Photo Editing 2017 - An Opinion

On 2017-01-24 04:19:56 +0000, nospam said:

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:


Oh, wait. I see the problem.

you looked in a mirror?

Examples of my output have appeared here many times. I'm not afraid
or ashamed to provide them.

nor am i, just not here.

So you claim.

i do, and plenty of people have seen them.

....but none of those people are participants of the photo news groups
where you are most vocal.

Not one individual from that group of people who have allegedly seen
them has come forward in any photo group to support and verify the
quality or existence of any of your photographic output.

On the face of it that is odd given that of the regular participants
here we have seen the work of Floyd, PeterN, Tony Cooper, Eric, David
(Davoud), Alan Browne, myself, android, RichA, and even at one stage
the masterful work of John Sisker, and others, but not a single one of
your images has been seen here where your arguments are most vigorous.
The weight of your remarks with regard to your photographic expertise
remains questionable.

So the World wonders and remains sceptical of the superior photography
and post processing skills you claim to have.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2017-01-24 05:20:11 +0000, nospam said:

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Oh, wait. I see the problem.

you looked in a mirror?

Examples of my output have appeared here many times. I'm not afraid
or ashamed to provide them.

nor am i, just not here.

So you claim.

i do, and plenty of people have seen them.

So you claim.

are you accusing me of lying?

You have yet to provide evidence that you are not.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 1/23/2017 11:19 AM, Neil wrote:
On 1/23/2017 10:54 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-01-23 15:19:27 +0000, Neil said:

On 1/23/2017 10:06 AM, Savageduck wrote:
This is an interesting take on the state of post processing/photo
editing in 2017 from Matt Kloskowski.

https://mattk.com/state-post-processing-photo-editing-2017/

Following his directions, I had to stop reading after his disclaimer.
;-)

You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized that
it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was introduced.
So, I don't use them at all.


From a technical standpoint anything a plugin does can be done from
within PS. However, it is a lot easier to use the presets in a plugin,
and tweak them. Having said that, there are times when I just want to
play with PS until I get a look that I want.



--
PeterN

On 1/23/2017 7:14 PM, Neil wrote:
On 1/23/2017 6:23 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 1/23/2017 3:30 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Neil
wrote:

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are
making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a
process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

When I need such a thing, I write it.

that's more work than using existing solutions but suit yourself.


Not always. There are times when writing your own is quicker than
sifting through commercial apps, to see which works best.

That is quite often the case, actually. If one lacks the knowledge to
write their own app, then it may be more efficient to sift through the
commercial offerings.


Of course.

--
PeterN

On 1/24/2017 10:59 AM, PeterN wrote:
On 1/23/2017 11:19 AM, Neil wrote:
On 1/23/2017 10:54 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-01-23 15:19:27 +0000, Neil said:

On 1/23/2017 10:06 AM, Savageduck wrote:
This is an interesting take on the state of post processing/photo
editing in 2017 from Matt Kloskowski.

https://mattk.com/state-post-processing-photo-editing-2017/

Following his directions, I had to stop reading after his disclaimer.
;-)

You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized that
it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was introduced.
So, I don't use them at all.


From a technical standpoint anything a plugin does can be done from
within PS. However, it is a lot easier to use the presets in a plugin,
and tweak them. Having said that, there are times when I just want to
play with PS until I get a look that I want.

Exactly right... most plug-ins don't do anything that can't be done by
using the tools within the app itself. Since I'm familiar enough with PS
that I access its tools via keyboard commands (I'm annoyed by the lack
of commands for some common tools), it is no big deal to just use the
them stock and/or create presets for those tools. Although I can
understand how plug-ins can be useful for some users, I'm not one of
those folks.

--
best regards,

Neil

In article , PeterN
wrote:


You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized that
it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was introduced.
So, I don't use them at all.


From a technical standpoint anything a plugin does can be done from
within PS.

not true.

However, it is a lot easier to use the presets in a plugin,
and tweak them.

sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Having said that, there are times when I just want to
play with PS until I get a look that I want.

nothing wrong with that.

On 1/24/2017 12:45 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized that
it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was introduced.
So, I don't use them at all.


From a technical standpoint anything a plugin does can be done from
within PS.

not true.

If you actually worked with the product you would know what I am talking
about. OK I will revise to say the "majority of things"


However, it is a lot easier to use the presets in a plugin,
and tweak them.

sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Having said that, there are times when I just want to
play with PS until I get a look that I want.

nothing wrong with that.

Never said there was.

--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:


From a technical standpoint anything a plugin does can be done from
within PS.

not true.

If you actually worked with the product you would know what I am talking
about. OK I will revise to say the "majority of things"

i've worked with photoshop for much longer than you have and have also
written several photoshop plug-ins, so i'm quite confident i know far
more about what can and cannot be done with a plug-in.

On 2017-01-24 18:07:30 +0000, nospam said:

In article , PeterN
wrote:


From a technical standpoint anything a plugin does can be done from
within PS.

not true.

If you actually worked with the product you would know what I am talking
about. OK I will revise to say the "majority of things"

i've worked with photoshop for much longer than you have and have also
written several photoshop plug-ins, so i'm quite confident i know far
more about what can and cannot be done with a plug-in.

As a matter of curiosity, just when did you start working with photoshop?

To make a declaration that you have worked with Photoshop for much
longer than an individual whose usage history you have absolutly no
knowledge, is to put it mildly, Trumpian. Perhaps you are drawing from
an alternate fact set.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2017012410344138165-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

From a technical standpoint anything a plugin does can be done from
within PS.

not true.

If you actually worked with the product you would know what I am talking
about. OK I will revise to say the "majority of things"

i've worked with photoshop for much longer than you have and have also
written several photoshop plug-ins, so i'm quite confident i know far
more about what can and cannot be done with a plug-in.

As a matter of curiosity, just when did you start working with photoshop?

in late 1989, when photoshop was still beta. it came with a hardware
key. the company i was at had only one key. we shared, although it was
really just myself and one or two others.

photoshop version 1.0 was released in feb 1990, mac only.

peter doesn't use a mac, so the first opportunity he could have used
photoshop would have been when it went cross-platform in 1992 with
version 2.5, about 3 years after i first started using it.

1992 is well before the digital photography revolution, so it's likely
that he did not start using photoshop until much later.

i still have photoshop 2.0 on an old mac from that era, which worked
the last time i tried.

To make a declaration that you have worked with Photoshop for much
longer than an individual whose usage history you have absolutly no
knowledge, is to put it mildly, Trumpian. Perhaps you are drawing from
an alternate fact set.

perhaps i'm drawing from what actually happened.