Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
My suggestion, if you're used to the Photoshop interface, is to at least upgrade to Photoshop Elements. It's got more to offer than LE. Though I do recommend full Photoshop. Here's a link to read more about it: http://www.adobe.com:80/products/photoshopel/indepth.html Here's a forum on egroups: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/photoshop_elements Larry >But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very >modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much >in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the >learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at >least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? And what about >the Jasc program? It receives rave reviews in popular (i.e. >non-professional) reviews, especially in computer publications, but I >don't recall any reference to it in this list. Why not? What >capabilities is it missing, that I really ought to have in order to do >quality work? *** Larry Berman http://BermanGraphics.com http://IRDreams.com http://ImageCompress.com ***
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
Matthew, There are many others subscribing to this mail list that can better advise you than I but this is my opinion: While there is no question that Photoshop is a powerful and precise graphics application, to the beginner, it is also very intimidating. Jasc's Paint Shop Pro (version 7.02), on the other hand, is much more user friendly and includes most of the features you will be needing - at least as you learn the techniques of digital imaging. Some of the features that Photoshop include (that Pain Shop Pro does not) are; a choice of color management profiles and a very good, albeit complex, monitor calibration feature, 48 bit, greater control of levels and curves, and more advanced tool and layer options. Paint Shop Pro offers only one color management profile (sRGB) and, I believe, is not quite as precise a graphics application as Photoshop. Paint Shop Pro includes a large library of preshapes that can be used in raster and vector layers, an impressive choice of tools, and does not require the computer resources that Photoshop can. Paint Shop Pro is very user friendly and will most likely meet your needs (at least in the beginning) for about a fifth the price of Photoshop 6.0. My opinion, Photoshop LE and Photoshop 5.0 (that is now included in some scanner bundles) are not as good a choice as Paint Shop Pro v 7.02. I use Photoshop and Paint Shop Pro because I believe both applications offer distinct advantages. I started out using Paint Shop Pro because it was cheap. It has evolved over several years to a much more powerful application and has remained a very easy program to learn and use. One bit of caution. When it comes to rotating an image to align a tilted image, neither of these applications do it well. Image alignment should be done by carefully aligning the image in the scanner. 90 and 180 degree rotations are handled very well with both applications. My suggestion to you, Matthew is to start out with the latest version of Paint Shop Pro and move up to Photoshop when, and if, you think you are ready. If your scanner is supported by Vuescan, I would also highly recommend it. You will need to output to 36 bit in Paint Shop Pro but it does a very good job. Jim "S. Matthew Prastein" wrote: > I'm new to all this, just getting my feet wet, and have a very basic > question about image processing software. It's clear, from all the > content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, > an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and > uniformity, in publishing. > > But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very > modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much > in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the > learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at > least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? And what about > the Jasc program? It receives rave reviews in popular (i.e. > non-professional) reviews, especially in computer publications, but I > don't recall any reference to it in this list. Why not? What > capabilities is it missing, that I really ought to have in order to do > quality work? > > Put another way, how do I choose software that matches the > capabilities of the rest of my system, and yet provides a reasonable > path for future upgrade?
