Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Photoshop Elements sale: $59 Aug 28 only

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Photoshop Elements sale: $59 Aug 28 only

 
 
sid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-02-2012
nospam wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, sid
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> > Certainly PS-6 was in the distant past and CS6 has moved way beyond
>> > what PS-6 offered.

>>
>> I should hope so for the money that you have spent to get to that point

>
> cs6 is spendy (although a drop in the bucket for a pro),


we are not talking pro use here are we?

> but photoshop
> elements for $59, as noted in the subject, is dirt cheap and can do a
> *lot* more than the gimp can.


What exactly can you achieve with elements that cannot be acheived with
gimp?


> you can even get photoshop elements for
> free bundled with some hardware.


not the latest version you wont

>> > Regarding differences between the two regarding what you might need to
>> > produce the images you do, you will probably get by without being
>> > limited by RGB & Gray Scale as color space choices.

>>
>> Yep that's fine for me and yourself I should think

>
> for many people it might be, but certainly not for all.


Isn't that what I just said?
>
>> > You will probably
>> > manage without content aware fill/correction.

>>
>> Ok, automatic cloning could be handy on occasion but does not stop me
>> cloning manually, which was how you had to do it until cs5

>
> sure, if you don't mind making more work for yourself.
>
> each successive version makes things easier than previous versions.
> computers are supposed to do the work for you, not the other way
> around.
>
> also, cs5 had content aware tools.


I already said that too

>> > You will probably never
>> > miss adjustment layers,

>>
>> you're right there, what do they do that I cannot achieve?

>
> quite a bit, namely non-destructive editing.


why do think I can't do that?

>
> you can change your adjustments long after you first made them, even
> after closing the file.
>
>> > or "Smart Objects".

>>
>> What do they do that I can't

>
> quite a bit, namely non-destructive editing.


Why do you think I cant do that?
>
> you can go back and un-blur something you blurred long ago, even after
> closing the file.


And?

>> > Most importantly there is
>> > probably no convincing you that these are just a few of the features
>> > available with what I use CS5, which you will find useless, but you
>> > have never tried any of them because the are not replicated in any way
>> > with your GIMP. CS6 has even more to offer.

>>
>> Why do you have to try and be condescending about it? Do you have some
>> sort of feeling of superiority because of the software you use?

>
> how is what he said condescending?
>
> your mind is made up and it doesn't sound like you'll ever try cs6 or
> elements or anything else.


You definitely haven't provided any reason for me to do so

>> > So my suggestion is to actually check out what Adobe has to say about
>> > their product & its new features, and download and examine CS6 for
>> > yourself:
>> > <
>> > http://www.adobe.com/products/photos...atures._sl_id-

>> contentfilter_sl_featuredisplaytypes_sl_new.html
>>
>> If adobe produced cross platform software then perhaps I would

>
> they do. just about *all* of adobe's software is cross platform,
> particularly photoshop.


No, for my platform, it is not,

>> > also find working with GIMP awkward, but that is a personal issue, as I
>> > have said if you are comfortable using GIMP, who am I to criticize you
>> > choice, i just feel that CS5/6 is the better, more capable piece of
>> > software.

>>
>> That still doesn't tell me what you can achieve that I can not. Is
>> finished product the reason for all this or is it not?

>
> if you don't mind doing everything the hard way, then go for it.


content aware fill seems to be the only thing to actually be not do able
with gimp

> meanwhile, photoshop users will be producing more and better photos in
> less time with fewer headaches.


quantify how you can produce more and particularly better photos using
photoshop. I'm very quick with gimp as I've been using it for a long time,
I've not had a headache from it, ever.

And, because that's what I want, I'll ask again how are your photos better
because of photoshop?

--
sid
RLU 300284
2010.2
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
sid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
Savageduck wrote:

>>>>> ...but GIMP is "free".
>>>>
>>>> righto then, I'll ask the specific question. What, can you achieve with
>>>> your ps/cs whatever that I cannot with my gimp. I haven't used ps since
>>>> version 6 10 or 12 years ago and I don't see any of you avid ps users
>>>> posting any pics that could not be processed using gimp.
>>>

>>
>>> Certainly PS-6 was in the distant past and CS6 has moved way beyond
>>> what PS-6 offered.

>>
>> I should hope so for the money that you have spent to get to that point

>
> What does that have to do with anything?


You brought price into in the first instance, do you not see the first line
in this post, but apart from that nothing at all.
>
>>> Regarding differences between the two regarding what you might need to
>>> produce the images you do, you will probably get by without being
>>> limited by RGB & Gray Scale as color space choices.

>>
>> Yep that's fine for me and yourself I should think

>
> Fine for you maybe, but certainly not for me.


Where are all these images where you need more than that? I'm sure I've seen
as much of your good work as anyone here but nothing that cant be done with
different tools to you.

>
>>> You will probably
>>> manage without content aware fill/correction.

