Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter & Gimp

Marc Heusser <marc.heusser.DeleteThis@CHEERSheusser.comMERCIALSPAMMERS.invalid>
wrote:

 > Just got a new scanner with Adobe's Photoshop Elements included.
 > Does it offer anything over IPhoto'05, Graphic Converter and Gimp?

Well, I sure think it does. Photoshop Elements is an amazing value;
you're basically being given 95% of Photoshop, a $600 program, for free.
Not to be sneezed at. m.

--
matt neuburg, phd = matt.DeleteThis@tidbits.com, <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.tidbits.com/matt/" target="_blank">http://www.tidbits.com/matt/</a>
AppleScript: The Definitive Guide
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596005571/somethingsbymatt" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596005571/somethingsbymatt</a>
Read TidBITS! It's free and smart. <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.tidbits.com" target="_blank">http://www.tidbits.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

matt neuburg <matt DeleteThis @tidbits.com> wrote:

 > Marc Heusser <marc.heusser DeleteThis @CHEERSheusser.comMERCIALSPAMMERS.invalid>
 > wrote:
 >
  > > Just got a new scanner with Adobe's Photoshop Elements included. Does it
  > > offer anything over IPhoto'05, Graphic Converter and Gimp?
 >
 > Well, I sure think it does. Photoshop Elements is an amazing value; you're
 > basically being given 95% of Photoshop, a $600 program, for free. Not to
 > be sneezed at. m.

The GIMP is also 95% of Photoshop for free, but it's a very different
95%.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

In article <1gswugz.1cnhaib1ryn3aeN%usenet@mile23.c0m>,
usenet DeleteThis @mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote:

 > matt neuburg <matt DeleteThis @tidbits.com> wrote:
 >
  > > Marc Heusser <marc.heusser DeleteThis @CHEERSheusser.comMERCIALSPAMMERS.invalid>
  > > wrote:
  > >
   > > > Just got a new scanner with Adobe's Photoshop Elements included. Does it
   > > > offer anything over IPhoto'05, Graphic Converter and Gimp?
  > >
  > > Well, I sure think it does. Photoshop Elements is an amazing value; you're
  > > basically being given 95% of Photoshop, a $600 program, for free. Not to
  > > be sneezed at. m.
 >
 > The GIMP is also 95% of Photoshop for free, but it's a very different
 > 95%.

The GIMP also has a less Mac-like interface which makes it awkward to use.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

sbt wrote:

 > In article <marc.heusser-F6B0A2.00085705032005 RemoveThis @idnews.unizh.ch>, Marc
 > Heusser <marc.heusser RemoveThis @CHEERSheusser.comMERCIALSPAMMERS.invalid> wrote:
 >
 >
  >>Just got a new scanner with Adobe's Photoshop Elements included.
  >>Does it offer anything over IPhoto'05, Graphic Converter and Gimp?
  >>Which tool would you use for what purpose?
  >>I just noticed I cannot get PS Elements to use CMYK as colour model, is
  >>that correct?
  >>
  >>TIA
  >>
 >
 > If I'm going to be converting to different formats (other than the
 > basic ones), I tend to use GC; otherwise, for RGB work, I would
 > recommend Photoshop Elements over either of the other two (particularly
 > if it is Elements 3, though Elements 2 was quite nice -- but 3 has a
 > few more features that come in handy).
 >
 > iPhoto 5 is much enhanced over earlier versions in dealing with color
 > adjustments and basic editing functions, but Elements has even more
 > flexibility in dealing with color adjustments, filtering, and the like.
 > With layers and layer styles, support for Photoshop filters, and all
 > that comes with them, it's a clear winner. If I didn't already have the
 > full version of Photoshop, I would be using Elements as my main photo
 > editor. The GIMP has a lot of power, but it's (at least in my opinion)
 > not as cohesively put together nor nearly as easy to use.


If you check out the iPhoto discussions over on the Apple
discussions area, you might have a different view. iPhoto 05 (or
rather the upgrade to it) has been responsible for trashing
entire photo libraries (always backup before you upgrade).

