friends who prefer "Paint Shop Pro."
     
    camera critter, Jul 7, 2005
    #8
  9. Eric Babula

    Fishface Guest

    Eric Babula wrote:
    > I'm looking at these two pieces of software in an ad from Circuit City,
    > for $99.99US. Is this a good deal? The ad says it's a savings of $50.


    Be aware that Adobe Premiere and Premiere Elements REQUIRE
    Windows XP.
     
    Fishface, Jul 7, 2005
    #9
  10. "camera critter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Bill H's post says a good deal about consumer-grade "Elements 3" (and
    > its competitor "Paint Shop Pro") versus industrial-strength "Photoshop
    > CS2."
    >

    <some good stuff snipped>
    >
    > I do chuckle over Bill F's simile of "PS Elephants 2," for I have
    > several friends who prefer "Paint Shop Pro."
    >


    PSP is far more a competitor to PS. In fact Adobe was forced to integrate
    features into PS such as .gif and .jpg optimizers, vector shapes, vector
    drawing abilities, and an image browser because so many PhotoShop 4, 5, 6, 7
    customers were complaining that PSP (since forever I think) had all of them
    and more.

    Elements 3 doesn't even come close to PSP 9 in terms of advanced features
    like curves, adjustment layers, vector drawing, and a slew of options to
    enhance workflow including scripting and recording. PSP 9 is by far the best
    value [both price wise and ease of use wise] on the market for web graphics
    work, and is still an exceptional value for home and small business usage
    and printing. For highend illustration and editing going to printing [for
    glossy mags, posters, and areas where precision color is needed] CorelDraw
    12 will do, or Photoshop in combination with Illustrator are still best.
    Let's face it though, nearly one of those professionals is ever seen in
    public newsgroups, they're too busy making big bucks to bother. The rest of
    us are getting pleasing results using PSP and printing at home, plus going
    to a good print lab for those special print projects that need more than a
    home equipment look.

    Take care,
    Linda
     
    Linda Nieuwenstein, Jul 7, 2005
    #10
  11. Eric Babula

    PanHandler Guest

    "Dave R knows who" <> wrote in message
    news:2ZZye.3307$p%...
    >
    > "Bill Funk" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >> I still use PSP and PS Elephants 2

    >
    > How is that spell checker working? :)

    'Elephants' would have passed a spell-checker; it's spelled correctly.
     
    PanHandler, Jul 7, 2005
    #11
  12. "Eric Babula" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns968BA9E1DAF3ebabulacare2com@66.192.254.231...

    > What's the difference between Photoshop Elements and regular Photoshop?
    > At this price, I'm assuming regular Photoshop can do a whole lot more
    > than PS Elements. But, what, exactly do I not get, if I buy PS Elements?


    I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I've read that PS Elements 2 (which
    I'm using, haven't tried 3) has about 85% of the features of PhotoShop 7 in
    it. Whatever the case, I think it's got more than enough features for the
    average user, although I'd like it better if it had a curves feature as
    well.
     
    Paul Fedorenko, Jul 7, 2005
    #12
  13. Eric Babula

    Guest

    I've used both Photoshop and Photoshop Elements - plenty. And I don't
    see much difference between the two of them for 99% of all use - least
    of all enough to justify the price difference.

    Browse this gun show for FREE! Shop the
    http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW
     
    , Jul 7, 2005
    #13
  14. Eric Babula

    Don Stauffer Guest

    Ron Hunter wrote:
    > PSE3 has a photo organizer, which makes keeping track of your pictures
    > easy, and a couple of features that aren't in PhotoShop CS, but if you
    > need the 'hard core' editing features, then PSE probably isn't for you.
    > IF your needs are less stringent, then you might find PSE3 a great
    > value. I certainly do.
    >
    >

    One of these hard core features that the full PS has is an unmatched
    ability in doing pre-press work such as color seperation negatives.
    This work is needed if your work will be reproduced on a printing press
    (not a computer printer).

    Most amateur and occasional photographers will never need these
    features, but if you are regularly submitting photos to be done on
    printing press, as with magazines or newspapers, PS does the best job.

