We also experienced a few crashes and numerous periods of inactivity – lasting around 10 to 20 seconds – during normal use. Importing our library of 56,000 photos took about five hours, and crashed each time it encountered a “corrupt or unreadable file”. Other aspects of performance weren’t so impressive, though. We also appreciated how easy it is to drag photos from the library directly onto a Batch Output template to initiate export. We didn’t have the two versions side by side to verify this, but we were able to compare it with Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.Įxports of 60 raw files to JPEG – complete with colour correction, noise reduction, sharpening and lens distortion correction – took two and a half minutes in AfterShot Pro 2, compared to four minutes in Lightroom 5. There’s a move to 64-bit code, which Corel claims makes raw processing 30% faster. On paper, AfterShot Pro 2 appears to stick to the lean, streamlined design brief. If Corel’s experience of consumer-orientated software could round out the features without compromising the existing core functions, it could have a Lightroom-killer on its hands.Ĭorel AfterShot Pro 2 review: new features That was pretty much it for features – there was no video support, mapping facilities or online hosting – but it was a strong foundation for Corel’s new acquisition.
Corel aftershot pro 3 vs corel paintshop pro full#
Whereas Lightroom offers a pared-back collection of functions for these local editing functions, AfterShot Pro offered up its full set, plus more versatile ways to define the area of the frame to be processed.
It surpassed Lightroom in its ability to process selected areas of the frame.
0 kommentar(er)