Also, in spite of the fact that it has a load of nice new editing
capabilities, the instant you edit anything on a file, it slams
the file into Generic RGB color space. If I remember correctly,
it basically blows away any ICC profile tags that were on the
file. Since it doesn't respect Colorsync properly, folks are
finding that they still need things like photoshop, etc. to do
reliable color editing. Since most of those tools already have
photo management mechanisms, the only thing left that they are
using iPhoto for is for ordering iBooks.

This is really inexcusable considering all the press Apple
generates on all the advantages of colorsync.

For this very reason, I'm looking at getting something like
Photoshop Elements. What is the difference between it, Photoshop
CS, and Photoshop proper?

--
Jeff Wiseman
to reply, just remove ALLTHESPAM<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

In article <Mp9Wd.1653$cN6.270@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Jeff
Wiseman <throwawayacct223 DeleteThis @earthlink.net> wrote:

 > Also, in spite of the fact that it has a load of nice new editing
 > capabilities, the instant you edit anything on a file, it slams
 > the file into Generic RGB color space. If I remember correctly,
 > it basically blows away any ICC profile tags that were on the
 > file. Since it doesn't respect Colorsync properly, folks are
 > finding that they still need things like photoshop, etc. to do
 > reliable color editing. Since most of those tools already have
 > photo management mechanisms, the only thing left that they are
 > using iPhoto for is for ordering iBooks.
 >
 > This is really inexcusable considering all the press Apple
 > generates on all the advantages of colorsync.

wow. they still haven't fixed this?? further evidence iphoto is nothing
but a toy.

 > For this very reason, I'm looking at getting something like
 > Photoshop Elements. What is the difference between it, Photoshop
 > CS, and Photoshop proper?

photoshop elements is photoshop cs without cmyk and other high end
features that most users do not need. there is a comparison at
adobe.com someplace. photoshop cs is photoshop 8 but with a
non-numerical name. if you look at the about box in cs, you will see
8.0.

also, check out iview media. it does quite a bit more than iphoto.

<http://www.iview-multimedia.com/><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

In article <1gswsnw.1r088va13isa7cN%matt@tidbits.com>,
matt.TakeThisOut@tidbits.com (matt neuburg) wrote:

 > Marc Heusser <marc.heusser.TakeThisOut@CHEERSheusser.comMERCIALSPAMMERS.invalid>
 > wrote:
 >
  > > Just got a new scanner with Adobe's Photoshop Elements included.
  > > Does it offer anything over IPhoto'05, Graphic Converter and Gimp?
 >
 > Well, I sure think it does. Photoshop Elements is an amazing value;
 > you're basically being given 95% of Photoshop, a $600 program, for free.
 > Not to be sneezed at. m.

Just be careful how you save your edited files. PS and PSE have some
ways to make them very large.

For viewing pics and opening about every possible graphics extensions,
Graphic Convertor is the best.

I had so many scanned pics before iPhoto ever came on the scene, that I
have never even opened the program.

--
Panta Rei<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 20:09:32 -0700, Jeff Wiseman wrote
(in article <Mp9Wd.1653$cN6.270@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>):

