alt.graphics.photoshop
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop?hl=en
alt.graphics.photoshop@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Thick guides in CS4 (Mac) - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/0a7fb8b60492be3a?hl=en
* Curves: Lightroom vs. Photoshop - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/842ae08d31f427b3?hl=en
* Photoshop CS4 Vibrance vs Saturation - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/cf767974479816bd?hl=en
* CS4: What annoys you? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/9d97c11724240eda?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Thick guides in CS4 (Mac)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/0a7fb8b60492be3a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jun 19 2009 9:23 am
From: John Stafford
On 6/19/09 5:22 AM, in article
5f2725b4-0967-4360-9dec-53e702b2dc72@g20g2000vba.googlegroups.com, "tgscott"
<tomgscott@gmail.com> wrote:
> I recently upgraded to CS4 (Mac) and have a gripe - guides are now
> thicker than they used to be (2 pixels as opposed to the previous 1
> pixel width). Does anyone know of a way to return them to the 1 pixels
> versions?
The thickness of the guide depends upon the degree of enlargement (zoom)
that you use. At 100% they are thick, but zoom in and eventually you get to
a point where they are smaller than one pixel (that is one pixel of your
image). Guides always fall between pixels.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 20 2009 4:50 pm
From: Ronald Poi
Hey yeah, guides are thicker and I hate them. I want my 1 pixel
guides... And no, zooming in doesn't make them thinner.
Does anyone knows how to go back to one-pixel?... I've searched
everywhere and found nothing.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Curves: Lightroom vs. Photoshop
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/842ae08d31f427b3?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 20 2009 3:42 pm
From: Misifus
just bob wrote:
> I own both LR v2 and CS4 but have many reason why CS4 works better for me,
> metadata templates and scripting, to name a few biggies. And I've always
> felt CS did everything Lightroom did until I happen to come across this
> article and the excerpt below, saying "In Lightroom, unlike Photoshop,
> Curves is nearly foolproof". I admit I've struggled to put Curves to good
> use.
>
I've not used LR since the beta version and I use CS3, rather than 4,
but I find curves quite useful in a number of ways, both in RGB and in
LAB modes.
-Raf
--
Misifus-
Rafael Seibert
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rafiii
home: http://www.rafandsioux.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photoshop CS4 Vibrance vs Saturation
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/cf767974479816bd?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 20 2009 9:04 pm
From: "Jane P"
Hi,
I'm trying to work out exactly what is the different between the Vibrance
and Saturation adjustments in CS4. I have been using them in Camera RAW for
a while now, and I see Vibrance is now an adjustment in CS4's menu.
I'm yet to find anyone who can give me a satisfactory answer as to the
difference. Saying that vibrance is just saturating those colours that don't
get saturated makes no sense to me.
Anyone have any clearer explanation?
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 20 2009 11:41 pm
From: Rob
Jane P wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm trying to work out exactly what is the different between the Vibrance
> and Saturation adjustments in CS4. I have been using them in Camera RAW for
> a while now, and I see Vibrance is now an adjustment in CS4's menu.
>
> I'm yet to find anyone who can give me a satisfactory answer as to the
> difference. Saying that vibrance is just saturating those colours that don't
> get saturated makes no sense to me.
>
> Anyone have any clearer explanation?
>
>
have a look at whats happening through Bridge when camera raw is used to
open up a file.
there has been some good tutorials as to all the functions when using
camera raw in bridge. (google)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: CS4: What annoys you?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/t/9d97c11724240eda?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Jun 20 2009 9:17 pm
From: "Jane P"
"ivanatwork" <ivanatwork@email.it> wrote in message
news:4a1ff330$0$1113$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it...
> adobepollster@gmail.com ha scritto:
>
>> With each new version, we find dialogs increasing in size and amount
>> of components and styles for doing new things, however this fact
>> causes the application to be monolithic, making the user pay the price
>> of complexity.
>>
> I usually find Photoshop a little too much "command-centric".
> It's like the Autocad of photoretouching: powerfull but only if you know
> how to do what you have to.
>
> What about something more centered on what you are doing? Example: an
> interface for web, an interface for photomanipulation ...
> Yes I know I can do it myself but if I don't need all these filters and
> effects why can't I simply deselect them from the menus, for example?
> You know: I spent a lot of time trying to understand the interface and the
> commands and it's a good thing since I also learn retouching.
>
> What I'm trying to say is: give the right tools for making the right
> things. So we have not to work on commands and scripts instead of maximize
> our preciuos time ;)
>
> Even a version dedicated to certain operations will be apreciated
> (example, a low cost version for web only etc...).
You can tell it what panels to show, and what commands to show on the menus.
It's called the workspace, and you can customise what stays and what goes
from the menus, and save it as your own options. You can easily get all the
commands back by loading the original workspace as well.
Just go into Window, Workspace, Keyboard Shortcuts & Menus. From there you
can choose what commands to show/hide, and you'll have your cut down version
of photoshop.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.graphics.photoshop"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.graphics.photoshop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.graphics.photoshop/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
0 comments:
Post a Comment