Looking for good creative filter software

[Jill Morgan]

With most of  my sales going to be online this Christmas, I am looking to design some artistic creative images for tote bags, mugs, masks, etc.

 

I've purchased Luminar and absolutely love it.  I want to create some crazy artistic images using software that comes with some really creative filters. I have played with Filter Forge but the rendering time is insane. 

 

I am building a new desktop for myself with an i7 processor, heavy duty graphics card and 16gb of RAM so hopefully the creative will move a bit quicker.

 

I wasn't impressed with the new edition of Topaz Labs Studio filters.  I have done tons of googling, but can't seem to find what I am looking for.

 

I don't mind spending the money if the software is worth it.  I believe you get what you pay for.

 

Jill

[MariaJ]

Hi Jill,  are you looking for a program that applies filters, or just the filters themselves?    If the latter, there are some nice looking texture available through this site:  https://www.dailytexture.com/

 

Maria

[MDM]

12 hours ago, Jill Morgan said:

With most of  my sales going to be online this Christmas, I am looking to design some artistic creative images for tote bags, mugs, masks, etc.

 

I've purchased Luminar and absolutely love it.  I want to create some crazy artistic images using software that comes with some really creative filters. I have played with Filter Forge but the rendering time is insane. 

 

I am building a new desktop for myself with an i7 processor, heavy duty graphics card and 16gb of RAM so hopefully the creative will move a bit quicker.

 

I wasn't impressed with the new edition of Topaz Labs Studio filters.  I have done tons of googling, but can't seem to find what I am looking for.

 

I don't mind spending the money if the software is worth it.  I believe you get what you pay for.

 

Jill

 

What is it about Topaz that you don't like? I know they changed it a lot on the surface but the arty stuff is all still in there.I bought it on a Black Friday deal a few years ago and don't use it much but it is certainly a good starting point for what you are talking about in terms of the content. It just requires a different approach. 

 

For what it's worth, 16GB of RAM is not a lot for a high end graphics machine. I would go 32 GB minimum if I were you. 

[Roadrunner]

I've always been a fan of the Nik Collection. You can download a 30 day trial at

https://nikcollection.dxo.com/download/

[Jill Morgan]

53 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

What is it about Topaz that you don't like? I know they changed it a lot on the surface but the arty stuff is all still in there.I bought it on a Black Friday deal a few years ago and don't use it much but it is certainly a good starting point for what you are talking about in terms of the content. It just requires a different approach. 

 

For what it's worth, 16GB of RAM is not a lot for a high end graphics machine. I would go 32 GB minimum if I were you. 

 

Topaz didn't seem to have enough of the funky kind of creative I am looking for.  Maybe I didn't hunt through it enough.

 

My 2 gaming sons told me 16gb was more than enough.  The graphics card was more important.  I have 8gb on the gpu. My one son does film editing and runs Premiere Pro, After Effects and Photoshop all at the same time moving files between them and they run seamlessly.

 

Jill

[Jill Morgan]

6 minutes ago, Rico said:

I've always been a fan of the Nik Collection. You can download a 30 day trial at

https://nikcollection.dxo.com/download/

 

Nik is more for photo improvement and enhancement as opposed to creative arty effects.  I can find tons for phones, but almost nothing for pcs. The ones I do find for pcs compress the images way down and are useless. Designed for web use as opposed to print.

 

Jill

[M.Chapman]

4 hours ago, MDM said:

For what it's worth, 16GB of RAM is not a lot for a high end graphics machine. I would go 32 GB minimum if I were you. 

 

Agreed. I was surprised recently when using PS and LR with 16GB RAM I started running out  of memory and my machine slowed to a crawl. I’ve been running on 16GB machines for ages without problems. I’ve now doubled the RAM to 32GB for £70. With RAM  so cheap it’s well worth having the extra headroom. PS CC seems to be reluctant to release RAM when images are closed.

 

Mark

[MDM]

15 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

 

Agreed. I was surprised recently when using PS and LR with 16GB RAM I started running out  of memory and my machine slowed to a crawl. I’ve been running on 16GB machines for ages without problems. I’ve now doubled the RAM to 32GB for £70. With RAM  so cheap it’s well worth having the extra headroom. PS CC seems to be reluctant to release RAM when images are closed.

 

Mark

Yes definitely. For the sort of thing Jill is talking about, I would go 32GB at least given how cheap RAM is nowadays. 

[GeoffK]

28 minutes ago, MDM said:

Yes definitely. For the sort of thing Jill is talking about, I would go 32GB at least given how cheap RAM is nowadays. 

 

If Jill can find a software that uses CUDA core rendering (I use it with Blender), then GPU rendering is far quicker than large GB RAM. That's why Luminar is slow, it's not set up for GPU rendering.

 

When I started 3D rendering via CPU it would be hours for a render (glass/caustics etc) , sometimes overnight - 5 or 6 GB of DDR5 in a graphics card utilising CUDA significantly cuts that time. OpenCL is an alternative.

 

 

[MDM]

31 minutes ago, GeoffK said:

 

If Jill can find a software that uses CUDA core rendering (I use it with Blender), then GPU rendering is far quicker than large GB RAM. That's why Luminar is slow, it's not set up for GPU rendering.

 

When I started 3D rendering via CPU it would be hours for a render (glass/caustics etc) , sometimes overnight - 5 or 6 GB of DDR5 in a graphics card utilising CUDA significantly cuts that time. OpenCL is an alternative.