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
Photoshop is not necessary unless you intend to be employed in the business. Photoshop Elements or 5.0 LE could do it for you, or Jasc PSP or even Corel PhotoPaint. What you learn in learning to use these other programs will apply to PS itself if and when it becomes worthwhile to shell out $500+. I think you're better off, for now, using one of these other programs, and in using them you'll discover for yourself whether you even want to go through the whole learning experience for using PS 6.0 - it's not easy, and something like Photoshop Elements contains most of the features (excepting being able to work in CMYK and LAB color spaces)without the learning curve. If you already have PS 5.0 LE start with that - it's an excellent program and, like Photoshop Elements, will do just about all PS 6.0 will do excepting CMYK and LAB adjustments. Maris - Original Message - From: "S. Matthew Prastein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 7:24 AM Subject: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02 | I'm new to all this, just getting my feet wet, and have a very basic | question about image processing software. It's clear, from all the | content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, | an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and | uniformity, in publishing. | | But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very | modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much | in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the | learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at | least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? And what about | the Jasc program? It receives rave reviews in popular (i.e. | non-professional) reviews, especially in computer publications, but I | don't recall any reference to it in this list. Why not? What | capabilities is it missing, that I really ought to have in order to do | quality work? | | Put another way, how do I choose software that matches the | capabilities of the rest of my system, and yet provides a reasonable | path for future upgrade? |
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
"S. Matthew Prastein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, > an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and > uniformity, in publishing. It has a really good colour management system, and that is the best thing going for it IMO. > But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very > modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much > in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the > learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? IMO no. It depends on how picky you are about getting a precise match between the screen image and the page. But you'll need more than just Photoshop to do that... > Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at > least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? Maybe, although AFAIK PS 5.0 LE has *no* colour management. It's also missing quite a few other features. > And what about the Jasc program? It receives rave reviews in > popular (i.e. non-professional) reviews, especially in computer > publications, but I don't recall any reference to it in this list. > Why not? Most of the more vocal members of the list are professional photographers who can justify the cost of Photoshop. Like you, I find it hard to justify, especially since I live in Australia where it costs over AUD$1300. I have been using Paintshop Pro since version 4.x, and they're now up to 7.02. PSP 7.02 does most things Photoshop can do, and some things PS *can't* do. I don't have PS 6.0 so I can't do a direct comparison, but one thing I prefer in PSP is the page setup facility which allows you to visually place the image on the page - the lack of a wiziwyg page setup facility in PS 5.5 stunned me considering the price of the program. One *big* point in favour of JASC in my opinion - they have a newsgroup, and employees of the company post there and read it. They *do* take notice of user suggestions. The other people in the newsgroup can be very helpful if you are trying to figure out how to do something with PSP. > What capabilities is it missing, that I really ought to have in order > to do quality work? 1) A high quality CMS. PSP uses the Windows CMS which is "ok" but not brilliant (others may feel otherwise :) 2) A soft proofing feature. There *is* a soft proofing feature in PSP but since it uses the Windows CMS, its accuracy is dubious. 3) The ability to uses colour spaces other than sRGB. This may be important with some colours, but I've never personally found it to be a serious limitation. PSP was mainly created with editing for the web in mind, hence there was no need to support other colour spaces. These days however, PSP 7.02 has some great tools for editing digital or scanned photos. 4) The ability to work in 16bit colour. PSP can read a 16bit TIFF file, but once the file is opened, all editing is in 8bits per channel. I don't think this is an issue with the Acer, but using Vuescan and my LS30 I can squeeze 10 bits per channel out of the scanner to tweak into a better 8 bit per channel image. Picture Window Pro is another cheap photo editing program which you might consider in addition to PSP because it *does* support 16 bit editing. http://www.dl-c.com/ > Put another way, how do I choose software that matches the > capabilities of the rest of my system, and yet provides a reasonable > path for future upgrade? I'd say that the Acer scanner, Epson printer, Vuescan and PSP 7.02 will give you great results. Stick to sRGB for the colour space and let the printer do "automatic colour adjustment" and you should get nice prints. On the other hand *don't* expect to get a precise match between the screen and the page! Doing "real" profiling and colour management is another whole kettle of fish. Rob PS If you'd been able to take advantage of the upgrade prices when PS6 was first released, my response may have been different. :)
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, S. Matthew Prastein wrote: > I'm new to all this, just getting my feet wet, and have a very basic > question about image processing software. It's clear, from all the > content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, > an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and > uniformity, in publishing. Photoshop can be mighty intimidating when you're just starting out. Lots of us have been there. No doubt several other competent packages can accomplish the same results, and almost always for less $$ than Adobe's latest. The one BIG advantage with PS is that it's the program that sets the standard, and the terminology, for the rest of the pack. One option you might consider is a pre-owned copy of an older PS version (say 4.x or 5.x) on eBay, which can be had for far, far less $$$ than the retail cost of PS 6. FWIW -- and this is a minority opinion, for sure -- you can do just fine without all the ICC color management stuff. I still do nearly all of my work in PS 4. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
Matthew: If you have PS 5.0 LE and you eventually intend to usr PS, I would suggest you at least load it and register it even if you use another imaging program. As Adobe upgrades the product, you will get offers to upgrade the product at a much lower price than the $500. I also think that you will get a magazine for the first year for free that will present information that will be useful in processing your images. Even if you do not use the program as much as a less costly one, the information is often transferable to another workflow. In the meantime you can play with both the PS and other program to see which provides the easiest interface for your use. Then, taking into consideration all the information you can read on this and other sites, you can decide what is best for you. Gordon
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
>It's clear, from all the >content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, >an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and >uniformity, in publishing. > >But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very >modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much >in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better? No need to spend the bucks for the full version of Photoshop, if you don't need the masking and a few of the other high-end features. Adobe has just released Photoshop Elements which has 80% of PS 6's features for only $99. Much better than PS LE. Built-in tutorials and a real manual. Bill
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
I must be "intellectually challenged." In spite of all I read about how easy Elements is to use, I can't seem to find my way to the things I'd like to learn to do. I downloaded the sample version, tried it, said Argh!!! and went back to LE. I can even find ways to do simple things (histogram + level adjust) in the trial version of 6.0 (just like in LE). I haven't found Elements useful in leading me past that point. Am I missing something? Do I just have to try harder? The little I've seen of Paint Shop Pro looks a lot easier to use than Elements. And, it's just the "high end" that intrigues me. I have the feeling that PS 6.0 lets one be the Spielburg of stills. Is that so? Or am I just an idiot? On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:48:02 -0700, you wrote: >>It's clear, from all the >>content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, >>an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and >>uniformity, in publishing. >> >>But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very >>modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much >>in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the >learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better? > >No need to spend the bucks for the full version of Photoshop, if you >don't need the masking and a few of the other high-end features. >Adobe has just released Photoshop Elements which has 80% of PS 6's >features for only $99. Much better than PS LE. Built-in tutorials and >a real manual. > >Bill
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
PS-LE will get you started, Matthew. If you're an amateur, the $600 price of Adobe6.0 isn't justifiable, especially when you paid less for your scanner. If you plan to turn Pro, plan on "ramping up" your expenditures by a factor of 2 or 3, at least. People speak well of the Jasc program, although I don't have it personally. There are other good programs available for less than $100 US. You might still be able to get CorelDraw/Photo v.9 for under $50 from deals.com (someone correct me if I remembered this wrong). Best regards--LRA >From: "S. Matthew Prastein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02 >Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 07:24:11 -0500 > >I'm new to all this, just getting my feet wet, and have a very basic >question about image processing software. It's clear, from all the >content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, >an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and >uniformity, in publishing. > >But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very >modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much >in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the >learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at >least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? And what about >the Jasc program? It receives rave reviews in popular (i.e. >non-professional) reviews, especially in computer publications, but I >don't recall any reference to it in this list. Why not? What >capabilities is it missing, that I really ought to have in order to do >quality work? > >Put another way, how do I choose software that matches the >capabilities of the rest of my system, and yet provides a reasonable >path for future upgrade? _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
I use PSP7.02 routinely, but still have occasional recourse to the following features in PS5LE 1. PS5LE's 'Variations' screen, where you can compare different twiddles alongside each other, with adjustable degrees of aggressiveness. 2. The PS5LE pick tool for selecting white point and black point from specific image locations. If this is there somewhere in PSP, please could someone tell me where to find it? 3. The superior PS5LE dithering of full screen images, which gives a much more pleasing look, better representative of what a print will look like. Regards, Alan T - Original Message - From: Lynn Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 9:39 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02 > PS-LE will get you started, Matthew. If you're an amateur, the $600 price of > Adobe6.0 isn't justifiable, especially when you paid less for your scanner. > If you plan to turn Pro, plan on "ramping up" your expenditures by a factor > of 2 or 3, at least. > > People speak well of the Jasc program, although I don't have it personally.
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
http://www.directdeals.com/index.asp Maris - Original Message - From: "Lynn Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 3:39 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02 | PS-LE will get you started, Matthew. If you're an amateur, the $600 price of | Adobe6.0 isn't justifiable, especially when you paid less for your scanner. | If you plan to turn Pro, plan on "ramping up" your expenditures by a factor | of 2 or 3, at least. | | People speak well of the Jasc program, although I don't have it personally. | There are other good programs available for less than $100 US. You might | still be able to get CorelDraw/Photo v.9 for under $50 from deals.com | (someone correct me if I remembered this wrong). | | Best regards--LRA | | | >From: "S. Matthew Prastein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | >Subject: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02 | >Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 07:24:11 -0500 | > | >I'm new to all this, just getting my feet wet, and have a very basic | >question about image processing software. It's clear, from all the | >content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, | >an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and | >uniformity, in publishing. | > | >But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very | >modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much | >in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the | >learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at | >least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? And what about | >the Jasc program? It receives rave reviews in popular (i.e. | >non-professional) reviews, especially in computer publications, but I | >don't recall any reference to it in this list. Why not? What | >capabilities is it missing, that I really ought to have in order to do | >quality work? | > | >Put another way, how do I choose software that matches the | >capabilities of the rest of my system, and yet provides a reasonable | >path for future upgrade? | | _ | Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com | | |
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
"James L. Sims" wrote: > > > Some of the features that Photoshop include (that Pain Shop Pro does not) Oh-Oh, it appears I've been redirected to the S&M newsgroup (again!) ;-) Then again, there does seem to be some correlation between color management and scanning and masochism... ;-) Art
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
"S. Matthew Prastein" wrote: > > > And, it's just the "high end" that intrigues me. I have the feeling > that PS 6.0 lets one be the Spielburg of stills. Is that so? Or am I > just an idiot? > Other than the introduction of layers, and the history pallet in more recent versions of PS, (I'm using v5.5) I think my increased productivity and capabilities with Photoshop come more from having used it longer than from new bells and whistles within it. Navigator and Actions are nice too, but they haven't made my images better. Art
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
I'll chime in here and agree with Rafe (did I just type that ;-)), and numerous others and support the idea that you not only don't need PS 6.0, but you don't need PS at all. Yes, I use it, because at the time when I started with it, (version 2.5) it was vastly superior to most else on the market, and it came bundled in a huge Adobe software package, and came as part of a scanner purchase, no less! PS has grown and has a great many bells and whistles now, some of which I will never need or use. However, in the meantime, many lesser known products have become much more sophisticated, and some have nipped at the heels of PS for the last several years. As others have mentioned, JASC, Corel, which is now concentrating heavily on image manipulation software, having bought out most of Meta-Creations' product line, MGI, and others have come up with fine products at much lower pricing. Recent older versions of Photoshop are fine, heck, they are what the top end people used only 6-12 months ago! And even Adobe recognized they needed to come up with something between Photoshop Full and Photodeluxe, which wasn't the quite crippled LE version. Photoshop Elements has come with rave reviews, and costs under $100 US, I believe. I'm sure there are reviews of image programs in some of the magazines which are worthwhile looking at, and most importantly, check for specific features you need, and if you are a novice, look for support groups to help you over the learning "curve". Lastly, if you are a careful shopper, you might find programs like MGI Photosuite available for free after rebate, although it isn't in the same league as PS, it has some nice features and is easy to use. (I was once speaking with the head sale guy from MGI by phone about some problems they were having with their rebate system up here in Canada (they are a Canadian company, but chose to use a US rebate service, and it backfired badly for their Canadian clients). One of the rebates involved an "upgrade" program, so he was filling out some forms for me, and asked me "what software are you upgrading from" and I said, "oh, let's put down Photoshop", even he got a big laugh out of that. Art Raphael Bustin wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, S. Matthew Prastein wrote: > > > I'm new to all this, just getting my feet wet, and have a very basic > > question about image processing software. It's clear, from all the > > content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, > > an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and > > uniformity, in publishing. > > Photoshop can be mighty intimidating when you're > just starting out. Lots of us have been there. > > No doubt several other competent packages can > accomplish the same results, and almost always > for less $$ than Adobe's latest. > > The one BIG advantage with PS is that it's the > program that sets the standard, and the terminology, > for the rest of the pack. > > One option you might consider is a pre-owned copy > of an older PS version (say 4.x or 5.x) on eBay, > which can be had for far, far less $$$ than the > retail cost of PS 6. > > FWIW -- and this is a minority opinion, for sure -- > you can do just fine without all the ICC color > management stuff. I still do nearly all of my work > in PS 4. > > rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
Many thanks to all for your quick, sympathetic, informative, and helpful advice and comments. I particularly value the specific information on features present or more effective in one program or another. I guess the thing for me to do is give the PS 6.0 free tryout a workout during the month it will be available to me-- hoping for a significant upgrade deal. PS 5.0 LE + Jasc 7.02 looks like a viable fallback option. And, at $35, I might as well take a look at Corel, Yes, VueScan is a marvel, getting better each week. I don't know where Ed gets the energy, but I'm sure greatful. It takes the strain out of massaging the prints. But, I've noticed, there's no substitute for full exposure of my negatives. Even 800 ASA Fuji, with full exposure, scans beautifully. On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 07:24:11 -0500, you wrote: >I'm new to all this, just getting my feet wet, and have a very basic >question about image processing software. It's clear, from all the >content here, that PS, and in particular PS 6.0, is the Rosetta stone, >an essential professional tool for achieving image quality, and >uniformity, in publishing. > >But what about lower-class people like me? I'm an amateur, with very >modest equipment (an Acer Scanwit 2740S and an Epson 900), very much >in the learning mode. Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the >learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at >least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? And what about >the Jasc program? It receives rave reviews in popular (i.e. >non-professional) reviews, especially in computer publications, but I >don't recall any reference to it in this list. Why not? What >capabilities is it missing, that I really ought to have in order to do >quality work? > >Put another way, how do I choose software that matches the >capabilities of the rest of my system, and yet provides a reasonable >path for future upgrade?
