Reading mode: Light Dark

Photoshop

Go to last post
But, then,what an insane culture we live in anyway, when people go nuts over a feeding tube when, close to a half million kids starve around the world each month !

you seem to have a lot of free time....what else is wrong with us...? please lets us know Yoda...!!
 
bkrausephoto said:
Photoshop is a professional app.
Click to expand...
This is what amuses me a little bit. Because it's thought of as the only "professional" app, people think it's the only one to use if you're a photographer. That's bunk. Most professional photographers should be able to use any image editing software and get quality results. And because it's known as the professional app, they charge exhorbinant prices for it. There is very little you can do in PSCS that can't be done using PSP9, for example. On top of it, PSP9 has functionality that PSCS doesn't have.

Complicated and inflexible does not have to mean professional and complicated. I'm not saying PSCS isn't a very capable and powerful package, but it is truly overpriced and unnecessarily complicated.

Brent, I looked at your porfolio and there is indeed some very nice work. But what work in there couldn't have been done with several other image editing packages that are 1/8th the price of PSCS?

if you can't handle the fact that
bkrausephoto said:
it might take some time to learn then use elements....your constant
bitching is funny, from someone who sounds like he thinks he is the
begin and end all of photography lets see some work....where have
you been published...? put some images behind that big mouth of
yours....
Click to expand...
I know you're talking to Michael, but I'll answer it from my perspective... I've had work displayed at PMA 3 times and PPE once. I've had 3 Kodak awards, and was the Minneapolis Photo Society's Monochrom Photographer of the Year in 2003. I do travel to speak with Jasc/Corel, but I was using PSP well before I started doing that for all the reasons I've mentioned.

Here's some work...















--
Jim Fuglestad
http://www.fuglestadphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/366
  • You're not in third grade anymore. Take as many recesses as you want!
  • Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
 
Shutter. said:
Shutter. wrote:
Why does it have to be hard and inflexible? :-)
Click to expand...
Jim,

Could a novice simply go into PSP9, open up a few levels, create a few layer masks, work curves, just to start?

Of course not.

To get the most out of it you at least have to understand how to do what you want. If the notion of layers or curves makes you sweat, then you simply won't be able to unleash the power of any serious image editing application.

If you're comfortable with PSP9, you'll be right at home with CS. A simple matter of learning where the buttons are.

Likewise, I have been a solid PS user for years, but I did give the PSP9 demo a whirl. No problem, I was using it moments after it was downloaded.

PSP9 or PSCS, you still have to understand (at least) the fundamentals of image editing. The more you know, the more control you'll have.

Having said that, you're a pro. Something tells me you're not working in the sRGB color space. I would think a wider gamut would be desirable. I'm thinking that for your work you're using PhotoShop. Just like the rest of us.

Unless color accuracy is a non-issue, that is.

--
rich
http://www.photoallure.com

'I'm not such a bad guy
once you get to know me'
-Agent Smith
 
Evil Eggplant said:
Evil Eggplant said:
Shutter. wrote:
Why does it have to be hard and inflexible? :-)
Click to expand...
Jim,

