Dear Shangara
I can't take my car on the water either. C1 doesn't try to be a PS substitute. In my view PS tries to be a C1 substitute but not very well.
My first real test with PS RAW was a very soft picture shot into a misty dawn. After quite a bit if fiddling I thought I had got a very good result. I then tried the same RAW file in C1 and got a far superior result much quicker. Intrigued I did some more comparisons and C1 came out top in all cases. It is almost like the difference between Velvia processed by a good pro lab and any old 200 asa film processed by the corner chemist.
Of course no photographer in 2004 is going to work without PS. I do all the other processing like cropping, burning and shading in PS.
Bob
On 26 Jun 2004, at 11:55, Shangara Singh wrote:
Bob
Can you do any of the things I mentioned in C1? Not without also owning
Photoshop, as far as I know. Therefore, it's unfair to make comparisons.
That's all I was saying.
Not disputing it's a fantastic piece of software and that, together with
Photoshop, it can save you time and/or produce better images than Camera
Raw. I have seen C1 in action but not explored it in detail.
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
