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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 6, 2003, 9:29 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

Quote:
if you're not really into photography
What an odd thing to say in a forum comprised of people who are into photography. :?

Quote:
But then again - if money's not a issue...
Another odd thing to say--unless $150 or so translates into quite a bit more in different countries, which it probably does.
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2003, 9:58 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

Okay, then I'm odd!

If you didn't notice BCoultry - there's lots of people in here, that is not that much into photography - and then I would say - SAVE YOUR MONEY. Posting a shot once in a while and asking for what digicam to buy is not nessacary "into photography", right! Just people who wants some help - and PS CS would be an overbuy IMO.

And for be 150$. Money is all relative - to me at least!

Actually I was just trying to help you and others that would be wondering about the PS CS!!! Sorry if I affended you.
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2003, 10:47 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

Klaus, I think we just ended up with a translation problem. Because you were reacting to a thread that I'd begun, I reacted to an implication that I'm not into photography and that I'm filthy rich, both of which came across as veiled insults.

I'm sure you didn't mean these things as insults, and please understand that, though I was startled by your comments, I now understand your true intent.

Truce.
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2003, 11:31 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

Thanks - I couldn't really understand your reaction. My statement was not pointed against you, but meant as an advice to save some money on an update, that people maybe don't need at all.
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2003, 11:54 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

For me, the RAW plug-in alone is worth it, but after visiting the Adobe site to read carefully about what else is new, I found that the choosing and applying of filters has been revamped to precisely what I've wished for since version 5 (my first). On top of that, I truly like what they've done with the browser.

When I upgraded from version 6 to 7, I ended up feeling that the Healing Brush and the addition of the browser made it worth every penny. I've got to say that, not once, have I felt I wasted my money on Photoshop.

That said, I agree with you that it's not the right program for everyone.
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2003, 9:21 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

Regarding the quality of NEF files converted to TIFF or JPGs.

Did you read Tom Hogans review on most RAW editors ?

http://www.bythom.com/raw.htm
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2003, 9:40 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

Quote:
Regarding the quality of NEF files converted to TIFF or JPGs.

Did you read Tom Hogans review on most RAW editors ?
It doesn't seem to apply to the ORF files produced by Olympus cameras (and the deficient little plug-in for converting them).
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2003, 9:51 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

ACR 2 was rewritten and considerably improved. also notice he based his testing and info on only 3 versions of RAW. that would be Nikon based bodies using fuji, kodak, and nikon. admittedly nikon did its homework for conversion and its product is good and it integration is also good. i believe it also was a seperate purchase early on too. but we all don't shoot with nikon. the conversion util for canon itself supplies leaves much to be desired. olympus came up a little short too. the minolta one isn't bad just slow and even not that slow.

now for me to pop for another $500 for the C1 product or even $350 which i could have gotten for recently doesn't make sense when ARC 2 works quite well and is an open product supporting all 3 raw version i own and more.

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_12/essay.html
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2003, 10:17 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

Bcoultry.
Sorry I didn't see that you shoot with Olympus! My mistake.

SJMS.

Quote:
but we all don't shoot with nikon.
Ups...seems like I provoked you in some matter! No such intention at all.
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2003, 10:23 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

none taken. i was just explaining the mechanics of the issue. and i apologize if you feel i was admonishing you.

klaus: one day your going to come over here we'll have to beat you up a little then then take out for the sights


oh yeah Ups is the United Parcel Service. Oops is what we do all the time
sjms 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 6:15 PM.