Google| Subject | Re: Calumet files Chapter 7 |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 04/05/2014 11:35 (04/05/2014 11:35) |
| Message-ID | <slrnljvjn8.9me.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
| Followups | Tony Cooper (2h & 50m) > Sandman |
In article <4b0vj9hlctc7cbqnrjf09cuep3j2632b6m@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper wrote:
Sandman
Tony Cooper 03/15/2014 03:13:30 PM <hgn8i9pp0requhve7bt09eubvstel0ig44@4ax.com>"they can approve vendors as suppliers of plugins for Photoshop. The plugins on that page are evidently plugins that Adobe has approved for use with Photoshop."
nospam
it doesn't.all you need to do is download the photoshop sdk, write whatever plug-in you want and offer it for sale. adobe doesn't even have to know about it.Tony Cooper
I don't know why you keep repeating this point. No one is contesting it. We all know that anyone can write a plug-in for Photoshop or LR and make that plug-in available to anyone without Adobe's knowledge or consent.
What is at question is only what you should call it.According to whom?
And where is the approval process "for use with Photoshop", Tony?
And regarding the name of the software, maybe we can go on what others have called their plug-ins?
http://css3ps.com - "Photoshop plugin" http://www.cutandslice.me - "Photoshop plugin" http://www.divine-project.com - "Photoshop Plugin" http://subtlepatterns.com - "Photoshop plugin" http://webzap.uiparade.com - "PS plugin" http://pnghat.madebysource.com - "Photoshop plugin" http://skeuomorphism.it - "Photoshop plugin" http://www.autofx.com/ - "Adobe Photoshop plug-ins"
All made by Adobe? Or Approved by Adobe? According to what approval process? But no, they can't be approved by Adobe, they need to have all been made by Adobe:
Tony Cooper Re: post processing 03/17/2014 <81qdi9p509anhalqskqa7cqu8d57g8412o@4ax.com>
"Only Adobe can call a plug-in a "Photoshop Plug-in"
-- Sandman[.net]
03/13/2014-
-