    However, for occasional shots sent to a magazine, the mag's staff can do
    a pretty decent job on a file you send them.
     
    Don Stauffer, Jul 7, 2005
    #14
  15. Eric Babula

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 23:39:42 GMT, "Dave R knows who"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Bill Funk" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >
    >> I still use PSP and PS Elephants 2

    >
    >How is that spell checker working? :)
    >

    Just fine.
    Did I spell "and" wrong? :)

    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
    funktionality.blogspot.com
     
    Bill Funk, Jul 7, 2005
    #15
  16. Eric Babula

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >Linda Nieuwenstein writes ...
    >
    >PSP is far more a competitor to PS.


    I only used PSP for a few days before deleting it (free 30 day trial
    with a new computer) but based on what I experienced I'd say PSP isn't
    as good as Elements 3 and is definitely not a threat to Photoshop,
    given the features I require. This was with either PSP 7 or 8 so dunno
    if it's still true but here is what I saw when I tried to use it ...

    1) Opened PSP and tried to open one of my film scan tiffs ... wouldn't
    open. Why not? Hmm, turns out the PSP version I tried won't open 16
    bit files (will PSP 9? dunno). This means none of my film scans or
    RAW conversions can even be read by this program ... hmm, big strike
    one. Elements 3 will open 16 bit files and do most operations on them.

    2) So I opened a *real* image editor (Photoshop) and converted a
    couple of files to 8 bits/channel just for PSP ... PSP then choked on
    my Ektaspace working space tag (what I use for Velvia film scans since
    it has a wide gamut matching slide film). OK, I figure I'll have to
    change the tag from Ektaspace to AdobeRGB so again I opened the *real*
    image editor and did the conversion ... and darned if PSP wouldn't
    recognize AdobeRGB either (Elements 3 does) ... in fact the only
    working space it seemed to recognize was sRGB, a limited gamut space
    for web images and uncalibrated monitors. Pretty unimpressive ... I
    saved a file and it stripped the profile I had when I opened it, so PSP
    is actually destructive to images opened with other working spaces if
    you save them.

    After a few minutes of trying various operations (which PSP does quite
    nicely, as do the other basic programs) I decided to delete it from my
    system. Again, I don't know if PSP 9 is better behaved but so long as
    there is no CMYK support, no 16 bit support and incredibly weak ICM
    color management support the program is not good enough for most
    serious photographers printing large prints, I feel, and it's a sick
    joke to even try to compare it to Photoshop.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Jul 7, 2005
    #16
  17. Linda Nieuwenstein wrote:
    >>

    > PSP is far more a competitor to PS. In fact Adobe was forced to integrate...


    << Snipped bits out >>

    PS Elements makes a lot of sense for the person who may carry his or her
    profession, hobby, avocation, vocation, whatever, to the next level. The
    learning curve alone makes Elements the right choice, as the transition
    to PS CS is all the easier. Not everyone, of course, will want to move
    past the basics.

    And PSP is Windows only.

    --
    John McWilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Jul 7, 2005
    #17
  18. "Bill Hilton" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >Linda Nieuwenstein writes ...
    >>
    >>PSP is far more a competitor to PS.

    >
    > I only used PSP for a few days before deleting it (free 30 day trial
    > with a new computer) but based on what I experienced I'd say PSP isn't
    > as good as Elements 3 and is definitely not a threat to Photoshop,
    > given the features I require. This was with either PSP 7 or 8 so dunno
    > if it's still true but here is what I saw when I tried to use it ...
    >


    Elements exists because of the pressure PSP was placing on PS and declining
    sales (don't forget the pirating of PS is huge), ask anyone in the know at
    Adobe. Adobe shot itself in the foot though becausue if it places too many
    advanced features in Elements than its PS users will get upset, and new
    potential customers will see no sense in wasting $600+ another $400 for
    illustration software). . Thus the reason for important features like Curves
    missing from Elements....but they are in PSP, as are Adjustment Layers,
    Levels, Black and White points, and the unbeatable Background Eraser. Corel
    PSP has it all, at a very low price with no concerns of putting too much in
    PSP. PSP can only get better and the price has always been more than fair,
    and support excellent. Adobe and support is like a circus elephant without
    peanuts...not nice at all.

