Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Guys, Photoshop does cost a lot like Leica glass. That's because they're the best. Really. For detailed manipulation of a digital image it just can't be beaten. Yes it has a great deal of features that most folks won't use, but the control and output quality when working with 16 bit images is unmatched. I'm not referring here to basic cropping adjustment or sorting needs. Regarding the pricing, if it is for non-commercial use, and you have a qualifying member of your household within the education system, you can purchase an academic version very much cheaper than the retail version. The software is identical, only the licence differs. Our resident Adobe rep (Wade) may step in here. So toughen up guys, be prepared to budget for it like a good lens and once you have it you will never want to go back. Be warned though, it's extremely addictive. Cheers Hoppy -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Jim Nichols Sent: Wednesday, 31 January 2007 01:37 To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Elements 5.0 Versus Lightroom 1.0 Ric, I had considered that possibility. As far as I know, Adobe only sells the latest, but there may be resellers who have the earlier versions. I will look around. Jim Nichols Tullahoma, TN USA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ric Carter" <ricc@mindspring.com> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 6:45 AM Subject: Re: [Leica] Elements 5.0 Versus Lightroom 1.0 > Are early versions of Photoshop still for sale at reduced prices? > > This may be a lower cost substitute for some people. > > Ric Carter > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/ricc/ > > On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:31 AM, Peter Dzwig wrote: > >> Jim, >> >> my comments on PSE5: >> >> I upgraded to PSE5 a couple of weeks ago because of my desire to be able >> to use levels. That was the single reason. Frankly it does that in a >> limited way, but in my opinion the User Interface to PSE5 is awful. >> >> UI: >> >> I say in my opinion deliberately because it is my opinion, but then that >> is what UI design is all about, providing a good experience to the user. >> To this user the UI singularly fails to do that. The user is forced into >> a way of handling and storing my images which is Adobe's way and not, >> probably the way that many users would want to. >> >> Several of the tools have been moved and the design of the sliders etc >> changed. Previously they had been perfectly OK. If it ain't bust... >> >> >> Levels: >> >> FWIW I work entirely with TIFFs until I do something like putting the >> images in the LUG gallery; as afr as I am aware all of these comments >> apply equally to JPEG manipulation. >> >> Levels, or lack of them, has been for me one of the major differences >> between PSE and PS. My workflow is based upon scanned C41 B&W (BW400CN) >> images stored as RGB TIFFs. Generally I convert these to B&W and then >> work on them as required. Levels is one of the last steps one would go >> through. >> >> Unfortunately "adjust colour levels" - which is what you get - requires >> a colour image, so you have to work entirely in colour or convert a B&W >> image back to colour! The levels that you get from the UI are then only >> adjustable at certain points via sliders, no manual dragging of the >> curves. The preview seems to take a longer time to react than I would >> have expected, but that is a minor point. Finally you cannot save the >> output from a set of levels adjustments independently of the image. In >> other words you can't save the adjustments to import and re-use. >> >> PSE5 adds a number of features which are aimed at the digital video >> capture market and at doing the sorts of things that I guess that most >> LUGgers probably don't do; most of which aren't "traditional >> photographic" manipulation. >> >> Gripes apart PS/PSE does enable you to do a lot which you couldn't do in >> a darkroom and that is its strength. >> >> Peter Dzwig >> >> Jim Nichols wrote: >>> LUGGERS, >>> In my digital endeavors, I work with JPEG images, not RAW or the other >>> more detailed files. For some years, I have used Adobe Photoshop LE as >>> my editing software. I am now interested in upgrading, and today >>> downloaded the beta version of Lightroom. In experimenting with >>> Lightroom, I find I miss the functionality of PS, but can't justify the >>> professional package. I wondered if anyone not requiring work with RAW >>> images has compared Lightroom and Photoshop Elements 5.0? If so, >>> please share your opinions. >>> Jim Nichols >>> Tullahoma, TN USA >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information