Adobe Photo Elements vs. Photo Shop

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bruce, Jul 26, 2003.

  1. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    I already have Photo Shop and got Photo Elements with a camera I just
    bought. Is Elements a subset of Photo Shop? Is there any reason I'd
    want to be running both of these programs?

    Thanks,
    Bruce
    Bruce, Jul 26, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Bruce

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: (Bruce)

    >Is Elements a subset of Photo Shop?


    Yes.

    >Is there any reason I'd
    >want to be running both of these programs?


    Elements dumbs down the commands a bit and has a lot of auto features. If you
    already know how to do things well in Photoshop there is nothing new in
    Elements, but if you're having problems with things in PS you might look at
    Elements to see if there's a simpler way (but inevitably less flexbible way) to
    do an editing task.
    Bill Hilton, Jul 26, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bruce

    Dick Weld Guest

    Elements also has the irritating habit of seizing control so that all your old
    PhotoShop files will open in Elements.

    Jim Townsend wrote:

    > Bruce wrote:
    >
    > > I already have Photo Shop and got Photo Elements with a camera I just
    > > bought. Is Elements a subset of Photo Shop? Is there any reason I'd
    > > want to be running both of these programs?

    >
    > Elements contains the key Photoshop features for editing photographs. It's
    > probably what most people actually need.
    >
    > Using Photoshop for *simple* photo editing (contrast, color, unsharp etc) is
    > kind of like picking up the family groceries with a 5 tonne truck :)
    >
    > If you already have Photoshop, there's no need to install elements.
    Dick Weld, Jul 26, 2003
    #3
  4. Bruce

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On 26 Jul 2003 08:58:53 -0700, (Bruce) wrote:

    >I already have Photo Shop and got Photo Elements with a camera I just
    >bought. Is Elements a subset of Photo Shop? Is there any reason I'd
    >want to be running both of these programs?
    >

    As others have said, Elements is a scaled-down version of PS.

    What I wonder is the legality/morality of giving away Elements
    obtained in this manner. There was a post in here recently from a
    person that wanted a simple program to do the basics of photo
    manipulation. I wonder if you would allowed to copy that Elements
    disk and send him the copy if you chose to.

    It is wrong to do that with PhotoShop, but since Elements is a free
    bundleware I wonder if the same restrictions apply. Morally, it
    wouldn't bother me a whit. Others may view it differently. I would
    be uncomfortable selling the program, but not in charging a shipping
    and handling fee for sending the disk.

    I used to have a copy of the old Adobe Photo Deluxe program that came
    bundled with something I purchased. I lost the original disk. Since
    I own a legal copy of PhotoShop 7, I never used the program. When my
    daughter started to use a digital camera I asked someone if I could
    have a copy of their Adobe Photo Deluxe for her since it's better than
    the program she has. The person I asked went ballistic and claimed I
    was perpetrating intellectual theft so I backed off. I didn't see a
    problem since the program was a freebie that didn't require
    registration. I guess I'm a morally corrupt person, but I can live
    with it.






    --
    Tony Cooper aka:
    Provider of Jots, Tittles, and Oy!s
    Tony Cooper, Jul 26, 2003
    #4
  5. Bruce

    Sloopy Guest

    In article <>,
    Tony Cooper <> wrote:

    > What I wonder is the legality/morality of giving away Elements
    > obtained in this manner.


    It's illegal unless you hand the camera over with it.

    -Sloopy
    Sloopy, Jul 26, 2003
    #5
  6. Bruce

    Sloopy Guest

    In article <>,
    Tony Cooper <> wrote:

    > I didn't see a
    > problem since the program was a freebie that didn't require
    > registration.


    The program was not free.

    You obtain a license to use it when you purchase the camera.

    -Sloopy
    Sloopy, Jul 26, 2003
    #6
  7. Bruce

    Sloopy Guest

    In article <>,
    Tony Cooper <> wrote:

    > It is wrong to do that with PhotoShop, but since Elements is a free
    > bundleware I wonder if the same restrictions apply. Morally, it
    > wouldn't bother me a whit. Others may view it differently. I would
    > be uncomfortable selling the program, but not in charging a shipping
    > and handling fee for sending the disk.


