Photoshop

Some of these photos do not explain. The ones with extra light on the face and gradiant color backdrop, do explain. I'm not aware of other programs that can create the light on the face that pscs gradiant technique can. Also my velvia and dream action tools are outstanding. I do a lot of layering and painting through to combine two or three pics into the best of the bunch

Also, I'm now debarreling in 16 bit using a free action. Not sure yoiur program can debarrel in 16 bit.

Also I'm using some free actions at the adobe site -- that within minutes throws up on the screen a bradey bunch --9 selections -- of velvia selections to choose from to select the iteration you want. Does the same thing for B/w

Also i'm using star brushes for photoshop that enhances the star effect in the shots.

Also I'm using adrienne's action for frames and mattes which is now full picture-- so you can get any size pic with a matte around it.

and I've transitioned to rawshooter conversion -- the detail and options are extraordinary. Then I post process in pscs. I only shoot raw.

Dr. Brown's javascript allows one to always shoot in Raw and convert huge numbers of files to whatever by allowing the computer to cook the folder of RAW files through the javascript of pscs

These are just some of many things pscs offers--besides the healing brush and healing rope, and shadow/highlight feature which are worth the $300 special price tag in and of themselves.

Salt is in the air!

http://www.shutterfreaks.com/gallery2/album34

Shutter. said:

MAC,

Click to expand...

Please explain.

--
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com

Shutter. said:

Yeah, while I agree with the message Michael is sending, he does
seem to be a bit, ummm..... out there. lol

But really, he raises a point it seems noone is ever willing to say

• Photoshop is overhyped and overpriced. I've been trying to find

out what it is that people need PSCS that they can't do in other
image editing software, and evileggplant is the only one who has
been able to give any reason at all.

I would seriously be interested in a level-headed discussion about
what can/can't be done in PCSC in comparison with other iimage
editing software packages.

Jim

Click to expand...

Agree, one reason I think and this is aimed mainly at the boys, is that we always desire the" latest" toy and when we here PS is the best and used by the "Pro's" we've got to have it and because its expensive we hate to admit we may have been wrong. My friend bought a Plasma tv for $10000 hardly 2 yrs ago and now they are selling for a third of that, and the experts say LCD screens are better so he must have one.
Carl

Bill_Turner said:

If you spent a little time, or a lot of time in your case, learning
the techniques that are available to you in Photoshop rather than
making idiotic posts on the DPReview Fora perhaps you'd understand
the power of this software.
Photoshop is the industry standard. Not because it was developed
by monkeys on LSD but because it is well though out and becomes
very intuitive with continued use. As one begins to understand the
tools, and yes, the learning curve is very, very steep, Photoshop
becomes irreplaceable as a tool for photography; not only digital,
but for all photography.
There are many editors out there in cyberspace that you can try.
If you'd really like a challenge, which seems to be unlikely, try
GIMP. GIMP has many of the features of Photoshop, is free but has
the worst UI (User Interface) that I've ever seen.

Click to expand...

On an old topic here... but I like the GIMP Its palletes don't get in your way.

I guess it depends on what you're more used to. I'm actually more used to the GIMP.
I'm still learning Photoshop I sort of use both.

Bill_Turner said:

I'd suggest that, after reading your posts, you stick with your
Rebel 2000, Kodak Royal Gold 200 and have your local drug store
process your prints.

--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
http://www.wmdturner.com
If you can visualize it, then create it in the camera, finish it
off with the print that matches your mind's eye then you are, most
likely, a master...

Click to expand...

I'll load up some tri-x in the film box and break out the trays and enlarger, but for now, you go first.

I'm starting to think you're smarter than you let on. I suspect your work may be truly inspirational.

Can I see some of it?

Michael D Robinson said:

AgenmEvil Eggplant said:

Michael D Robinson said:

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...

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...

Click to expand...

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

'I'm not such a bad guy
once you get to know me'
-Agent Smith

Thanks for the flowers

One tangible benifit in CS is the highlight/shadow function. I know, you can do the same thing in curves, but that would be more time consuming, and require knowlwdge beyond that of the average enthusiast.

Highlights/shadows makes this type of adjustment much easier. It also works surprisingly well.

An example of CS simplifying a complex operation.

CS works with 16 bit data. Maybe not a big deal. But if you're working on an image of a red rose, or a solid blue sky gradient, the 256 shades of each primary color may be a bit restrictive. Being able to work with 16 bits can be a real plus in certain situations

Pardon my ignorance, but can PSP9 do any of this?

Cheers

Shutter. said:

But really, he raises a point it seems noone is ever willing to say

• Photoshop is overhyped and overpriced. I've been trying to find

out what it is that people need PSCS that they can't do in other
image editing software, and evileggplant is the only one who has
been able to give any reason at all.

I would seriously be interested in a level-headed discussion about
what can/can't be done in PCSC in comparison with other iimage
editing software packages.

Jim

hunter said:

Michael D Robinson clearly has his mind made up and wanted to state
it and is not willing to listen to any other discussion. No
problem, just stop responding!!