Could a novice simply go into PSP9, open up a few levels, create a
few layer masks, work curves, just to start?
Click to expand...
Nope.
Evil Eggplant said:
To get the most out of it you at least have to understand how to do
what you want. If the notion of layers or curves makes you sweat,
then you simply won't be able to unleash the power of any serious
image editing application.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more.
Evil Eggplant said:
If you're comfortable with PSP9, you'll be right at home with CS. A
simple matter of learning where the buttons are.
Click to expand...
Actually no. I decided to try PSCS in November and December to see what all the hoopla was about. I was completely underwhelmed. My workflow was longer because of the necessity to continually go up to the menus to use the functions (sure, I could use quickkeys in both apps, but there are too many to remember effectively). PSCS has no flexibility to create your own workflow buttons. I have created a toolbar in PSP9 with the tools I use most frequently, in the order that I use them. Also, the inability to right-click and dup/del layers was extremely frustrating. Also, it drove me nuts that the functions in PSCS don't remember your last setting you used when using that function. So, when doing several of the same shots it was a pain. I will often use quickscripts in PSP9 to edit similar photos, which also is much more efficient.
Evil Eggplant said:
PSP9 or PSCS, you still have to understand (at least) the
fundamentals of image editing. The more you know, the more control
you'll have.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. But still - $800???
Evil Eggplant said:
Having said that, you're a pro. Something tells me you're not
working in the sRGB color space. I would think a wider gamut would
be desirable. I'm thinking that for your work you're using
PhotoShop. Just like the rest of us.
Click to expand...
You're thinking incorrectly. I use WHCC as my professional printer (as well as hundreds of other professional photographers) and they only print to RGB, so using Adobe does nothing for you. I have no problems whatsoever with color gamut using the sRGB color space. No client has ever had any problem with my colors. Color space, IMO, is one of the over-hyped issues around.
Evil Eggplant said:
Unless color accuracy is a non-issue, that is.
Click to expand...
I think PS just makes color accuracy complicated. Really, think about it. The easiest way to do color management is to have your printer print a file, then compare the print to your monitor and adjust your color temp on your monitor until it matches. I use three different monitors with my laptop - the laptop monitor itself, my studio monitor, and my home monitor. I have found the right color temp on each monitor that matches the same file, and then I change my color temp when I switch monitors so I'm always working with the same colors. It's so much easier than messing around with color management profiles. Gobs and gobs easier.

I don't care what software people use, only get my feathers ruffled a bit when people think that PSCS is the only software to use if you're a professional. And it's funny because it doesn't stop there. Then people buy C1, then they buy a handful of plug-ins to convert to bw, reduce noise, etc... and spend another few hundred bucks. So, when it's said and done they've spend $1,500. I spent $100. Hmmm.... that's a nice lens for the difference. :-)

Jim

--
Jim Fuglestad
http://www.fuglestadphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/366
  • You're not in third grade anymore. Take as many recesses as you want!
  • Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
 
Shutter. said:
Shutter. wrote:

Actually no. I decided to try PSCS in November and December to see
what all the hoopla was about. I was completely underwhelmed. My
workflow was longer because of the necessity to continually go up
to the menus to use the functions (sure, I could use quickkeys in
both apps, but there are too many to remember effectively). PSCS
has no flexibility to create your own workflow buttons. I have
created a toolbar in PSP9 with the tools I use most frequently, in
the order that I use them. Also, the inability to right-click and
dup/del layers was extremely frustrating. Also, it drove me nuts
that the functions in PSCS don't remember your last setting you
used when using that function. So, when doing several of the same
shots it was a pain. I will often use quickscripts in PSP9 to
edit similar photos, which also is much more efficient.
Click to expand...
Good points.

There are buttons that are user configurable. Keyboard shortcuts to control actions. I use several of the F keys to start actions. No problem there.

Global application of settings is something I usually do in RAW. This makes sense to me. It makes sense to do as much as you can before the raw pixel data is rendered into a TIFF. Before the images ever make it to PS, they have all been (somewhat) adjusted for color balance and exposure.
Shutter. said:
Shutter. said:
PSP9 or PSCS, you still have to understand (at least) the
fundamentals of image editing. The more you know, the more control
you'll have.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. But still - $800???
Click to expand...
That is a lot of money. Absolutely it is. I just spent $800 on a lens. That's a lot of money too. You would say that if a $100 lens does a job equal to an $800 lens then why not go with the less expensive lens. That would be a valid point, so I'll make it for you. My point is that CS is state of the art. To me and many others, it's worth the price.
Shutter. said:
Shutter. said:
Having said that, you're a pro. Something tells me you're not
working in the sRGB color space. I would think a wider gamut would
be desirable. I'm thinking that for your work you're using
PhotoShop. Just like the rest of us.
Click to expand...
You're thinking incorrectly. I use WHCC as my professional printer
(as well as hundreds of other professional photographers) and they
only print to RGB, so using Adobe does nothing for you. I have no
problems whatsoever with color gamut using the sRGB color space.
No client has ever had any problem with my colors. Color space,
IMO, is one of the over-hyped issues around.
Click to expand...
RGB is fine, in fact, if that's the gamut that your printer uses then you're all set.
Shutter. said:
Shutter. said:
Unless color accuracy is a non-issue, that is.
Click to expand...
I think PS just makes color accuracy complicated. Really, think
about it. The easiest way to do color management is to have your
printer print a file, then compare the print to your monitor and
adjust your color temp on your monitor until it matches. I use
three different monitors with my laptop - the laptop monitor
itself, my studio monitor, and my home monitor. I have found the
right color temp on each monitor that matches the same file, and
then I change my color temp when I switch monitors so I'm always
working with the same colors. It's so much easier than messing
around with color management profiles. Gobs and gobs easier.
Click to expand...
For your type of work what you do is just fine, but if you were doing product photography where color acuracy must be dead-nuts, then the "eyeball" method of calibration wouldn't be good enough. What the camera captures must be true to the scene, what you see on the tube must be true to the scene. Printed output must be true to the scene.

