Best image viewer, and why?

[Anusha]

Please post the image viewers you use and why. I want to find out the best image viewer out there.

[ICE]

ACDSee

well i havent used any other.. thats d reason:lol:

[G-Force]

ACDSee

well i havent used any other.. thats d reason:lol:
:yes: :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes:

[Anusha]

ACDSee

well i havent used any other.. thats d reason:lol:
That's still a valid reason :lol:

[fazaal24]

in XP i used FSViewer...

it has loadz of optionz and user friendly interface:D

[Anusha]

in XP i used FSViewer...

it has loadz of optionz and user friendly interface:D
Ok. But, why "used" in XP? What about Vista?

[charutha1]

acd see

[ehiranya]

:D Windows Picture and Fax Viewer! :D

[fazaal24]

Ok. But, why "used" in XP? What about Vista?

"used" b'cuz..i dnt use XP anymore..:D

in vista the default viewr..Image Gallery;)

[sandun_kg]

AcdSee

[Anusha]

Please tell the reason (pros) for using the viewer of your choice.

[Anusha]

I see a lot of ACDSee fans here. Please tell which version you are using as well.

[Dath]

ACDsee 4.0

first of all haven,t tried any other software b,cas i found this very handy as per my requirements.

4.0 was superb it,s find duplicates option was what i loved most.I used something called power pack suite which comes with plugins like image fox and with a cool image editing tool too.(cant remember name though:S)

Now they r doing version 9 right,but after 4th one i found all new versions r buggy.

Nowadays we don,t use image viewing software eeh ,cas no time 2 mess with Jpgs :lol: :D

[Anusha]

Nowadays we don,t use image viewing software eeh ,cas no time 2 mess with Jpgs
What does that supposed to mean? :confused:

[Dath]

What does that supposed to mean? :confused:

Just haven,t used ACDsee 4 a while that,s it bro...... :D :D

[Dath]

Anusha your Vista system rating eka keeyada enne ??????????

[shanX]

Windows Picture and Fax Viewer :)

[Anusha]

Anusha your Vista system rating eka keeyada enne ??????????
4.9

[Anusha]

Windows Picture and Fax Viewer :)
I've moved to IrfanView because it is very fast in rendering the images. It doesn't use antialiasing filters as most of the other viewers use. IMO, for just viewing purposes, that extra bit of quality improvement is not worth it, if it takes too long to render the image. Eg: it takes only 200 milliseconds to render a 4MPixel image in my PC with IrfanView.

ACDSee Pro 2.0 (still in beta) also has a very fast image rendering engine, but it's still in the beta and it crashed too often.

[blood_brotha]

Acdsee rockz.. i mean the older 1

[Sujakshan]

Iphoto

[ICE]

ACDSee 8

[Novindu]

WINdows picture n fax viewer:P:P da best;)

[Anusha]

WINdows picture n fax viewer:P:P da best;)
:D

[chamithal]

Viewing - Windows picture n fax viewer
Editing - Paint.NET

[nEoN_wHitE]

ACDSee

well i havent used any other.. thats d reason:lol:
yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa me 2:D
and im using da ver 9..
it easy maxxa and can do anythign v like with it:D:D:D

[nEoN_wHitE]

ACDSee 8
9;):D:D:D

[nabil]

windws picture n fax viewer .. da vista 1
actually its called photo gallery

[Ranhiru]

I can count on this Micrsoft Picture and Fax Viewer! I mean it loadz quickly and and is not much of trouble! Simple and Sweet! :lol:

[Anusha]

I can count on this Micrsoft Picture and Fax Viewer! I mean it loadz quickly and and is not much of trouble! Simple and Sweet! :lol:
I would be using it if I was in XP. In Vista, I'm using IrfanView.

[shanX]

I've moved to IrfanView because it is very fast in rendering the images. It doesn't use antialiasing filters as most of the other viewers use. IMO, for just viewing purposes, that extra bit of quality improvement is not worth it, if it takes too long to render the image. Eg: it takes only 200 milliseconds to render a 4MPixel image in my PC with IrfanView.

ACDSee Pro 2.0 (still in beta) also has a very fast image rendering engine, but it's still in the beta and it crashed too often.
Irfan View, hmmm... although hav seen the setup file on cds, never tried :D

B4 gettin used to Windows Picture and Fax Viewer in XP, I used several versions of ACDsee, its just awesome :yes:

:lol: You care abt fast in image rendering??? :rofl: :lol:

Well, isnt ACDsee 2, an old version?? :confused:

[shanX]

Viewing - Windows picture n fax viewer
Editing - Paint.NET
Macromedia Fireworks for editing ;)

[chrishanfernando]

windows picture and fax viewer

cuz its really eazy than acdc

[Anusha]

Irfan View, hmmm... although hav seen the setup file on cds, never tried :D

B4 gettin used to Windows Picture and Fax Viewer in XP, I used several versions of ACDsee, its just awesome :yes:

:lol: You care abt fast in image rendering??? :rofl: :lol:

Well, isnt ACDsee 2, an old version?? :confused:
It's ACDSee Pro 2
http://www.acdseepro.com/

(as in Premiere Pro 2 = 8th Premiere?)

About the rendering time....It's not a problem when the CPU is idle. But if the CPU is at full load and I wanna open an image, it will take too long, it the program is not optimized for faster viewing.

[shanX]

It's ACDSee Pro 2
http://www.acdseepro.com/

(as in Premiere Pro 2 = 8th Premiere?)

About the rendering time....It's not a problem when the CPU is idle. But if the CPU is at full load and I wanna open an image, it will take too long, it the program is not optimized for faster viewing.
k :D

Anyway am using WPFV, coz of its simplicity, rather than installing ACDsee ;)

[tckrockz]

"used" b'cuz..i dnt use XP anymore..:D

in vista the default viewr..Image Gallery;)
:yes: :yes: :yes: same here

[Dath]

4.9

Coool my one counts only 3.1 :( :( :( b,cas of VGA

[Dath]

It's ACDSee Pro 2
http://www.acdseepro.com/

(as in Premiere Pro 2 = 8th Premiere?)

About the rendering time....It's not a problem when the CPU is idle. But if the CPU is at full load and I wanna open an image, it will take too long, it the program is not optimized for faster viewing.

:confused:
never knew abt this :shocked:

[Anusha]

k :D

Anyway am using WPFV, coz of its simplicity, rather than installing ACDsee ;)
I just checked the image viewing capabilities of Vista's Windows Photo Gallery Viewer and IrfanView while the CPU is 100% at load (think of a video encoding scenario). It only took 1 second for IrfanView to show the image. WPGV took more than 5 seconds. It was a 4MPixel (2560x1600) wallpaper from Mac OSX. :)

[Anusha]

Coool my one counts only 3.1 :( :( :( b,cas of VGA
Mine too, because of the CPU and VGA. Both give 4.9.
CPU, because Vista thinks it's slow. :rolleyes: (Vista gives 4.8 for 2.8GHz Pentium D!!! WTF?!!!)
VGA, because it doesn't support SM3.0 :(

[shanX]

I just checked the image viewing capabilities of Vista's Windows Photo Gallery Viewer and IrfanView while the CPU is 100% at load (think of a video encoding scenario). It only took 1 second for IrfanView to show the image. WPGV took more than 5 seconds. It was a 4MPixel (2560x1600) wallpaper from Mac OSX. :)
:lol: Y u bothering so much abt Image render speed?? :confused:

R u into porn?? :P :rofl: ;)