 > sbt wrote:
 >
  >> In article <marc.heusser-F6B0A2.00085705032005.TakeThisOut@idnews.unizh.ch>, Marc
  >> Heusser <marc.heusser.TakeThisOut@CHEERSheusser.comMERCIALSPAMMERS.invalid> wrote:
  >>
  >>
   >>> Just got a new scanner with Adobe's Photoshop Elements included.
   >>> Does it offer anything over IPhoto'05, Graphic Converter and Gimp?
   >>> Which tool would you use for what purpose?
   >>> I just noticed I cannot get PS Elements to use CMYK as colour model, is
   >>> that correct?
   >>>
   >>> TIA
   >>>
  >>
  >> If I'm going to be converting to different formats (other than the
  >> basic ones), I tend to use GC; otherwise, for RGB work, I would
  >> recommend Photoshop Elements over either of the other two (particularly
  >> if it is Elements 3, though Elements 2 was quite nice -- but 3 has a
  >> few more features that come in handy).
  >>
  >> iPhoto 5 is much enhanced over earlier versions in dealing with color
  >> adjustments and basic editing functions, but Elements has even more
  >> flexibility in dealing with color adjustments, filtering, and the like.
  >> With layers and layer styles, support for Photoshop filters, and all
  >> that comes with them, it's a clear winner. If I didn't already have the
  >> full version of Photoshop, I would be using Elements as my main photo
  >> editor. The GIMP has a lot of power, but it's (at least in my opinion)
  >> not as cohesively put together nor nearly as easy to use.
 >
 >
 > If you check out the iPhoto discussions over on the Apple
 > discussions area, you might have a different view. iPhoto 05 (or
 > rather the upgrade to it) has been responsible for trashing
 > entire photo libraries (always backup before you upgrade).
 >
 > Also, in spite of the fact that it has a load of nice new editing
 > capabilities, the instant you edit anything on a file, it slams
 > the file into Generic RGB color space. If I remember correctly,
 > it basically blows away any ICC profile tags that were on the
 > file. Since it doesn't respect Colorsync properly, folks are
 > finding that they still need things like photoshop, etc. to do
 > reliable color editing. Since most of those tools already have
 > photo management mechanisms, the only thing left that they are
 > using iPhoto for is for ordering iBooks.
 >
 > This is really inexcusable considering all the press Apple
 > generates on all the advantages of colorsync.
 >
 > For this very reason, I'm looking at getting something like
 > Photoshop Elements. What is the difference between it, Photoshop
 > CS, and Photoshop proper?
 >
 >

Its not 95% of Photoshop so much as what 95% of people who want a graphic
program want. If you want to use channels you need Photoshop. If you
don't use channels chances are good Elements is all you need. Its not
that channels are the only difference but its a pretty good rule of thumb
on what kind of user you are. I have Elements and really want to move up
to Photoshop but that price is a killer for me. So I guess that is
another decision point as well.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

nospam wrote:

 > In article <Mp9Wd.1653$cN6.270@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Jeff
 > Wiseman <throwawayacct223.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote:
 >
 >
  >>Also, in spite of the fact that it has a load of nice new editing
  >>capabilities, the instant you edit anything on a file, it slams
  >>the file into Generic RGB color space. If I remember correctly,
  >>it basically blows away any ICC profile tags that were on the
  >>file. Since it doesn't respect Colorsync properly, folks are
  >>finding that they still need things like photoshop, etc. to do
  >>reliable color editing. Since most of those tools already have
  >>photo management mechanisms, the only thing left that they are
  >>using iPhoto for is for ordering iBooks.
  >>
  >>This is really inexcusable considering all the press Apple
  >>generates on all the advantages of colorsync.
 >
 >
 > wow. they still haven't fixed this?? further evidence iphoto is nothing
 > but a toy.


Yes, apparently iPhoto 04 at least just left everything alone (no
colorsync but at least no botched colorsync attempts). However,
as a lot of folks discovered, returning to iPhoto 04 is
problematic as well apparently.


  >>For this very reason, I'm looking at getting something like
  >>Photoshop Elements. What is the difference between it, Photoshop
  >>CS, and Photoshop proper?
 >
 >
 > photoshop elements is photoshop cs without cmyk and other high end
 > features that most users do not need. there is a comparison at
 > adobe.com someplace. photoshop cs is photoshop 8 but with a
 > non-numerical name. if you look at the about box in cs, you will see
 > 8.0.


OK, so Photoshop CS **IS** the top end application (complete with
$700 price tag or whatever)


 > also, check out iview media. it does quite a bit more than iphoto.
 >
 > <http://www.iview-multimedia.com/>


It's kinda funny because iview was the name of a Unix/PC
application that has been around for well over a decade or more
for viewing WorldView documentation files, graphics, and
collections (i.e., the published form of Interleaf documents)
long before "ieverythings" started showing up (August 1998,
right? :-)

I want something with a good history of basic photo management,
colorsync control, colorspace mapping, basic image editing,
cropping, etc., and the ability to easily control printed and
saved output formats (e.g. standard picture sizes, etc.). Being
able to hook into TWAIN drivers might be nice too.

I'm not a real power user but when I *DO* want to do something, I
don't like the tool to be Mickey Mouse.