 

 

Oh I wasn’t talking about rendering, just general 2D graphics use with or without arty filters. I know nothing about rendering to be honest. 

[Jill Morgan]

1 hour ago, M.Chapman said:

 

Agreed. I was surprised recently when using PS and LR with 16GB RAM I started running out  of memory and my machine slowed to a crawl. I’ve been running on 16GB machines for ages without problems. I’ve now doubled the RAM to 32GB for £70. With RAM  so cheap it’s well worth having the extra headroom. PS CC seems to be reluctant to release RAM when images are closed.

 

Mark

 

I think a lot depends on the machine you are using.  When you custom build one, you can design the machine for what you are using it for.  Most premade desktops come with an integrated gpu as opposed to installing a separate card with more power. It makes a whale of a difference. I don't really need the i7, but my son already had it so figured I will use it. Need more fans to keep everything cool, but that's okay.  The cooler the better. My Lenova has 12gb of RAM and no issues running PS or Luminar. 

 

I even run PS on my ancient laptop that is 8 years old.  It only has 8gb of RAM and a much slower processor but does the job.  Can't have more than a few pics open at a time though.  I can't run Luminar or a few other apps on the laptop as the gpu isn't powerful enough.

 

Jill

[Jill Morgan]

1 hour ago, GeoffK said:

 

If Jill can find a software that uses CUDA core rendering (I use it with Blender), then GPU rendering is far quicker than large GB RAM. That's why Luminar is slow, it's not set up for GPU rendering.

 

When I started 3D rendering via CPU it would be hours for a render (glass/caustics etc) , sometimes overnight - 5 or 6 GB of DDR5 in a graphics card utilising CUDA significantly cuts that time. OpenCL is an alternative.

 

 

 

The graphics card I am getting is a NVIDIA, so will be CUDA enabled.

 

Jill

[GeoffK]

1 hour ago, MDM said:

Oh I wasn’t talking about rendering, just general 2D graphics use with or without arty filters. I know nothing about rendering to be honest. 

 

https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cc-gpu-card-faq.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MDM]

56 minutes ago, Jill Morgan said:

 

I think a lot depends on the machine you are using.  When you custom build one, you can design the machine for what you are using it for.  Most premade desktops come with an integrated gpu as opposed to installing a separate card with more power. It makes a whale of a difference. I don't really need the i7, but my son already had it so figured I will use it. Need more fans to keep everything cool, but that's okay.  The cooler the better. My Lenova has 12gb of RAM and no issues running PS or Luminar. 

 

I even run PS on my ancient laptop that is 8 years old.  It only has 8gb of RAM and a much slower processor but does the job.  Can't have more than a few pics open at a time though.  I can't run Luminar or a few other apps on the laptop as the gpu isn't powerful enough.

 

Jill

 It’s not as simple as just running PS. The image sizes (MP size) are important in determining how comfortably Photoshop or Lightroom can deal with them. Panoramas and multilayered files require a lot of RAM. You may well be fine with 16GB of course. I just like the comfort of 32 or more. 

[MDM]

2 minutes ago, GeoffK said:

 

https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cc-gpu-card-faq.html

 

 

 

 

I know Geoff. I wasn’t suggesting not to get a good graphics card. I have one myself and I would advise anyone getting a new computer to make sure to get an ample GPU. .I was just suggesting plenty of RAM as well. (Well done Arsenal 😀)

[GeoffK]

21 minutes ago, MDM said:

I know Geoff. I wasn’t suggesting not to get a good graphics card. I have one myself and I would advise anyone getting a new computer to make sure to get an ample GPU. .I was just suggesting plenty of RAM as well. (Well done Arsenal 😀)

 

You may be right.....at least about Arsenal...but I have never had more than 8GB of RAM and can still easily open and work on PS files which are up to 2.5GB. The point is that Adobe are enabling GPU acceleration on many/most? of their software - it's a trend worth bearing in mind. 

[MDM]

32 minutes ago, GeoffK said:

 

You may be right.....at least about Arsenal...but I have never had more than 8GB of RAM and can still easily open and work on PS files which are up to 2.5GB. The point is that Adobe are enabling GPU acceleration on many/most? of their software - it's a trend worth bearing in mind. 

 

OK but not my experience. Large files in Photoshop start using scratch disk and things slow to a crawl even with SSDs. Lightroom has some serious RAM requirements now as well I think. Not a big deal for a self build desktop PC as easily upgradeable but if I was buying a new MacBookPro it would be nothing less than 32GB. I recall you are not a Mac fan. 

[Jill Morgan]

2 hours ago, MDM said:

 It’s not as simple as just running PS. The image sizes (MP size) are important in determining how comfortably Photoshop or Lightroom can deal with them. Panoramas and multilayered files require a lot of RAM. You may well be fine with 16GB of course. I just like the comfort of 32 or more. 

 

As I mentioned in a previous post, my son does his film editing with 16GB of RAM, running Photoshop, Premiere Pro and After Effects all at the same time.  Render times are good for Premiere Pro, and these movies are large files.  The GPU has 8GB of VRAM.  I think I will be more than fine with this.

 

If I'm having no issues with 12Gb of RAM on my Lenova with an intergrated GPU that has no VRAM of its own but shares the system RAM, then I can do nothing but speed up with 16Gb of RAM and a dedicated GPU with 8GB of VRAM.

 

Still no one with any great filter software outside of Topaz and Filter Forge?

 

Jill