The way you do it gets printer and screen calibrated to each other, but how does your method assure that what you see in print is truthful to the actual scene? It doesn't. And that is why I fend your method problematic.
Shutter. said:
I don't care what software people use, only get my feathers ruffled
a bit when people think that PSCS is the only software to use if
you're a professional. And it's funny because it doesn't stop
there. Then people buy C1, then they buy a handful of plug-ins to
convert to bw, reduce noise, etc... and spend another few hundred
bucks. So, when it's said and done they've spend $1,500. I spent
$100. Hmmm.... that's a nice lens for the difference. :-)
Click to expand...
mmmmmmm... must... have... lensessssss...
Shutter. said:
Jim

--
Jim Fuglestad
http://www.fuglestadphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/366
  • You're not in third grade anymore. Take as many recesses as you
want!
  • Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
Click to expand...
--
rich
http://www.photoallure.com

'I'm not such a bad guy
once you get to know me'
-Agent Smith
 
Evil Eggplant said:
There are buttons that are user configurable. Keyboard shortcuts to
control actions. I use several of the F keys to start actions. No
problem there.
Click to expand...
You have a better memory than me. :-)
Evil Eggplant said:
Global application of settings is something I usually do in RAW.
This makes sense to me. It makes sense to do as much as you can
before the raw pixel data is rendered into a TIFF. Before the
images ever make it to PS, they have all been (somewhat) adjusted
for color balance and exposure.
Click to expand...
Well, I think raw is overrated too, lol. But I batch process when I can, but usually the lighting is so dynamic that batch processing is worthless whether raw or jpg. The batch processing methods in PSP9 are excellent! Very much like my batch processing abilities in PSP.
Evil Eggplant said:
That is a lot of money. Absolutely it is. I just spent $800 on a
lens. That's a lot of money too. You would say that if a $100 lens
does a job equal to an $800 lens then why not go with the less
expensive lens. That would be a valid point, so I'll make it for
you. My point is that CS is state of the art. To me and many
others, it's worth the price.
Click to expand...
Well, if the $100 lens was as good as the $800 lens then absolutely I'd buy the $100 lens. i don't care which lens is white or black. :-) However, that's seldom the case. I find $800 for lens to be cheap, not expensive. I'll spend the money where I get an business advantage, absolutely.
Evil Eggplant said:
RGB is fine, in fact, if that's the gamut that your printer uses
then you're all set.
Click to expand...
It's not just fine, it's very good.
Evil Eggplant said:
For your type of work what you do is just fine, but if you were
doing product photography where color acuracy must be dead-nuts,
then the "eyeball" method of calibration wouldn't be good enough.
What the camera captures must be true to the scene, what you see on
the tube must be true to the scene. Printed output must be true to
the scene.
Click to expand...
Evil Eggplant said:
The way you do it gets printer and screen calibrated to each other,
but how does your method assure that what you see in print is
truthful to the actual scene? It doesn't. And that is why I fend
your method problematic.
Click to expand...
No method of color calibration or profiling assures that the color is as it is in real life! The only way we know that is our recollection of the scene as we saw it. It's the photographers job, not the softwares, to get the color accurate to the actual scene.
Evil Eggplant said:
mmmmmmm... must... have... lensessssss...
Click to expand...
Hehe.... yeah, and I need to now to replace this one! gulp

