Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
From | nospam |
Date | 12/03/2013 22:17 (12/03/2013 16:17) |
Message-ID | <031220131617012097%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Tony Cooper |
Followups | Tony Cooper (2h & 20m) > nospam |
more reading problems?Tony CooperTony Coopernospam
To really make your point, you'd have to put the same amount of time and effort into learning how to successfully process an image in Gimp that you've put into learning how to successfully process an image in Photoshop.
Most of the "kludge" effect is that you're working with a program that is not what you're used to using and proficient at using.
no, the problem is that functionality is missing and what he wants to do is not possible. no amount of proficiency or time spent can fix that.
Are you claiming that no one can process an image successfully in Gimp? That the functionality incorporated in PS is required to process an image successfully?
That SavageDuck, with enough practice with the Gimp, couldn't produce a processed image that is fully acceptable to him?that's not what he said.
Bullshit.
more twisting.Tony CooperOther people do things differently. So what?nospam
that's not the issue.
the issue is that some people claim the gimp can do anything that photoshop or lightroom can do.
What kind of arrogance makes you think *your* issue is *the* issue?