Subject | Re: post processing |
From | nospam |
Date | 03/14/2014 22:56 (03/14/2014 17:56) |
Message-ID | <140320141756134558%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Tony Cooper |
Followups | Tony Cooper (1h & 30m) > nospam |
it's not an error.Tony CoopernospamTony 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.
You've never been noted for your ability to clearly express yourself. It's not surprising you make this error.
ok, almost nobody.nospamTony Cooper
i know many software developers who have written photoshop plug-ins. i know people at adobe who worked on the photoshop plug-in sdk.
nobody says 'a plug-in for photoshop'.
"For" is used by Nik, OnOne, and at the Adobe Exchange. That's "nobody"?