 
Sure Wizard, Some sites for you to see ! Not one PS image among them and 10's of thousands more ! http://www.adventuresinstock.com will lead you to a few other links. And I'm past the stage of really caring what you think. i do photography for the lifestyle, not because of the dellusion that I'm some great artist. As long as I get a check, I'm happy ! Oh, yes, I'm the most published photog in Alaska(and AK has more pro photographers per capita than most states) and published everyday worldwide through various stock agencies.
bkrausephoto said:
Photoshop is a professional app. if you can't handle the fact that
it might take some time to learn then use elements....your constant
bitching is funny, from someone who sounds like he thinks he is the
begin and end all of photography lets see some work....where have
you been published...? put some images behind that big mouth of
yours....
Click to expand...
 
My personal opinion:

PS tries to be all thigns to all people. Graphic design tool. Web design tool. Image editing tool.

It's mediocre at all of those, IF you invest a lot of time. It's a trade off that satisfies no audience completely.

But specialized tools are better. I'm fond of Picture-Window from http://www.dl-c.com . Designed by a photographer for photgraphers. User interface is spartan, but very logical.

That such a complex tool as Photoshop is relied on so much might say something about the state of photography. :(

I imagine that Ansel Adams would not use Photoshop if he went digital. He would prever something far simpler, becuase he tried to get it "right" in the camera, not in the darkroom. Darkroom manipulation work was only used when the unmanipulated image did not match his visualization of the image.
Evil Eggplant said:
Photoshop is the industry standard for good reason. It takes time
to learn how to unleash the power of this amazing application.

Sorry, photoshop is not an appliance. It is a powerful application
that requires time spent learning how to use it.

If instant gratification is what you desire there are gads of
programs with "auto-fix" options. Photoshop is not for you, that's
for sure.

I can't believe you would come out here on the pro forum and whine
about photoshop because you're unwilling to invest some time
learning how to use it.

Most pros have spent years learning what they know, and continue
working on perfecting their craft. They have little patience for
appliance operators who insist on instant gratification.
Michael D Robinson said:
Who designed this thing, a blind monkey on LSD, and they have the
nerve to charge almost 800 U.S. for it ! I vote it as the "worlds
most user unfriendly softwear" Elements 3 is better because it
promts you to certain functions. Want to become the next Bill
Gates ? Design a photo edit platform that you don't need 2
lifetimes to master.
Click to expand...
--
rich
http://www.photoallure.com

'I'm not such a bad guy
once you get to know me'
-Agent Smith
Click to expand...
--
[email protected]
 
I am curious, what couldn't you do before that you can now do? I'm honestly very interested.

Thanks,

Jim
hunter said:
.....dont use it! But dont knock the millions of us who have
invested the time to learn how to use it to do things that we could
not do before!!
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad
http://www.fuglestadphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/366
  • You're not in third grade anymore. Take as many recesses as you want!
  • Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
 
Art...














Shutter. said:
Thanks,

Jim
hunter said:
.....dont use it! But dont knock the millions of us who have
invested the time to learn how to use it to do things that we could
not do before!!
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad
http://www.fuglestadphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/366
  • You're not in third grade anymore. Take as many recesses as you
want!
  • Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
Click to expand...
--
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com
 
David, Yes, Maybe I'll try that softwear ! Yes, You are spot-on...something is rotten in Denmark,,,or PS,,, I feel that folk that defend it so strongly are people that NEED TO...but not all !
DavidMaven said:
PS tries to be all thigns to all people. Graphic design tool. Web
design tool. Image editing tool.

It's mediocre at all of those, IF you invest a lot of time. It's a
trade off that satisfies no audience completely.

But specialized tools are better. I'm fond of Picture-Window from
http://www.dl-c.com . Designed by a photographer for photgraphers. User
interface is spartan, but very logical.

