PWP is an editor... period. I started with PWP and it took me a long
time to cotton to Photoshop (started with 7). PWP has some tools that I
consider superior to PhotoShop (the clone tool especially) but it does
not have layers. One can do the same thing as layers (in a more
round-about way) but now that I have become accustomed to PS and layers
I can't readily go back. So I pay the Adobe freight charge but also
keep a copy of PWP around.
Chuck Norcutt
Jez Cunningham wrote:
> I'm gonna have a good look at pwp - but it's the organizing of those 15000+
> images more than pixel-level editing I'm looking for. Is it any good at that?
> Jez
>
> Sent from my Nokia phone
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Norton
> Sent: 04/11/2009 20:14:01
> Subject: Re: [OM] Lightroom?
>
>> This is the part I don't get. Folks on theis list are always shooting barbs
>> at Adobe for the upgrade treadmill
>
>
>
> Absolutely!
>
> We're so concerned about "backwards compatibility", and that drove the whole
> DNG fiasco which was Adobe's scam to... oh, never mind--I'll save that beef
> for another day.
>
> But anyway, "backwards compatibility" with Adobe isn't the problem. "Forward
> compatibility" is the problem. In a nutshell, if you buy a new camera you
> must buy the upgrade to Adobe software. ACR is locked down to the current
> camera list at the time of release and they refuse to make ACR forward
> compatible, which is the driving reason why most of us MUST upgrade the
> software. There are some exceptions to this, but for the most part, if you
> buy a new camera you are hosed.
>
> As to PS, well, the program is an absolute disaster in the memory/processing
> department. It takes a huge amount of memory and processing power to have
> an editing experience that is anything but hair-tugging weeping, wailing and
> nashing of teeth. And it only gets worse and worse.
>
> So, you buy a new digital camera. You have to buy an upgrade to your Adobe
> software. To run the new Adobe software you have to buy a new computer. That
> new $1200 DSLR just cost you $3500.
>
> Meanwhile, there are alternatives which sometimes are actually better.
> Olympus Studio2, for example, gives outstanding colors in the conversions
> without strange artifacts. ACR? Not so much. Picture Window Pro 5.0 runs
> circles around Photoshop in functions like resizing, cropping and other
> full-image adjustments on a fraction of the memory and processing
> horsepower. The entire program costs LESS than just an upgrade.
>
> Anybody who grouses at Microsoft for being evil is totally misguided. Adobe
> makes Microsoft seem angelic in comparison. When was the last time that
> Adobe GAVE AWAY a service pack update to their software?
>
> Sure, there are some good things that Adobe has done, but I suspect those
> were caused by somebody's mistake than by a corporate decision.
>
> AG (Bought Adobe products once--never again) Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|