Subject | Re: post processing |
From | Tony Cooper |
Date | 03/14/2014 22:50 (03/14/2014 17:50) |
Message-ID | <98u6i9pi02pbpqp1uc7rd5hgjkv5g1a29m@4ax.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | nospam |
Followups | nospam (5m) > Tony Cooper |
nospamYou've never been noted for your ability to clearly express yourself. It's not surprising you make this error.
In article <hu96i9199f3tocv162rgrr5uv247har7pf@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:nospamTony CooperTony CooperSandman
Nik says they offer "powerful plug-ins for Photoshop and Lightroom".
But Tony said just above that Nik doesn't claim to be plug-ins! He'll be pissed at you now.
I knowing you sometimes struggle with the language, but you should be able to understand the difference between "a Photoshop plug-in" and "a plug-in for Photoshop". That word "for" in there should be simple to understand.
you *must* be kidding me.Tony Coopernospam
A "Photoshop plug-in" would be a plug-in authored by, and offered by, Adobe. A "Plug-in for Photoshop" is a plug-in that is authored by some other organization and offered as something that will work with Photoshop. Nik is offering a plug-in, a plug-in that will work with Photoshop, but not a Photoshop plug-in.
nope. you really are serious. holy shit. just when i thought i'd seen it all.
i've written photoshop plug-ins.
i know many software developers who have written photoshop plug-ins. i know people at adobe who worked on the photoshop plug-in sdk."For" is used by Nik, OnOne, and at the Adobe Exchange. That's "nobody"?
nobody says 'a plug-in for photoshop'.