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...

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

'I'm not such a bad guy
once you get to know me'
-Agent Smith

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...

--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
http://www.wmdturner.com

If you can visualize it, then create it in the camera, finish it off with the print that matches your mind's eye then you are, most likely, a master...

One of the reasons I do work with PS is the support and education. Go to any bookstore and you will find more material on PS education than any other similiar program. I don't see too many seminars/workshops, etc. for other photo editing programs. If there are, there are not too many out there and they are not taught by top industry people.

I find PS very easy to work with. But I also take the time to educate myself and keep educating myself with any new ideas that I FEEL help MY business.

PS lets me create the image I see in my mind, just as a painter paints what he sees on canvas. It's not always the way things really are. Neither did Ansel Adams. Those scenes were not in black and white and they did not have the contrast he created in development and printing. Capture was just the beginning for Ansel. That's why he developed the zone system. So he could HAVE CONTROL over the ENTIRE process. Just like PS does now. He would have loved it.

It's all about what the photographer wants to create. How he creates it is up to him. Either with PS or not. There is no 'pure' photo. Your dreaming if you think there is. Even the selection of film changes how reality is. Nothing out there, film or digital can capture EXACTLY how things appear. PS can actually help get you pretty close to how it did appear.

Mike

--
'Change the way you look at things, and the things you look at change.'

Photoshop has made me tens of thousands of dollars as a tool. Yes,
I did the work, but the tool allowed that to happen.

Who cares what it costs? The return was more than I could ever
expect in money and joy of creating.

I spend more for a weekend out of town, no big deal...... but
PS has engaged the creative side more than just a weekend on
a mini vacation.

It is all relative to your experience and return on investment.

To reply to everyone individually...

But the bottom line is that yes, PSCS is obviously a very capable software application. But it is without question unduly inflexible. It has capabilities that other programs don't, but it is also void of valuable features that other software packages have.

The 16 bit 8 bit argument is completely irrelevant to me. I use the professional printer whcc... they only print in sRGB and 8 bit. Using 16 bit would do nothing. I also would argue that you wouldn't be able noticeably determine if a print was from an 8 bit or 16 bit file.

The argument that it has returned it's value many times... but that's likely it being a photo editing software package that has returned the value, not that it's Photoshop specifically.

To the silly filters that make photos look cheasey.... you can get those for free off the Internet. Filters cheapen photos, not enhance them, IMO.

I think Adobe rests on it's laurels a bit when it comes to it's user interface, but they don't need to improve it, I guess, since it's users expect that it should be complicated since it's such an advanced program. ;-)

Anyway... use what you want, I really don't care, but I do find it a bit amusing how many people think they need to have PSCS in order to have good results, when 95% (my estimate) of them don't need it. To each their own, I guess.

Happy Shooting.

Jim

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...

--
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:

But the bottom line is that yes, PSCS is obviously a very capable
software application. But it is without question unduly
inflexible. It has capabilities that other programs don't, but it
is also void of valuable features that other software packages have.

The 16 bit 8 bit argument is completely irrelevant to me. I use
the professional printer whcc... they only print in sRGB and 8 bit.
Using 16 bit would do nothing. I also would argue that you
wouldn't be able noticeably determine if a print was from an 8 bit
or 16 bit file.

The argument that it has returned it's value many times... but
that's likely it being a photo editing software package that has
returned the value, not that it's Photoshop specifically.

To the silly filters that make photos look cheasey.... you can get
those for free off the Internet. Filters cheapen photos, not
enhance them, IMO.

I think Adobe rests on it's laurels a bit when it comes to it's
user interface, but they don't need to improve it, I guess, since
it's users expect that it should be complicated since it's such an
advanced program. ;-)

Anyway... use what you want, I really don't care, but I do find it
a bit amusing how many people think they need to have PSCS in order
to have good results, when 95% (my estimate) of them don't need it.
To each their own, I guess.

Happy Shooting.

Jim

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...

--
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...

--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
http://www.wmdturner.com

If you can visualize it, then create it in the camera, finish it off with the print that matches your mind's eye then you are, most likely, a master...

cold c said:

Photoshop is being marketed to a large range of users.

Click to expand...

Ummmm... make that a large range of "professional" users and I'd agree. Other software, such as Elements, is marketed towards the consumer crowd.

cold c said:

In my experience (from other applications), I would guess that the
real reason many existing users don't want any new interface
features for new users is that they already know the interface (so
would see no benefit to themselves) and they would much rather have
the development time of photoshop spent implementing their own
personal wish list of features.

Click to expand...

Actually, the interface has morphed quite a bit over the years, with the addition of the layer metaphor, layer "folders", adjustment layers, the dynamic toolbar, and so on, many such devoted to helping the user manage not just the complexity of the application, but the complexity of the project itself.

Personally, I'd like to see more customization features, like adding menu command keys and being able to hide and rearrange items on the tool palette.

But again, those are "power user" features, and not major changes to the interface and underlying metaphors.