On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:22:25 -0800, profpam wrote in
Message-Id: :

I actually prefer Photo Shop 7.0 by Jasc to Adobe's Photoshop because it
is easy to use and very affordable. Of course, there are a number of
things that work better with Photoshop; i.e. cutting-out a complex
object.

Yes. For power and ease of use, Jasc's Paint Shop is the tool of
choice. If you need to do color separations, match commercial
printing ink colors, or complex rendering, PhotoShop can do it at a
price.

Hmm...I have Photoshop too, and I would call "Elements" Photoshop for
Computer Dummies. Well, not exactly dummies, but it has a lot of the
Photoshop adjustments automated so people with less graphic experience and
computer experience can tweak their photos and give them interesting
effects. It is just a slimmed-down, more automated version of Photoshop.
It costs about $100 from Adobe directly, but I bet it is available for less
somewhere else. I got it with my camera, plus I convinced them to buy it at
work for processing our photos. QPR is good.
--
Reka

I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
http://www.rolbox.it/hukari/index.html

"Larry Dighera" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 07:09:56 +0100, "Reka"
wrote in Message-Id: :

Photoshop Elements isn't bad for the money

I'm not familiar with that. Tell me more.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.583 / Virus Database: 369 - Release Date: 10.02.04

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 07:09:56 +0100, "Reka"
wrote in Message-Id: :

Photoshop Elements isn't bad for the money

I'm not familiar with that. Tell me more.

Hmm...I have Photoshop too, and I would call "Elements" Photoshop for
Computer Dummies. Well, not exactly dummies, but it has a lot of the
Photoshop adjustments automated so people with less graphic experience and
computer experience can tweak their photos and give them interesting
effects. It is just a slimmed-down, more automated version of Photoshop.
It costs about $100 from Adobe directly, but I bet it is available for less
somewhere else. I got it with my camera, plus I convinced them to buy it at
work for processing our photos. QPR is good.
--
Reka

I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
http://www.rolbox.it/hukari/index.html

"Larry Dighera" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 07:09:56 +0100, "Reka"
wrote in Message-Id: :

Photoshop Elements isn't bad for the money

I'm not familiar with that. Tell me more.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.583 / Virus Database: 369 - Release Date: 10.02.04

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:04:53 GMT, "Diana Kulaga"
wrote:

Thanks, all. I know about adjusting color post-photo, but still haven't
been able to capture that particular plant's color. Nice to know the pros
have problems too......

I think that one of these days we'll have to spring for Adobe Photoshop.
From everything I hear, that's the best one without spending obscene amounts
of money. That program is about as obscenely priced as we'd want to get.

Diana

There is a Photoshop ELEMENTS that is pretty useful with out the
super top overhead or the super cost.
SuE
http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php

This is interesting. Lots of good info; thanks, everyone.

Diana

"V_coerulea" wrote in message
...
Good reds are very difficult with a diverse background. I've found that
the
best way to get a good red is to provide a monochromatic background of
blue
(especially), yellow, brown, gray, or just about anything but purple and
some greens. I know there are technical explainations of why the reds are
difficult but this is the best work-around I've come across. It may not be
"natural", but you'll get the red you want.
Gary

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
ink.net...
To all you ace photographers out the

What do you do to get good reds? We've got a great camera now, and can
get
true colors in every hue but some reds. I posted a pic in abpo of Dtps.
Taisuco Firebird, but the true color is a deeper and richer fuscia than
what
we captured.

We get the "brown" reds, and the maroons are perfect. But the hot
fuscias
are a problem. Any advice welcome!

Diana

This is interesting. Lots of good info; thanks, everyone.

Diana

"V_coerulea" wrote in message
...
Good reds are very difficult with a diverse background. I've found that
the
best way to get a good red is to provide a monochromatic background of
blue
(especially), yellow, brown, gray, or just about anything but purple and
some greens. I know there are technical explainations of why the reds are
difficult but this is the best work-around I've come across. It may not be
"natural", but you'll get the red you want.
Gary

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
ink.net...
To all you ace photographers out the

What do you do to get good reds? We've got a great camera now, and can
get
true colors in every hue but some reds. I posted a pic in abpo of Dtps.
Taisuco Firebird, but the true color is a deeper and richer fuscia than
what
we captured.

