Google| Subject | Re: Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP? |
| From | Savageduck |
| Date | 04/14/2014 07:24 (04/13/2014 22:24) |
| Message-ID | <2014041322245755079-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
| Followups | nospam (53m) > Savageduck Tony Cooper (1d, 22h & 38m) |
On 2014-04-14 04:53:57 +0000, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>said:
Tony CooperIt is not the equal of the PS clone tool, but it is there and when used judiciously it works. Once you have used it and understand when it works and when it doesn't, it is reasonably easy to work with. You just have to understand when you should move to PS as an external editor. For complex cloning, patching, and where the content aware features have to come into their own, LR cannot compete. However, for most editing it does just fine.
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 00:00:00 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:nospamTony Cooper
In article <gfmmk99mv381mh8j7l9gj5gacdc462oprs@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:Tony Coopernospam
If you think that the new Healing Brush features are a equal substitute for the Cloning Tool, then you evidently never understood how to use PS's Clone Tool effectively.
i never said it was equal. what i said is that it works quite well in most situations and in many cases, it's easier and more effective.
No you didn't. That's a complete fabrication. What you would call a "lie". What you said was:
"so does adobe, which is why they included a clone tool in lightroom."
It is not a clone tool. It does not replicate what the clone tool is capable of. You have to dick around with it to get it to use the area you want it to use which makes it less effective. Useful for some things, but not as effective, and certainly not easier to use.
-- Regards,
Savageduck
04/05/2014-