That such a complex tool as Photoshop is relied on so much might
say something about the state of photography. :(

I imagine that Ansel Adams would not use Photoshop if he went
digital. He would prever something far simpler, becuase he tried to
get it "right" in the camera, not in the darkroom. Darkroom
manipulation work was only used when the unmanipulated image did
not match his visualization of the image.
Evil Eggplant said:
Photoshop is the industry standard for good reason. It takes time
to learn how to unleash the power of this amazing application.

Sorry, photoshop is not an appliance. It is a powerful application
that requires time spent learning how to use it.

If instant gratification is what you desire there are gads of
programs with "auto-fix" options. Photoshop is not for you, that's
for sure.

I can't believe you would come out here on the pro forum and whine
about photoshop because you're unwilling to invest some time
learning how to use it.

Most pros have spent years learning what they know, and continue
working on perfecting their craft. They have little patience for
appliance operators who insist on instant gratification.
Michael D Robinson said:
Who designed this thing, a blind monkey on LSD, and they have the
nerve to charge almost 800 U.S. for it ! I vote it as the "worlds
most user unfriendly softwear" Elements 3 is better because it
promts you to certain functions. Want to become the next Bill
Gates ? Design a photo edit platform that you don't need 2
lifetimes to master.
Click to expand...
--
rich
http://www.photoallure.com

'I'm not such a bad guy
once you get to know me'
-Agent Smith
Click to expand...
--
[email protected]
Click to expand...
 
Oh, poor you ! Who cares if you spend your days and nites slaving over PS...Watza matta...can't take any flak without crying ! Millions do lots of things, does not mean they are right or just or photoshop gods !
hunter said:
.....dont use it! But dont knock the millions of us who have
invested the time to learn how to use it to do things that we could
not do before!!
Click to expand...
 
I would bet more than you !
Shutter. said:
Thanks,

Jim
hunter said:
.....dont use it! But dont knock the millions of us who have
invested the time to learn how to use it to do things that we could
not do before!!
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad
http://www.fuglestadphotography.com
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/366
  • You're not in third grade anymore. Take as many recesses as you
want!
  • Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
Click to expand...
 
I'm never PC always controversial and contrairian! I really don't know what the big deal is: It's just photography ! I see there is a lot of merit to what people say about the positive nature of PS. I'v learned a few things here, hope you do !
kwik67 said:
Michael D Robinson said:
Who designed this thing, a blind monkey on LSD, and they have the
nerve to charge almost 800 U.S. for it ! I vote it as the "worlds
most user unfriendly softwear" Elements 3 is better because it
promts you to certain functions. Want to become the next Bill
Gates ? Design a photo edit platform that you don't need 2
lifetimes to master.
Click to expand...
--
http://naynayphotos.smugmug.com/gallery/439721/1/17710320
Click to expand...
 
Michael D Robinson said:
Oh, poor you ! Who cares if you spend your days and nites slaving
over PS...Watza matta...can't take any flak without crying !
Millions do lots of things, does not mean they are right or just or
photoshop gods !
Click to expand...
This post and many others you have don't really add anything to the general
knowledge of the forum.

Bumping your posts is one thing, but adding comments like this just shows your
level of maturity is less than your experience with photography. If you want to

break the three or four rules of the forum below, at least do it with some creative

writing skills. Personally, I find it entertaining, but it is really rude because it takes
up space (bumping) for others that might want to see the forum as a mature place
to derive answers about photography.

You might still have something to offer, but not if you continue like you do here?

A few of the rules are........ might add... try to be mature... we are pros.

Be civil - anyone being abusive, calling names or generally trying to stir up trouble will not be tolerated. If you think someone is wrong it may be because they are new, don't jump on them, think first. If you are repeatedly abusive you will be banned from these forums.

Trolls - Anyone deliberately antagonizing other forum users by posting 'flame bait' type messages are not welcome.

Bashing - Deliberately and repeatedly bashing the same brand, product or company will get you banned. If you have a complaint or comment to make then make it once and make sure you have facts to support it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top