Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Software > Editors (Photoshop, Vegas, Final Cut Pro, Kdenlive, etc.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 26, 2006, 4:16 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 429
Default

Is there any reason to upgrade? I shoot sports and wildlife and want to know if it would be worth the money to upgrade from Elements?
RP33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 24, 2007, 12:53 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
JDar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 956
Default

Photoshop Elements does at least 80% of what the full Photoshop does, and Adobe is even allowing use of Adobe Bridge with Elements (at least for OS X, and I wonder how long that will last.)

If you are missing color separations to send to a commercial printer, or haven't approached adjusting Curves via another program (LightZone is my current favorite) or with a plug-in, then consider full Photoshop. Otherwise, ask what problem would switching solve in your particular use?

IMO Elements is easier to learn to use and a real bargain. With Adobe adding camera profiles every couple of months for ACR I think I'm sticking with Elements on my iMac for a very long time.

Adobe used to have a side by side comparison of Elements and full Photoshop on their web site. Don't know if it's still presented that way, but it was very affirming to see that.
JDar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2007, 4:28 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,482
Default

The latest version of Elements I have worked with is 3.0, so I am now two versions behind. In version 3.0 one of the features missing is Layer Masks. It's one big feature I would miss if relegated to Elements as I use Layer Masks all the time In PS CS2. Many other features in Photoshop are available in Elements, just in a scaled down availability. One such feature I noticed in using my girlfriend's Elements 3.0 was the drop shadow feature, in which all the aspects of drop shadowsare infinitly variable in Photoshop. They are in Elements 3.0, but hard coded with not as many variables that you can adjust.

Elements costs $100 or slightly less, which is6 times less than what Photoshop costs retail, not a small chunk of change. I bought my version through a specialAdobe was running for a whileusing the license from the Elements copy that came with my Canon DSLR a couple of years ago, making the cost of Photoshop $299, a price that was quite a bit more bearable.


Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2007, 5:48 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 429
Default

What do you use your layer mask for? I have a plug in that works for that. Just wanting to know what I can use it for to make my pictures better.
RP33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2007, 7:51 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,482
Default

RP33 wrote:
Quote:
What do you use your layer mask for? I have a plug in that works for that. Just wanting to know what I can use it for to make my pictures better.
I use it alot in combination with the processing of my RAW images to increase tonal ranges. Process one RAWfile twice (or more)- once to perfectly expose the highlights and then once to get the shadows right, then combine the two in photoshop, adding a layer mask to reveal part of one image through to another to create one perfect image.

With a mask you can reveal and then reverse what you've done if you need to change things up...they are not destructive in terms of noterasing anything. Think about it like placing several pictures on top of one another, then masking part of some or allof them to reveal only what you want the viewer to see in the final image.

Hereis an image where I wanted to keep deep colors in the foliage, but it rendered the sculpture too dark, so I processed a second file with the brightness in the artworkI wanted. I thenlayered the dark image on top of the other, added a layer mask to the top image and painted over the dark sculpture, revealing the one below I had exposed the way I wanted. This is how our eyes see this type stuff, but not pictures unless you help things. It can also be thought of as a more precise way of dodging and burning, something masters like Ansel Adams didfor decades to create the images they did. You can play with an image like this an infinite number of times with an infinite number of layers, then save it as a .psd file, which retains all the layers, or flatten it all to one layer you can then save as a JPEG.




Same thing here. Exposing for the wall would have blown out the highlights on the statue, so I layered two images together to get the best of both the statue and the wall. In addition, I only sharpened the statue...something I could do because it was on a separate layer from the rest of the image. Sharpening shadows only adds noise to that part of theimage..


Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2007, 2:03 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
pagerboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 483
Default

I tried CS2 and don't think for my use that its any better than Photoshop Elements 1(what I am using now), if I was to take a course and do more artistic photos then I would probably go that way.
pagerboy is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:11 PM.