--
Jeff Wiseman
to reply, just remove ALLTHESPAM<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

John Biltz wrote:

 > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 20:09:32 -0700, Jeff Wiseman wrote
 > (in article <Mp9Wd.1653$cN6.270@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>):
  >>For this very reason, I'm looking at getting something like
  >>Photoshop Elements. What is the difference between it, Photoshop
  >>CS, and Photoshop proper?
 >
 > Its not 95% of Photoshop so much as what 95% of people who want a graphic
 > program want. If you want to use channels you need Photoshop. If you
 > don't use channels chances are good Elements is all you need. Its not
 > that channels are the only difference but its a pretty good rule of thumb
 > on what kind of user you are. I have Elements and really want to move up
 > to Photoshop but that price is a killer for me. So I guess that is
 > another decision point as well.


If not for the price, I'd probably go with photoshop simply
because I like having the abilities there "just in case" :-)

However, I'm not a professional graphics person or even a power
user at the moment, so wouldn't really need channels. However,
even though I don't set up for professional printing, I still
like the ability to do things like soft proofs and such. Mainly
because it is a learning tool for me. Also, I CAN be picky about
some images that are important to me and I don't want a tool that
is going to enterfere with me getting it.

If you had to identify 3 main items that are lacking in Photoshop
Elements that you wish it had, what would they be?


--
Jeff Wiseman
to reply, just remove ALLTHESPAM<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

In article <lytWd.1888$oO4.1395@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Jeff
Wiseman <throwawayacct223 RemoveThis @earthlink.net> wrote:

 > John Biltz wrote:
 >
  > > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 20:09:32 -0700, Jeff Wiseman wrote
  > > (in article <Mp9Wd.1653$cN6.270@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>):
   > >>For this very reason, I'm looking at getting something like
   > >>Photoshop Elements. What is the difference between it, Photoshop
   > >>CS, and Photoshop proper?
  > >
  > > Its not 95% of Photoshop so much as what 95% of people who want a graphic
  > > program want. If you want to use channels you need Photoshop. If you
  > > don't use channels chances are good Elements is all you need. Its not
  > > that channels are the only difference but its a pretty good rule of thumb
  > > on what kind of user you are. I have Elements and really want to move up
  > > to Photoshop but that price is a killer for me. So I guess that is
  > > another decision point as well.
 >
 >
 > If not for the price, I'd probably go with photoshop simply
 > because I like having the abilities there "just in case" :-)
 >
 > However, I'm not a professional graphics person or even a power
 > user at the moment, so wouldn't really need channels. However,
 > even though I don't set up for professional printing, I still
 > like the ability to do things like soft proofs and such. Mainly
 > because it is a learning tool for me. Also, I CAN be picky about
 > some images that are important to me and I don't want a tool that
 > is going to enterfere with me getting it.
 >
 > If you had to identify 3 main items that are lacking in Photoshop
 > Elements that you wish it had, what would they be?

Channels, Actions, and user-defined Layer Styles are the three biggest
for me, and the main reason I use CS instead of Elements. But, I need
those features for my work. When I create a DVD for a client, the label
and cover art is a big selling point with a lot of them. Similarly, a
brochure or a pamphlet often entails using both Photoshop and
Illustrator, in addition to InDesign.

Elements is overkill for a majority of my friends and relatives and CS
would be like using a nuke to kill a fly. It really depends on your
needs/wants.

--
Spenser<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

In article <ZrtWd.2262$cN6.1208@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Jeff
Wiseman <throwawayacct223 RemoveThis @earthlink.net> wrote:

  > > wow. they still haven't fixed this?? further evidence iphoto is nothing
  > > but a toy.
 >
 > Yes, apparently iPhoto 04 at least just left everything alone (no
 > colorsync but at least no botched colorsync attempts). However,
 > as a lot of folks discovered, returning to iPhoto 04 is
 > problematic as well apparently.

colorsync was broken there too.