    Are you a sociopath who thinks he has to follow only the laws that he
    approves of?

    -Sloopy
    Sloopy, Jul 26, 2003
    #7
  8. Bruce

    Paul H. Guest

    "Tony Cooper" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 26 Jul 2003 08:58:53 -0700, (Bruce) wrote:
    >
    > What I wonder is the legality/morality of giving away Elements
    > obtained in this manner. There was a post in here recently from a
    > person that wanted a simple program to do the basics of photo
    > manipulation. I wonder if you would allowed to copy that Elements
    > disk and send him the copy if you chose to.


    I see the situation in simple moral terms: you acquired a license to
    Photoshop Elements and it's you prerogative to give that license away. If
    you were keeping a copy for yourself, that would be a different matter, but
    as it stands the circumstance is "one license sold by Adobe, one program
    used by an individual." Period.

    Legally, of course, the issue may be different since, as lawyers *proudly*
    declare, the law has nothing to do with morality.


    > It is wrong to do that with PhotoShop, but since Elements is a free
    > bundleware I wonder if the same restrictions apply. Morally, it
    > wouldn't bother me a whit. Others may view it differently. I would
    > be uncomfortable selling the program, but not in charging a shipping
    > and handling fee for sending the disk.


    I don't know if it should be different with Photoshop, assuming you held the
    license for the product. If you transferred all program materials and
    documentation to another person without keeping a copy for yourself, how
    would that be Adobe's business or cause harm to Adobe? Again, one license,
    one user; Adobe's bottom line would be unaffected.

    > I used to have a copy of the old Adobe Photo Deluxe program that came
    > bundled with something I purchased. I lost the original disk. Since
    > I own a legal copy of PhotoShop 7, I never used the program. When my
    > daughter started to use a digital camera I asked someone if I could
    > have a copy of their Adobe Photo Deluxe for her since it's better than
    > the program she has. The person I asked went ballistic and claimed I
    > was perpetrating intellectual theft so I backed off.


    Since you are a legal license holder of Photodeluxe, you have a right to
    maintain a backup copy and IMHO, it is immaterial as to whether your backup
    copy should be on CD-R, CD-R/W, or on a master CD not normally in your
    possession. Practically speaking, there would be no difference--bytes are
    bytes and you have a license to use the program. Frankly, that's the
    message software producers have been pushing for several years now, "We
    don't sell software, we sell licenses." Well, you have a license giving you
    a right to use the program and the genealogy of the bytes comprising that
    program is utterly irrelevant to the terms of the license.

    Mere quibbling over terms and true jurisprudence ought to be different
    things entirely.

    Besides, on a larger scale, the bundling of software is an issue that has
    never been satisfactorily dealt with by the courts or our representatives.
    I think the contract concerning bundled software ought to be *solely*
    between the company offering the bundled package and the software
    producer(s) supplying software to the bundle. It is both absurd and unfair
    to attempt to hold the end-user responsible, legally or morally, for an
    agreement to which he was never a recognized party. Software producers
    should understand and accept the risks associated with bundling, as we
    end-users accept the "this software is not guaranteed for any particular
    purpose" disclaimer in all software licenses I've seen. If a software
    producer is unwilling to accept the risk of bundling, then the company
    doesn't have to participate in bundling schemes: no one holds a gun to a
    CEO's head making him or her bundle their programs with third-party
    hardware. And when is the last time you heard of a software producer
    barricaded in a locked office screaming "Stop me before I bundle again!"
    through the door?

    Speaking only for myself, I will continue to behave morally but I refuse to
    act as an unpaid enforcer tasked to ensure *any* software company's
    profitability. To that onerous concept, I say "Byte me!"
    Paul H., Jul 26, 2003
    #8
  9. Bruce

    Mark M Guest

    "Sloopy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > Tony Cooper <> wrote:
    >
    > > What I wonder is the legality/morality of giving away Elements
    > > obtained in this manner.

    >
    > It's illegal unless you hand the camera over with it.