We get the "brown" reds, and the maroons are perfect. But the hot
fuscias
are a problem. Any advice welcome!

Diana

Howdy folks

Was just following this thread and thought I would drop some comments.
I would definitely go with photoshop 7, don't even look at photoshop
elements, its wishy washy to say the least.

Anyway, most graphical/photo editing proggies have a tool/function called
'auto levels'. Usually applying this function will give you very true
colours. If the original poster would like to e-mail me the pic I can show
you before and after pictures just to show you what I'm talking about. my
mail is remove removespam to get me
--
**So long, and thanks for all the fish!**


"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
nk.net...
This is interesting. Lots of good info; thanks, everyone.

Diana

"V_coerulea" wrote in message
...
Good reds are very difficult with a diverse background. I've found that
the
best way to get a good red is to provide a monochromatic background of
blue
(especially), yellow, brown, gray, or just about anything but purple and
some greens. I know there are technical explainations of why the reds
are
difficult but this is the best work-around I've come across. It may not
be
"natural", but you'll get the red you want.
Gary

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
ink.net...
To all you ace photographers out the

What do you do to get good reds? We've got a great camera now, and
can
get
true colors in every hue but some reds. I posted a pic in abpo of
Dtps.
Taisuco Firebird, but the true color is a deeper and richer fuscia
than
what
we captured.

We get the "brown" reds, and the maroons are perfect. But the hot
fuscias
are a problem. Any advice welcome!

Diana

Howdy folks

Was just following this thread and thought I would drop some comments.
I would definitely go with photoshop 7, don't even look at photoshop
elements, its wishy washy to say the least.

Anyway, most graphical/photo editing proggies have a tool/function called
'auto levels'. Usually applying this function will give you very true
colours. If the original poster would like to e-mail me the pic I can show
you before and after pictures just to show you what I'm talking about. my
mail is remove removespam to get me
--
**So long, and thanks for all the fish!**


"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
nk.net...
This is interesting. Lots of good info; thanks, everyone.

Diana

"V_coerulea" wrote in message
...
Good reds are very difficult with a diverse background. I've found that
the
best way to get a good red is to provide a monochromatic background of
blue
(especially), yellow, brown, gray, or just about anything but purple and
some greens. I know there are technical explainations of why the reds
are
difficult but this is the best work-around I've come across. It may not
be
"natural", but you'll get the red you want.
Gary

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
ink.net...
To all you ace photographers out the

What do you do to get good reds? We've got a great camera now, and
can
get
true colors in every hue but some reds. I posted a pic in abpo of
Dtps.
Taisuco Firebird, but the true color is a deeper and richer fuscia
than
what
we captured.

We get the "brown" reds, and the maroons are perfect. But the hot
fuscias
are a problem. Any advice welcome!

Diana

Howdy folks

Was just following this thread and thought I would drop some comments.
I would definitely go with photoshop 7, don't even look at photoshop
elements, its wishy washy to say the least.

Anyway, most graphical/photo editing proggies have a tool/function called
'auto levels'. Usually applying this function will give you very true
colours. If the original poster would like to e-mail me the pic I can show
you before and after pictures just to show you what I'm talking about. my
mail is remove removespam to get me
--
**So long, and thanks for all the fish!**


"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
nk.net...
This is interesting. Lots of good info; thanks, everyone.

Diana

"V_coerulea" wrote in message
...
Good reds are very difficult with a diverse background. I've found that
the
best way to get a good red is to provide a monochromatic background of
blue
(especially), yellow, brown, gray, or just about anything but purple and
some greens. I know there are technical explainations of why the reds
are
difficult but this is the best work-around I've come across. It may not
be
"natural", but you'll get the red you want.
Gary

"Diana Kulaga" wrote in message
ink.net...
To all you ace photographers out the

What do you do to get good reds? We've got a great camera now, and
can
get
true colors in every hue but some reds. I posted a pic in abpo of
Dtps.
Taisuco Firebird, but the true color is a deeper and richer fuscia
than
what
we captured.

We get the "brown" reds, and the maroons are perfect. But the hot
fuscias
are a problem. Any advice welcome!

Diana