![]() Instead, when one clicks on the image it simply fills the screen but without providing some way of zooming into a section of special interest. ![]() Why FastStone doesn't have this feature is truly perplexing. The next in line for the throne is IrfanView, its difference from VuePrint is that after you map out the square you have to click on the square for it to enlarge/fill the screen-essentially it's an extra step, albeit a small one. With the mouse, you'd just map out/make a square of the section of the image you want enlarged then release the mouse key and voilà that area would fill the screen-a most invaluable feature for highly detailed/hi-res images. The 'Rolls Royce' viewer in that regard was always Hamrick's now-defunct VuePrint Pro*. However, unfortunately, I don't use FastStone Image Viewer for one very simple reason, that being the clumsy awkward way it scales images to view, essentially you cannot select a portion of an image to view as an enlargement. It even has a scaled-down version of my very favorite Photoshop adjustment tool: Shadow/Highlight but unfortunately which doesn't stretch to having tonal width, radius and midtone contrast adjustments a la PS. It has many useful features such as histograms, an excellent tree / file view with images, thumbnails or details mode and such which are quite on par with XnView.įurthermore, it has basic image editing which is fine for quick touch-ups. When compared side by side with default photo viewers, it easily holds its own.I rather like FastStone Image Viewer, it progressively gets better every time I come to review it. If all you need is an image viewer, this software is an excellent option. Since the basic version of ACDSee is free, you might as well try it and find out if its feature set and speed are ideal for you. The software is particularly useful if you regularly deal with batches of images since it can handle large volumes of data with no lag. The free version might be limited in advanced functions, but it is fast, efficient, and it costs nothing. There are more advanced versions of ACDSee that have expanded functions, but the free basic version is what most users will end up wanting. Toying around with the available options is a great way to find out what the tool can really do. While browsing your images, you can select an image to print, set the paper size and image format, and change various other options to personalize your printed image. It has several printing options that help you translate your images into physical representations. Zooming in and out of the current image is as easy as pressing the '-' and '+' symbols, and you can set that same image as the desktop background with a single click. There is never any delay between your commands being issued and carried out, and the convenient list of tools contains various implements that you'll find quite useful. Your system will not be slowed by any degree when you take advantage of the slim yet powerful size and functionality of ACDSee. It works well for professionals, but daily users have no need for such extravagance. For example, the industry standard for image viewing apps is certainly Adobe Lightroom, but that app is expensive, packed full of professional features, and heavy on system resources. ![]() ![]() However, each user is different, so what works best for one might not work at all for another. Just like every other variety of software, image viewers come in a range of qualities, and those qualities are generally related to the number of features in the software. ACDSee doesn't have this problem because the software was designed to forgo those additional functions in favor of optimal speed. That may sound strange, but what that basically means is that those apps sacrifice speed for extraneous functions that most users never need. They generally run too slowly, and that is often because those default viewers come with a few too many functions for them to be optimized for utility. Overall Opinion: If you've ever used the default photo viewer app in just about any operating system, you've probably realized one thing about all of them.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |