From: ray on
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:14:38 +0000, Chris H wrote:

> In message <240220101145066458%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, nospam
> <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> writes
>>In article <7ul2ptFb4lU19(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> And again, OP is not a pro - a rank amateur. Amateurs and pros don't
>>> need the same tools.
>>
>>that's why there's photoshop elements and the full photoshop.
>>
>>> > In this instance PSE is a better choice than GIMP. Only the
>>> > religious would say otherwise.
>>>
>>> That's very possible - what, exactly, do you have against letting OP
>>> try them both and see what's best in his situation?
>>
>>what do you have against advice from those who have tried both and found
>>that the gimp is not worth the bother?
>
> I note that a lot of those suggesting PSE, like myself, have tried GIMP
> and found it wanting.....
>
> Those pushing GIMP just seem anti PS for religious reasons.

I'm not 'anti' anything. I'd just like for the OP to TRY GIMP before he
lays out the cash - what are you afraid of? Obviously the ultimate
decision lies with the user - he should try everything he can get his
hands on to see what meets his needs. If free software does, fine - if
not he hasn't lost a damned thing.
From: nospam on
In article <OqadnZGSTc5NxhjWnZ2dnUVZ7rVi4p2d(a)bt.com>, C. Neil Ellwood
<cral.elllwood2(a)btinternet.com> wrote:

> Gimp just takes a very little learning

that's because it does less.

> and I use the way that was
> pioneered with the earlier versions ( right clicking on the picture to
> get to whatever I want to do instead of going all the way to the top of
> the screen to select the tool), there are many ways of doing something and
> whatever way one finds easiest is the best.

there is no need to go 'all the way to the top of the screen' to change
a tool in photoshop.
From: nospam on
In article <7ul4ekFb4lU20(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com>
wrote:

> >> That's very possible - what, exactly, do you have against letting OP
> >> try them both and see what's best in his situation?
> >
> > what do you have against advice from those who have tried both and found
> > that the gimp is not worth the bother?
>
> What I have against it is: what is 'not worth the bother' for one person
> may be exactly what another person needs - that's the same reason there
> is more than one camera for sale.

do you buy every camera? or do you take the advice of people who have
used them, such as talking to a salesperson or reading reviews?

> A point you probably have not considered is 'adequacy'. It's not even
> necessary to have 'the best' if what you have is adequate to your needs.
> Especially if the adequate solution is free and 'the best' is not.

as noted earlier, it's sometimes free, but even at $50, it can be worth
getting a pro quality tool and not bothering with a lesser product,
only to find out that the 'free' product can't do certain things and
wasn't such a good deal after all.

> I wonder what you're afraid of.

nothing. what are *you* afraid of?
From: nospam on
In article <7ul5kfFb4lU21(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com>
wrote:

> I'm not 'anti' anything. I'd just like for the OP to TRY GIMP before he
> lays out the cash

lays out what cash? photoshop has a *free* trial version.

> what are you afraid of? Obviously the ultimate
> decision lies with the user - he should try everything he can get his
> hands on to see what meets his needs.

why? that takes time. maybe he's busy and doesn't want to try a
bazillion different apps. maybe he doesn't know what to look for to
even evaluate it.

> If free software does, fine - if
> not he hasn't lost a damned thing.

other than lost time, which might be more valuable than the price of
software. i don't know what you get paid, but some people can have the
*full* photoshop pay for itself in less than a day, which makes the $50
for photoshop elements become a no-brainer.
From: J. Clarke on
On 2/24/2010 11:13 AM, John McWilliams wrote:
> Chris H wrote:
>> In message <4b8540a0$0$22530$607ed4bc(a)cv.net>, Alan Lichtenstein
>
>>> My question is therefore, if those are my goals, and I may eventually
>>> wind up upgrading to one of the Photoshop CS programs, will I be at a
>>> disadvantage if I purchase Aperature rather than Lightroom.
>>
>> I think the answer has to be yes.... but only a very minor one. Try both
>> and see what you like. Use the one you find the best to work with. IF
>> you are like me you will only occasionally need something other than LR
>> or Aperture.
>>
>>> I do not think at this juncture, given what I have I would benefit by
>>> obtaining Elements.
>>
>> OK... But you should be able to get elements for (almost) free.
>
>
>
> Moreover, Elements integrates well with Lightroom. One way is in LR, you
> hit Cmd-E and it opens the image in PS or PSE, depending on which you have.
>
> I am not sure if PSE does panoramic stitching or HDR, the former being
> more important to me than the latter. HDR is way overrated and often,
> after hours of work, looks poor.

Elements 7 has stitching, Elements 8 can merge bracketed exposures.