Why are they not really free?

I am looking for free online photo editor and guess what - trying again and again I see they are not free. i started from befunky (I liked their lens flare effect option): uploaded a file, processed and before saving it on my laptop it offerd me payed subscription. I could not save the image at all. And again and again all the same - all of free sites are really payed. Google show them as free but they are not.

Do free powerful sites exist to process images and apply some beautiful, contemporarily looking effects?

Because most people want to make money on the products they made.

One way or another you get what someone pays for.

Why are you bothering to upload files to an online editor?

 

The free and open-source GIMP editor doesn't take up much space or need a very powerful processor. It's free to download and use as much as you like from gimp.org.

free and open-source GIMP editor

 

rodeo_joe is right, GIMP is a good option, although the learning curve can be a little steep in places

 

I am still mostly using my old purchased copy of Creative Suite 5, but when that dies (as it soon will with OS upgrades), I may well go to GIMP.

 

With your attitude about paying for the software you use, you really need to look at the Open Source apps..

I'm not a big fan of GIMP for a variety of reasons, but I don't think there's much arguing with the fact that it's the best FREE editor on the market and it truly is free software.

Having just purchased two refurbished E6400's (Windows 10) to augment my W8 Toshiba, I looked into the "free" version of PhotoScape X, as I have used the V3.x since 2000. The change between the two is drastic, and the "free" trial of X has that "send dollars & have a peek" popping up all the time. So I just put V3.7 onto the Windows 10 machines & all is good again. . same old screen. . no new habits to learn. V3.7 is not the latest - greatest clone of Photoshop most look for, but it works in my environment. Google "PhotoScape 3.7" and give it a try if you like. Aloha from the Mainland (till Nov 6!), Bill

Thanks for the GIMP link Joe. . .looks interesting. Bill

I've used Gimp for a long time & like it more every year, despite its complexity. I used PS before Gimp and learned how to do much of what PS does over time - but Gimp is not exactly intuitive, and the learning curve is steep. All in all, I'm sticking with it because it works well & does essentially all of what I need.

 

I also love Photoscape, but it's a very rudimentary editor - I use it mostly for screen capture (at which it excels) and simple animation.

I try Gimp from time to time and consistently find it a bug ridden mess with cryptic errors and support community barely capable of using MSpaint let alone Photoshop. If it works for you....great. Otherwise, you get what you pay for.

There is also Raw Therapee, which is free and open-source editing software for raw images. It is available for Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux. I just downloaded it on my Mac and will give it a try.

 

Like JDM, my main image editing software is Photoshop CS5,and worry about what the new mac OS will mean for my continued use of my 2010 Mac Pro computer and software. I also use Affinity Photo, and am always willing to try something new if it might be useful. Although not free, Affinity Photo is quite a bargain at $50 for full-feature image editing software.

There is also Raw Therapee, which is free and open-source editing software for raw images. It is available for Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux. I just downloaded it on my Mac and will give it a try.

It’s very good for RAW files. I use FastStone for photo file viewing & management, and have both Gimp & Raw Therapee in the “open with” right-click context menu. It feels a lot like the old Adobe Bridge - Lightroom - Photoshop structure.

Everything has a price, and "free" software simply means the owners are being paid in kind.

 

There is a coffee shop, according to the news last week, that charges nothing for their drinks other than all of your personal data - the kind you give for "free" to the likes of Google. Even Google apps offer in-app purchases if you want better service, including freedom from pop-up ads. Free software is like a Chevy II in the 80's - seats, steering wheel and engine were extras ;)

 

The only "free" things in this life are those paid with other people's money - until it runs out.

There is also Raw Therapee, which is free and open-source editing software for raw images. It is available for Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux. I just downloaded it on my Mac and will give it a try.

 

Like JDM, my main image editing software is Photoshop CS5,and worry about what the new mac OS will mean for my continued use of my 2010 Mac Pro computer and software. I also use Affinity Photo, and am always willing to try something new if it might be useful. Although not free, Affinity Photo is quite a bargain at $50 for full-feature image editing software.

Thank you, but I really used to use RT some years ago, but I did not like the colours and it was so slow (I used Olympus E-420 which was so good at its colours). Though the soft is awesome in its fine-tuning shadows and highlights. And RT does not apply good-looking effects and retoucheng as far as I know. I need cloning, retouching, modern lens flare, miniature (tilt shift) and easy cropping. :eek:

I also like analog colour emulation - does GIMP offer film emulation? I have Pentax with its SILKYPIX developer - an awesome software (also with built - in film emulation) but it does not have retouching, nor crop, nor horizon elignment, turning, etc.