>>
>> Ok, automatic cloning could be handy on occasion but does not stop me
>> cloning manually, which was how you had to do it until cs5

>
> What "automatic cloning"?
>
> I was talking about content aware fill/correction, and in CS6 there is
> considerably more, but I am sure you haven't even bothered to read
> about those features.


From the demo that I have seen that's what content aware fill/correction
does

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH0aEp1oDOI


>>> You will probably never
>>> miss adjustment layers,

>>
>> you're right there, what do they do that I cannot achieve?

>
>>> or "Smart Objects".

>>
>> What do they do that I can't

>
> Quite a bit, you should read about them some time, not the least of
> which is opening from ACR as a 32-bit Smart object which can provide a
> different level of adjustment, plus the ability to be taken back into
> ACR for double processing, but you probably wouldn't use that anyway.


you're right again oh wise sage, why oh why would I ever need that level of
superiority, my images just do not come up to your high standards, or is it
that I just do not feel that level of over complexity is at all necessary

But anyway, there you go with that condescending attitude again.

>>> So my suggestion is to actually check out what Adobe has to say about
>>> their product & its new features, and download and examine CS6 for
>>> yourself:
>>> <
>>> http://www.adobe.com/products/photos...atures._sl_id-

>> contentfilter_sl_featuredisplaytypes_sl_new.html
>>
>> If adobe produced cross platform software then perhaps I would

>
> Why on earth should Adobe produce an open source version of CS6 for
> Linux? They are a successful commercial enterprise, and the Linux base
> is an insignificant market to chase.


I never said they should did I?

> So the reality of the situation is, you have made the choice to use
> Linux exclusively,


Yes we have

> and because the closest open source image editing SW
> to PS you can find is GIMP.


See, even at this point you don't seem to believe there are choices other
than PS, if I wanted to use PS I could, cs5 runs under wine apparently but
why would I need to run it to achieve what I already achieve without it.


> You like Floyd, and Pablo are rabidly
> locked into your choices and will remain blind to alternatives, many of
> them which are superior to the GIMP.


I'm sorry duck but the rabid frothing over software is coming from you, Alan
and your best mate nospam. No change there then.

> I also find working with GIMP awkward, but that is a personal issue, as I
>>> have said if you are comfortable using GIMP, who am I to criticize you
>>> choice, i just feel that CS5/6 is the better, more capable piece of
>>> software.

>>
>> That still doesn't tell me what you can achieve that I can not. Is
>> finished product the reason for all this or is it not?

>
> It isn't going to make any difference to you one way, or another is it?


Not really, no. If I could see that all you PS users were producing images
that I couldn't it would be a different story, but you're not, are you?

--
sid
RLU 300284
2010.2
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
sid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
Eric Stevens wrote:


>> WARNING
>>You are crossposting to more than two newsgroups.
>>Please use the "Followup-To" header to direct the replies to your article
>>into one group.
>>Do you want to re-edit the article or send it anyway?

>
> Why don't you send it anyway?


how do think it got here?

--
sid
RLU 300284
2010.2
 
Reply With Quote
 
Pablo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
Savageduck escribió:

> So the reality of the situation is, you have made the choice to use
> Linux exclusively, and because the closest open source image editing SW
> to PS you can find is GIMP. You like Floyd, and Pablo are rabidly
> locked into your choices and will remain blind to alternatives, many of
> them which are superior to the GIMP.


You are *such* a ****.

I use Gimp because it serves its purpose. I don't care what PS can do, as I
don't frigging need it. Just get that into your extremely thick skull.

For your information, I buy the software that I need. For work, I bought
Trados, a windows program that costs a lot of money. There is a free linux
program called OmegaT, which has quite a following. I tried it, but prefer
to use the commercial offering largely because of extra features and ease of
use. I believe OmegaT is fine for most stuff.

You are so up your own arse, you will probably (hopefully) disappear any
moment).

Now look, you've got me using rude words.

--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
The below is a link to an ad for an apartment
for rent. It may or may not be of interest to photographers.
Follow the link at your peril.
http://paulc.es/piso/index.php
 
Reply With Quote
 
sid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
Alan Browne wrote:


>>> On 2012.09.02 11:51 , sid wrote:
>>>
>>>> righto then, I'll ask the specific question. What, can you achieve with
>>>> your ps/cs whatever that I cannot with my gimp.



>>> I personally can't point directly to that


I don't know why I didn't stop right here before as those 7 words are
exactly right.

eod for me

--
sid
RLU 300284
2010.2
 
Reply With Quote
 
Pablo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
Eric Stevens escribió:

> On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 09:08:24 +0100, sid
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Eric Stevens wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> WARNING
>>>>You are crossposting to more than two newsgroups.
>>>>Please use the "Followup-To" header to direct the replies to your
>>>>article into one group.
>>>>Do you want to re-edit the article or send it anyway?
>>>
>>> Why don't you send it anyway?