    You own that license of the software, and can give it away provided you
    don't install it on your onw computer.
    Mark M, Jul 26, 2003
    #9
  10. Bruce

    Mark M Guest

    "Sloopy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > Tony Cooper <> wrote:
    >
    > > It is wrong to do that with PhotoShop, but since Elements is a free
    > > bundleware I wonder if the same restrictions apply. Morally, it
    > > wouldn't bother me a whit. Others may view it differently. I would
    > > be uncomfortable selling the program, but not in charging a shipping
    > > and handling fee for sending the disk.

    >
    > Are you a sociopath who thinks he has to follow only the laws that he
    > approves of?


    Cite the law, or quit posting BS.
    Mark M, Jul 26, 2003
    #10
  11. Bruce

    Mark M Guest

    > Now, is there, or is there not, a law regarding freely distributed
    > bundled software? Do you know, or are you just blowing smoke?
    > Is your assumption that it is against the law merely an assumption or
    > is it based on some actual knowledge?


    I would imagine that reading the license agreement could clear up this
    question.
    Mark M, Jul 26, 2003
    #11
  12. Bruce

    Wes J Guest

    What I'd like to see in Elements is the ability to do a slide show, like
    those that come with so many photo CDs. It's a pain (unless I'm missing
    something) to just view these photos in Elements. Anybody found a way to do
    this?
    "Bruce" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I already have Photo Shop and got Photo Elements with a camera I just
    > bought. Is Elements a subset of Photo Shop? Is there any reason I'd
    > want to be running both of these programs?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Bruce
    Wes J, Jul 26, 2003
    #12
  13. Bruce

    Jim Waggener Guest

    "Bruce" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I already have Photo Shop and got Photo Elements with a camera I just
    > bought. Is Elements a subset of Photo Shop? Is there any reason I'd
    > want to be running both of these programs?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Bruce


    One thing Elements does that, PS7 does not, is creating panoramas very
    simply.




    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
    Jim Waggener, Jul 26, 2003
    #13
  14. Bruce

    Paul H. Guest

    "Sloopy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > Tony Cooper <> wrote:
    >
    > > It is wrong to do that with PhotoShop, but since Elements is a free
    > > bundleware I wonder if the same restrictions apply. Morally, it
    > > wouldn't bother me a whit. Others may view it differently. I would
    > > be uncomfortable selling the program, but not in charging a shipping
    > > and handling fee for sending the disk.

    >
    > Are you a sociopath who thinks he has to follow only the laws that he
    > approves of?
    >
    > -Sloopy


    I suggest you learn something about contract law and the legal concept of
    "consideration" before you start calling people sociopaths. The supposed
    implicit agreement that the purchaser of the hardware may not transfer his
    license to bundled software has never been tested in court, nor has it been
    made explicit by Federal or State legislatures. Furthermore, the idea that
    a purchaser of bundled software can be bound in perpetuity to a contract he
    or she never entered into explicity is insane.
    Paul H., Jul 26, 2003
    #14
  15. Bruce

    Paul H. Guest

    "Sloopy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > Tony Cooper <> wrote:
    >
    > > It is wrong to do that with PhotoShop, but since Elements is a free
    > > bundleware I wonder if the same restrictions apply. Morally, it
    > > wouldn't bother me a whit. Others may view it differently. I would
    > > be uncomfortable selling the program, but not in charging a shipping
    > > and handling fee for sending the disk.

    >
    > Are you a sociopath who thinks he has to follow only the laws that he
    > approves of?
    >
    > -Sloopy


    So if you had been in Alabama in the 1950's and witnessed an elderly black
    woman drink at a whites-only water fountain, you would have made a citizen's
    arrest and turned her over to the police because "the law is the law" and
    must be followed blindly without reason?

    If you would NOT have done such a thing, you're saying that sometimes
    morality overrides mere legality, which is the argument many people are
    making about bundled software. Remember, no one is talking about making
    copies of software, just transferring all rights and materials as well as
    the license to use the software in question. Furthermore, the person
    transferring the software receives no remuneration and the software company
    has already been paid a royalty by the hardware bundler for the one license.
    If no one is hurt, physically or financially, then where is the crime?
    Claiming that giving away bundled software is tantamount to raising
    quibbling to an art form.