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
"S. Matthew Prastein" wrote: > > > guess the thing for me to do is give the PS 6.0 free tryout a > workout during the month it will be available to me-- hoping for a > significant upgrade deal. PS 5.0 LE + Jasc 7.02 looks like a viable > fallback option. And, at $35, I might as well take a look at Corel, FYI: Here in the USA, just upgraded to PS 6.0 from PS 5.0LE for $299. The catch is that you must purchase an Epson 1280 printer directly from Epson. The Epson purchase includes PS5.0 LE and the upgrade offer. Many thanks to all the those who have shared their expertise here & especially for VUESCAN (Now back to the digest !). JJSmith
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 07:24:11 -0500 S. Matthew Prastein ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Should I shell out the $500+ bucks, plus the > learning time, to get a grip on 6.0? TBH, there's a sickeningly expensive near-inevitability about this. PS remains the principal DI prog, though most people - me included - never use more than a fraction of what it can do. It's not essential, but if you can afford it and intend to stick with this activity, you will at least find a lot of support expressed here in terms of PS use. > Will 5.0 LE serve me better, at > least in the learning phase and possibly for all time? Fine for now, upgrade if/when you feel the limitations are a problem. The one huge benefit of PS full, for scannerites, is the ability to work with 16bit/channel scans. > And what about > the Jasc program? I've not seen latest versions, but I was starting to hate the UI as it changed from being a quick, cheap and dirty image editor to something with bigger aspirations. However it has a lot of fans. I always preferred the similarly priced Micrografx Picture Publisher, which really does run PS close in most areas, and I very much prefer the UI to PS for many operations. It also has a much lighter footprint than PS, requiring much less RAM and CPU and being much faster on modest machines. I still use it now, especially for webby stuff. However, tragically, it doesn't speak 16bits. Or at least v8 doesn't, v9 may. Picture Window Pro is, from what I hear, another serious contender. I know of a PS user who uses PWP instead, whenever he can. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
I use Photoshop, but only because I bought it (student edition) before Photoshop Elements came out. If I were starting now, I'd use Photoshop Elements. I think the additional features that I'm aware of in the full Photoshop system (color space managementm etc.) are more useful for a professional working for a print publication than my hobby use. Paintshop Pro is very good for the money, and can even do some things that are very difficult in Photoshop, but after using Photoshop for a while, I think it's generally more powerful; and I think the price advantage is gone or nearly gone with the inroduction of Photosop Elements. Photoshop LE: I can't recall exactly what I found lacking in this, but I do recall that looking at the features, it wasn't good enough for me. I think Elements is a much better low-entry offering than LE was. -- Terry Carroll | "Denied." Santa Clara, CA | Baltimore Ravens v. Bouchat, no. 00-1494, [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (U.S. Supreme Court, May 21, 2001) Modell delendus est |
RE: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
I resend it again, the first time failed through problems at the mail server. Sorry it arrives late. > -Original Message- > From: Rob Geraghty [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 4:25 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro > 7.02 > > > Picture Window Pro is another cheap photo editing program which you might > consider in addition to PSP because it *does* support 16 bit editing. > > http://www.dl-c.com/ > [Oostrom, Jerry] PWP uses the windows color management system, which is probably not as good as that of Adobe. It also misses the selection tools such as magic wand, freehand, rectangle etc. Actually, I think it misses all those selection tools and as a result I miss them. Perhaps the cheaper editing tools compared to the full version of Photoshop also miss "magic wand select similar" etc. , which I noticed can be handy to select white dust specks and subsequently blur these specks. However, you may never have a need for that. PWP has a lot of things going for it besides the price: (here a few that I use: ) All edits (= a lot) can be in 48 bit, you have a warping tool which e.g.enables you to correct distorted lines in architecture photography, you have a barrel distortion correction tool (I have cheap lenses), you have a chromatic aberration correction tool (I have cheap lenses) and with every valid remark that you have you get a new version of the executable sent to your mail-address (at least thats what the programmer tried to do), with a correction that works. But I read that Photoshop Elements is only $99 and has (Adobe?) CM, whereas PWP almost costs $80, ash Windows CM and has a more complicated user interface, for me especially true with masks.
filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: PS 6.0 v. PS 5.0 LE v. Jasc Paintshop Pro 7.02
James Sims wrote: >One bit of caution. When it comes to rotating an image to align a tilted >image, neither of these applications do it well. Image alignment should >be done by carefully aligning the image in the scanner. 90 and 180 degree >rotations are handled very well with both applications. FWIW I use the crop tool in PSP to help with this. Generally if I am rotating the image, it's because the horizon is slightly off level. I create an outline using the crop tool with a side close to the line of the horizon, and this gives me a reference to judge whether the rotation has worked. The PSP crop tool doesn't behave like the selection tool, so it's safe to use in this way - otherwise you'd be rotating the selection. You can rotate by fractions of a degree - although I've never bothered with less than 0.5. Even a small amount of rotation will lose a lot of the edges of the image, so it's worth getting your camera level! :) Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