Thank you, but I really used to use RT some years ago, but I did not like the colours and it was so slow (I used Olympus E-420 which was so good at its colours). Though the soft is awesome in its fine-tuning shadows and highlights. And RT does not apply good-looking effects and retoucheng as far as I know. I need cloning, retouching, modern lens flare, miniature (tilt shift) and easy cropping. :eek:

 

If you do that much editing, how much do you value your time to be worth per hour? How many hours of frustration does it take to justify spending $50 on Affinity Photo, which, it appears to me, will do everything that you want in an editor?

I know nothing about online editors. - I am pretty cheap when it comes to picking ISPs so it takes me an entire day to upload just 2 GB...

Since Rawtherapee and GIMP already got mentioned, let me add Darktable (now even for Windows!) to the list. It seems to be a RAW converter offering perspective manipulation cropping and rotating. it lacks clone stamping so you need to use something else. - GIMP? - for that. For a couple of free filters you could give Inpixio's free version a go or even good old Picasa.

 

In general I think odds that you'll find a somewhat usable software to download are higher than a free Online editor. - Somebody has to pay bandwidth and processing power for those; finding a hosting service for software must be easier.

I try Gimp from time to time and consistently find it a bug ridden mess with cryptic errors and support community barely capable of using MSpaint let alone Photoshop. If it works for you....great. Otherwise, you get what you pay for.

 

- Bug ridden mess? A bit harsh.

The hue-saturation module is a major fail, and some of the default settings are irritating, but on the whole it works very well. The dual mode (forward/backward) perspective control is extremely good, as are the curves and levels tools. Cloning and healing work just as well as PS, as do most of the other commonly used tools.

 

I've used much worse paid image editors; one of which left random orange speckles in the image. I mean, how do you manage to program that in? And then fail to notice it before release.

 

Adobe don't have a clean charge-sheet either. I remember one release that froze solid when a certain sequence of actions was performed. It took Adobe 3 months or so to bring out the patch for that one.

Edited October 11, 2018 by rodeo_joe|1

Online photo editing to me is a perfect example when native applications beat web applications, by a long mile.

 

GIMP has its quirks, and I cannot warm up to its interface at all. For a completely free editor, on Windows, my choice would be Paint.NET. Functionality-wise it's close to the GIMP, and its UI is somewhat more conventional.

For slightly more frequent use, I would bite the bullet, and get Affinity Photo. It's not very expensive, and in terms of functionality runs very close to Photoshop (while being cheaper than PS Elements). To me, easily worth its money.

Functionality-wise it's close to the GIMP, and its UI is somewhat more conventional.

 

- The GIMP can be easily configured to a 'conventional' single window interface, rather than floating tool and layer pallettes. It's all there in the View menu options.

 

Once configured to a single window, the setting 'sticks' until it's changed again.

 

It pays to download the separate (large) help file for GIMP, since it does have a few quirks. You just have to realise that the Photoshop way isn't the only way to do things.

I am looking for free online photo editor .....

I have been reading "Physics of Digital Photography" by Andy Rowlands. It is technical, but it has opened my eyes to the complexity of digital image processing. Just as one example are the many steps required to convert the RAW data into an acceptable image on the screen while avoiding strange artifacts in the image. Not to mention getting the colour right. And on it goes. The people who write all this software have to be not only dedicated to the craft of programming, but need to be good mathematicians too.

 

My point is that someone has to pay for all this expertise. Sure, some people are getting very rich. But your average Adobe or Apple software engineer is not. I want Adobe to continue to be able to afford the best programmers they can into the foreseeable future. Lightroom is a remarkable piece of software.

 

There are non-subscription options too, and lets hope those companies can survive.

 

No one is posting a question like "where can I get a free 40Mp digital Camera with a great 35mm-80mm lens?". Or where can I get a free MacBook Pro.

 

In my (probably unpopular opinion), if you are willing to buy a digital Camera, you should include in your budget the cost of good image processing software.

you should include in your budget the cost of good image processing software.

I would go for Corel PSP

No one is posting a question like "where can I get a free 40Mp digital Camera with a great 35mm-80mm lens?". Or where can I get a free MacBook Pro.

The matter of fact that Google show them as free but actually they aren't. That was my thought.

Picasa was free and what they should have done is to improve it.

Corel is not so expensive so Corel is an option.

Free online soft makes a sense - good traffic to the site and they can make money via ads. :oops:

If you consider the time and effort you use to acquire those images, plus the time needed to learn how to use an editing program effectively, you will (probably) realize free programs are the most expensive overall. I've spent over 20 years with Photoshop, and still haven't explored its depths. Various updates have been relatively incremental and painless to adopt. It does what I need it to do, now for $10/month, and is always up to date.

 

I adopted Photoshop because it was both parametric and subjective, and did not rely solely on sliders like Corel at the time. Having invested hundreds of hours in its use, why would I switch to a product which has changed form and scope so many times like Corel?

Edited October 19, 2018 by Ed_Ingold

Don't camera manufacturers furnish programs free to the camera buyer?