    Since the difference between PSP 7 and PSP 8/9 is night and day I'd suggest
    your few day trial of the version you're not sure of means very little. Try
    again with PSP 9.

    Your other points are moot since your argument is based on misinformation.
    It is a shame you gave up so quickly on PSP, but frankly a real professional
    uses all tools available to them in combination. More professionals have PSP
    installed on their machines all the time because there are things PSP can do
    easier/faster than PS, and even some features that PS just doesn't have that
    are super handy and effective to graphics design. The same holds true for
    press work, PS has things PSP doesn't, yet...

    It makes sense to have both, but Elements a competitor to PSP? Not even
    close. Adobe will have to add more features from PS and that's not going to
    happen any time soon.

    Take care,
    Linda
     
    Linda Nieuwenstein, Jul 8, 2005
    #18
  19. "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > PS Elements makes a lot of sense for the person who may carry his or her
    > profession, hobby, avocation, vocation, whatever, to the next level. The
    > learning curve alone makes Elements the right choice, as the transition to
    > PS CS is all the easier. Not everyone, of course, will want to move past
    > the basics.
    >
    > And PSP is Windows only.
    >


    Both points are fair enough arguments against PSP in the past, and lesser so
    now. Both arguments are based on low percentages since the 'masses' far out
    number those who will go pro and actually 'purchase' (not pirate) PS, and
    work on Mac. Last stats I saw about a year ago indicated that Macs hold only
    16% of the market and declining. In fact I read a while back that several of
    the larger image editing (including 3d animation) companies in light of
    increased competition from what used to be peons, were placing Mac
    development on the back burning for new software (whole new product not
    updates like version 8 to 9 of existing software), and existing Mac software
    versions were being developed last [after Windows version] if and as time
    and money permits. Heck in a few years all the big companies will be falling
    to knew printer technology is my guess (althoug one company has foresight
    and is already developing 'in device' image editing software. The next 5
    years will prove interesting for new technology and trends I think.

    Take care,
    Linda
     
    Linda Nieuwenstein, Jul 8, 2005
    #19
  20. "Linda Nieuwenstein" <> wrote in message
    news:__yze.15$...
    >
    > "Bill Hilton" <> wrote in message
    >>
    >> I only used PSP for a few days before deleting it (free 30 day trial
    >> with a new computer) but based on what I experienced I'd say PSP isn't
    >> as good as Elements 3 and is definitely not a threat to Photoshop,
    >> given the features I require. This was with either PSP 7 or 8 so dunno
    >> if it's still true but here is what I saw when I tried to use it ...
    >>

    >
    > Your other points are moot since your argument is based on misinformation.

    Oh sorry, forgot to say why your points are moot. PSP has never (as far back
    as I can recall) had problems opening 16-bit images, images with embedded
    profiles, or aRGB because PSP has always just stripped the image's gamut
    prior to displaying it. In PSP you work in sRGB (most frequently used color
    space in modern day...backed my most equipment available). Why your images
    didn't open probably had a lot more to do with your save configuration in
    PS, or the known issue of PS (up to version 7 that I know of) improperly
    recording the image data at time of saving. Most people who only use PS
    would never notice, but the weakness becomes evident PS saved images are
    used in non-Adobe software. Some have argued this is done on purpose to
    discourage the use of other software to maintain company loyality.

    Take care,
    Linda
     
    Linda Nieuwenstein, Jul 8, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mick.

    Adobe Premiere elements 1.0, instructions

    Mick., Dec 26, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    652
    Mick.
    Dec 26, 2004
  2. Dustin

    Quality of Adobe Premiere Elements slideshow output

    Dustin, Dec 4, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    424
    Dustin
    Dec 4, 2004
  3. dubian
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    607
    dubian
    Dec 8, 2005
  4. k

    Adobe Premiere Elements

    k, Jan 28, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    365
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
    Jan 31, 2005
  5. bboyd23
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    3,515
    R. C. White
    Nov 25, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page