    On the other hand, if you *would* have turned in the elderly black woman
    then I ask you: Who's the sociopath?

    Furthermore, suppose I decide to give my Mom a copy of MS Office for
    Christmas. I buy the software, install it on my computer, try it for a few
    hours, then completely and utterly remove it from my computer. I then put
    everything associated with Office back in the box, re-shrinkwrap the box and
    give it to my Mom, who happily sends in the registration card.

    What crime have I committed and what should be my punishment? Try taking
    *that* case to any federal, state, or local prosecutor and see if he doesn't
    laugh you out of his office.

    The law also incorporates the concept of the "reasonable person" and the
    idea that buying a piece of hardware obligates you _in perpetuity_ to the
    terms of a license you had no part in negotiating and whose terms were not
    fully disclosed until you opened the box is utterly and completely absurd.
    I truly believe the courts, if such a case were brought, would argue that
    the putative "license agreements" did not pass the "reasonable person" test.

    Finally, last week I gave my brother two audio CD's I didn't want anymore.
    I guess I'm a criminal and a sociopath for illegally transferring my
    license. I can live with that, but feel free to hire a detective to find me
    then turn me in to the proper authorities, Herr Sloopy.
    Paul H., Jul 27, 2003
    #15
  16. Bruce

    Mark M Guest

    > Finally, last week I gave my brother two audio CD's I didn't want anymore.
    > I guess I'm a criminal and a sociopath for illegally transferring my
    > license. I can live with that, but feel free to hire a detective to find

    me
    > then turn me in to the proper authorities, Herr Sloopy.


    Uh oh...
    You'd better be careful with those paper-back/card-cover versions of novels
    as well. I sold a pile of books at a garage sale last weekend for 25
    cents...My hands are outstretched, and I'm ready to be cuffed. :)

    ANY property can be transfered unless it's a
    no-longer-legal-but-grandfathered-in item like a gun that has been recently
    sales/transfer-banned or something.

    So long as ownership/posession is severed in teh transfer, there is ZERO
    problem. We're not talking about an illegal product here.
    Mark M, Jul 27, 2003
    #16
  17. Bruce

    Paul H. Guest

    "Tony Cooper" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    <snip>
    > "If you reside within the United States or Canada, please complete and
    > return a Transfer of Adobe License form when you sell or give away a
    > single-user, retail version of a licensed Adobe product that is
    > registered in your name. Until Adobe receives a completed Transfer of
    > Adobe License form, the product remains licensed to the individual or
    > company to whom it is registered. By completing a Transfer of Adobe
    > License form, the Adobe software can be registered to the new owner.
    > Registration ensures that the new owner can be recognized as the legal
    > licensee and can receive continued customer service and support."
    >
    > Based on this, and contrary to your position, it is both legally and
    > morally acceptable to sell or give away Adobe software. The provision
    > of a transfer of license only ensures that the new owner is recognized
    > as the legal owner by Adobe. The bundling aspect seems to be
    > irrelevant.
    >
    > I could have looked this up in the first place, but I didn't realize
    > that a simple question would disturb your rock.
    >
    > Carry on, now.


    Thank you, Tony, for clearing that up. Borland used to (and may still) have
    a similar and reasonable policy regarding software license transfer, as I'm
    sure most other companies do.

    Unfortunately, some folks are not happy unless they're pointing fingers and
    shouting "Heretic!", "Witch!", "Send out Barabas!", or some such.
    Paul H., Jul 27, 2003
    #17
  18. Bruce

    Jeremy Guest

    Tony Cooper <> wrote:

    > "If you reside within the United States or Canada, please complete and
    > return a Transfer of Adobe License form when you sell or give away a
    > single-user, retail version of a licensed Adobe product that is
    > registered in your name. Until Adobe receives a completed Transfer of
    > Adobe License form, the product remains licensed to the individual or
    > company to whom it is registered. By completing a Transfer of Adobe
    > License form, the Adobe software can be registered to the new owner.
    > Registration ensures that the new owner can be recognized as the legal
    > licensee and can receive continued customer service and support."
    >
    > Based on this, and contrary to your position, it is both legally and
    > morally acceptable to sell or give away Adobe software. The provision
    > of a transfer of license only ensures that the new owner is recognized
    > as the legal owner by Adobe. The bundling aspect seems to be
    > irrelevant.


