Tenacious wrote:
You feel like ImageFX was better or simply in the same ballpark?
I've had every version of ImageFX since 3.0, and I also use Photogenics 5.0. Photogenics is a much better paint package than ImageFX, but IFX is more powerful when it comes to image processing, especially when multiple layers are used.
Photogenics is a little buggy, but for the most part it's very usable. I don't think it's any more buggy than ImageFX is. They both have their moments. Photogenics' drawing tools are more powerful than ImageFX's, and it has a more interactive method of undo.
I have no docs and I find IFX less than intuitive to use without a lot of experimentation.
ImageFX is quirky at first, and I was pretty clumsy with it until I picked up the Catalyzer videos. They're pretty good at introducing a lot of ImageFX's layout and capabilities. I have a large number of notes and diagrams from the times I taught others about ImageFX. If there were enough people who'd be interested, I might assemble them into a usable collection.
ImageFX draws a lot, and I mean A LOT, of power from ARexx scripting. Without documentation, that aspect of the program is lost.
PG does seem more user friendly.
I use ImageFX a lot more than PG, so I've gotten familiar enough with it that it's my first choice. I did pick up quite a bit about Photogenics from the tutorials, but some of its features still seem a little obscure.
