Google| Subject | Re: post processing |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 2014-03-13 22:41 (2014-03-13 17:41) |
| Message-ID | <130320141741488722%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
| Followups | Tony Cooper (4h & 32m) > nospam |
In article <rv74i9p62n96ij92ehsia2pp168efn77e5@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:
in other words, effort. it doesn't have to be physical effort to be effort. more of your usual twisting.Tony CoopernospamnospamTony Cooper
depending on what you want to do, that might matter or it might not. also, a non-destructive workflow is quite a bit harder with photoshop because it's not designed for it. it's possible but it takes a lot of effort.
It takes some care, but not effort. "It's possible" suggests that it's very difficult, and it's not at all very difficult.
it's effort.
You like to say that, but it really doesn't. It just requires some care and thought. While thinking may be an effort for you, most of us consider effort to be required for physical activity.
I can't remember ever losing an original or the ability to go back to do it differently working in Photoshop in any of the versions I've owned.again, non-destructive is not being able to go back to the original.
it's being able to go back and adjust just about anything along the way, such as uncrop what you cropped out or change the colour balance or some other parameter of the raw processing or changing the amount of blur or sharpening or masking or many other things, without affecting anything else.
if all you did was saved the original, then you would have to start over from the original. that's not a non-destructive workflow.
I know you don't think I'm particularly brilliant, so it must be effortless.you make dumb people look brilliant.
2014-03-13-
-
-