    Except that it says "single-user, retail version". That doesn't include
    bundled products; that's not a retail version.

    Adobe specifically also does *not* let you transfer a license for an
    educational version of their software -- even if the person you're
    transferring it to qualifies for the license, and even if you're giving
    it to them for free.

    --
    Jeremy |
    Jeremy, Jul 27, 2003
    #18
  19. Bruce

    Sloopy Guest

    In article <>,
    Jeremy <> wrote:

    > Tony Cooper <> wrote:
    >
    > > "If you reside within the United States or Canada, please complete and
    > > return a Transfer of Adobe License form when you sell or give away a
    > > single-user, retail version of a licensed Adobe product that is
    > > registered in your name. Until Adobe receives a completed Transfer of
    > > Adobe License form, the product remains licensed to the individual or
    > > company to whom it is registered. By completing a Transfer of Adobe
    > > License form, the Adobe software can be registered to the new owner.
    > > Registration ensures that the new owner can be recognized as the legal
    > > licensee and can receive continued customer service and support."
    > >
    > > Based on this, and contrary to your position, it is both legally and
    > > morally acceptable to sell or give away Adobe software. The provision
    > > of a transfer of license only ensures that the new owner is recognized
    > > as the legal owner by Adobe. The bundling aspect seems to be
    > > irrelevant.

    >
    > Except that it says "single-user, retail version". That doesn't include
    > bundled products; that's not a retail version.
    >
    > Adobe specifically also does *not* let you transfer a license for an
    > educational version of their software -- even if the person you're
    > transferring it to qualifies for the license, and even if you're giving
    > it to them for free.


    Hey! Jeremy!

    Do Tony a favor and don't confuse him with the facts.

    -Sloopy
    Sloopy, Jul 27, 2003
    #19
  20. Bruce

    Paul Rubin Guest

    Jeremy <> writes:
    > Except that it says "single-user, retail version". That doesn't include
    > bundled products; that's not a retail version.
    >
    > Adobe specifically also does *not* let you transfer a license for an
    > educational version of their software -- even if the person you're
    > transferring it to qualifies for the license, and even if you're giving
    > it to them for free.


    That's not necessarily up to Adobe to decide. Adobe was in a lawsuit
    on that very topic (Softman vs. Adobe) and my understanding is they
    lost, and you can resell your copy of a bundled program whether Adobe
    likes it or lot. It's just like if you buy a book and it says inside
    that you're not allowed to resell it: that might be true in the
    publisher's fantasies, but they cannot enforce it, they're attempting
    to squash your rights that you are entitled to exercise, but the law
    doesn't support them so you don't have to pay attention to what they
    say.

    For some more info, see

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23073.html

    For some legal analysis,

    http://www.haledorr.com/publications/pubsdetail.asp?ID=82444122002

    Or for the actual ruling,

    http://cryptome.org/softman-v-adobe.htm

    Unfortunately I don't know of more recent developments of that case.

    IANAL, HTH, YMMV, HAND.
    Paul Rubin, Jul 27, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. BobS
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    491
  2. Glenn Jacobs

    Photo Shop versus Photo Shop Elements

    Glenn Jacobs, Nov 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    535
    Glenn Jacobs
    Nov 14, 2004
  3. shipping

    Is Adobe Photo Shop elements 4 the way to go?

    shipping, Dec 29, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    459
    Ray Fischer
    Dec 30, 2005
  4. Bowels

    Rotating pictures on Adobe photo shop elements 4

    Bowels, Aug 27, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    352
    Stewy
    Aug 29, 2006
  5. sanwan

    Adobe Photo Shop Elements - Try eBay

    sanwan, Oct 30, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    360
    Joseph Meehan
    Oct 30, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page