Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | J. Clarke |
| Date | 12/04/2013 01:23 (12/03/2013 19:23) |
| Message-ID | <MPG.2d084003889a76d598a232@news.newsguy.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
In article <2bms999opmua4hejg5ltdsfur89nkpcs14@4ax.com>, tonycooper214 @gmail.com says...
Tony Cooper_An_ image? Certainly there must be some image somewhere that can be processed in GIMP with a successful result. That doesn't necessarily mean that all or most can, nor does it mean that a given quantity of effort with GIMP will give a result equal to applying that same quantity of effort with another program.
On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:17:01 -0500, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:nospamTony Cooper
In article <nses995v7g2n5j3d1742s2u2r7n88ckoq8@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:nospamTony 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?
more reading problems?
how many times does it need to be said that the gimp does not have features that photoshop and lightroom have, making it *not* *possible* to do certain things?
My question asks if an image can be processed in Gimp with a successful result.
Yes or no?
11/30/2013-
-