>>
>>how do think it got here?

>
> My apologies. I thought you were the guy who said he had no option but
> to respond by posting articles without the follow ups. Clearly you are
> not.


Praps you refer to me. My newsreader *defaults* to setting followups to
prevent spamming, but I can manually change that on a per-post basis.

> You have eminently demonstrated that it is possible to post with a
> full complement of follow ups.. I suspect this is a case of someone
> else trying to convert this little corner of Usenet to the way he
> would like it to be. Yet another Reg Shoe perhaps?


I do wonder if the majority of subscribers to all these groups actually want
to see all this nonsense.

--
Pablo

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/
The below is a link to an ad for an apartment
for rent. It may or may not be of interest to photographers.
Follow the link at your peril.
http://paulc.es/piso/index.php
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
On 9/2/2012 12:42 PM, Savageduck wrote:

<snip>

> There certainly seems to be a "Cult of GIMP" developing here.
>

I assume the pun was unintentional.


--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
Pablo <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Eric Stevens escribió:
>
>> On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 09:08:24 +0100, sid
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> WARNING
>>>>>You are crossposting to more than two newsgroups.
>>>>>Please use the "Followup-To" header to direct the replies to your
>>>>>article into one group.
>>>>>Do you want to re-edit the article or send it anyway?
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you send it anyway?
>>>
>>>how do think it got here?

>>
>> My apologies. I thought you were the guy who said he had no option but
>> to respond by posting articles without the follow ups. Clearly you are
>> not.

>
>Praps you refer to me. My newsreader *defaults* to setting followups to
>prevent spamming, but I can manually change that on a per-post basis.
>
>> You have eminently demonstrated that it is possible to post with a
>> full complement of follow ups.. I suspect this is a case of someone
>> else trying to convert this little corner of Usenet to the way he
>> would like it to be. Yet another Reg Shoe perhaps?

>
>I do wonder if the majority of subscribers to all these groups actually want
>to see all this nonsense.




Unfortunately, the most active posters to these newsgroups appear to
thrive on it, revel in it, and delight in wasting other people's time
with it.

 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
On 9/3/2012 7:47 AM, Bruce wrote:
> Pablo <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Eric Stevens escribió:
>>
>>> On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 09:08:24 +0100, sid
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> WARNING
>>>>>> You are crossposting to more than two newsgroups.
>>>>>> Please use the "Followup-To" header to direct the replies to your
>>>>>> article into one group.
>>>>>> Do you want to re-edit the article or send it anyway?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why don't you send it anyway?
>>>>
>>>> how do think it got here?
>>>
>>> My apologies. I thought you were the guy who said he had no option but
>>> to respond by posting articles without the follow ups. Clearly you are
>>> not.

>>
>> Praps you refer to me. My newsreader *defaults* to setting followups to
>> prevent spamming, but I can manually change that on a per-post basis.
>>
>>> You have eminently demonstrated that it is possible to post with a
>>> full complement of follow ups.. I suspect this is a case of someone
>>> else trying to convert this little corner of Usenet to the way he
>>> would like it to be. Yet another Reg Shoe perhaps?

>>
>> I do wonder if the majority of subscribers to all these groups actually want
>> to see all this nonsense.

>
>
>
> Unfortunately, the most active posters to these newsgroups appear to
> thrive on it, revel in it, and delight in wasting other people's time
> with it.
>


Yet some are so far above it all, that they make comments about why they
don't participate. We are still waiting with bated breath, for
contributions of photo from the superior ones. we need to learn from the
masters.

--
Peter

Wondering if the term: "baited breath" would be more appropriate.
 
Reply With Quote
 
sid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-03-2012
Alan Browne wrote:

> On 2012.09.03 04:22 , sid wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> On 2012.09.02 11:51 , sid wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> righto then, I'll ask the specific question. What, can you achieve
>>>>>> with your ps/cs whatever that I cannot with my gimp.

>>
>>
>>>>> I personally can't point directly to that

>>
>> I don't know why I didn't stop right here before as those 7 words are
>> exactly right.
>>
>> eod for me

>
> Bailed out, eh?


Yeah, that sort of thing is fine to kill a dull Sunday afternoon/evening but
it's utterly pointless thinking it's any more than that.

hand

--
sid
RLU 300284
2010.2
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Photoshop Elements sale: $59 Aug 28 only tony cooper Digital Photography 26 09-03-2012 10:07 PM
Re: Photoshop Elements sale: $59 Aug 28 only nospam Digital Photography 0 08-30-2012 12:26 AM
Re: Photoshop Elements sale: $59 Aug 28 only tony cooper Digital Photography 0 08-29-2012 11:07 PM
Re: Photoshop Elements sale: $59 Aug 28 only Bob S Digital Photography 0 08-29-2012 01:02 AM
Re: Photoshop Elements sale: $59 Aug 28 only PeterN Digital Photography 0 08-29-2012 12:14 AM



Advertisments