  > > also, check out iview media. it does quite a bit more than iphoto.
  > >
  > > <http://www.iview-multimedia.com/>
 >
 > I want something with a good history of basic photo management,
 > colorsync control, colorspace mapping, basic image editing,
 > cropping, etc., and the ability to easily control printed and
 > saved output formats (e.g. standard picture sizes, etc.). Being
 > able to hook into TWAIN drivers might be nice too.

i find that iview is a wonderful way to catalog images and near
everything else. it has limited editing capabilities (or just directly
open the image in photoshop) and it can create contact sheets, web
pages and many other things. there is a full featured demo available so
check it out and decide for yourself.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 19:23:13 -0700, sbt wrote
(in article <050320051823133953%dogbreath@chaseabone.com.invalid>):

 > In article <lytWd.1888$oO4.1395@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Jeff
 > Wiseman <throwawayacct223.RemoveThis@earthlink.net> wrote:
 >
  >> John Biltz wrote:
  >>
   >>> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 20:09:32 -0700, Jeff Wiseman wrote
   >>> (in article <Mp9Wd.1653$cN6.270@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>):
   >>>> For this very reason, I'm looking at getting something like
   >>>> Photoshop Elements. What is the difference between it, Photoshop
   >>>> CS, and Photoshop proper?
   >>>
   >>> Its not 95% of Photoshop so much as what 95% of people who want a graphic
   >>> program want. If you want to use channels you need Photoshop. If you
   >>> don't use channels chances are good Elements is all you need. Its not
   >>> that channels are the only difference but its a pretty good rule of thumb
   >>> on what kind of user you are. I have Elements and really want to move up
   >>> to Photoshop but that price is a killer for me. So I guess that is
   >>> another decision point as well.
  >>
  >>
  >> If not for the price, I'd probably go with photoshop simply
  >> because I like having the abilities there "just in case" :-)
  >>
  >> However, I'm not a professional graphics person or even a power
  >> user at the moment, so wouldn't really need channels. However,
  >> even though I don't set up for professional printing, I still
  >> like the ability to do things like soft proofs and such. Mainly
  >> because it is a learning tool for me. Also, I CAN be picky about
  >> some images that are important to me and I don't want a tool that
  >> is going to enterfere with me getting it.
  >>
  >> If you had to identify 3 main items that are lacking in Photoshop
  >> Elements that you wish it had, what would they be?
 >
 > Channels, Actions, and user-defined Layer Styles are the three biggest
 > for me, and the main reason I use CS instead of Elements. But, I need
 > those features for my work. When I create a DVD for a client, the label
 > and cover art is a big selling point with a lot of them. Similarly, a
 > brochure or a pamphlet often entails using both Photoshop and
 > Illustrator, in addition to InDesign.
 >
 > Elements is overkill for a majority of my friends and relatives and CS
 > would be like using a nuke to kill a fly. It really depends on your
 > needs/wants.
 >
 >

Actually a very good point. Elements was pretty intimidating to me when I
started with it. It takes quite awhile before a newbie gets to its limits
and a casual user probably never will. That is why you see people saying
it does 95% of Photoshop. It doesn't. But only a few users will ever get
to where it comes up short and really unless your a professional it is
probably not worth the time or money to learn to use it at full
capability. Really for most people Elements really is better. With me its
just a hobby and I can't justify half the cost of a laptop on one
program. If I am ever a student again I'm picking it up though.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp 

In article <lytWd.1888$oO4.1395@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Jeff Wiseman <throwawayacct223.DeleteThis@earthlink.net> wrote:

 >
 > If you had to identify 3 main items that are lacking in Photoshop
 > Elements that you wish it had, what would they be?
 >

Not exactly responsive to your question -- but in my setup at least
Photoshop Elements 3 comes up with a kind of "working window" or "full
screen artboard" that *completely* covers the entire screen below the
menu bar, so that you can't see any of the other windows from other apps
that may be partially overlapped underneath it, and can't jump to
another app or Finder window by just clicking on the appropriate window.

In a quick trial at least, this "full-screen" window can't be closed,
can't be resized, can't be gotten rid of. I'd much prefer the old
Elements 2 or Illustrator model, where palettes and working images float
on the Finder window (and I particularly love the Illustrator capability
to toggle all the current palettes off and back on with the Tab key).

Is there a setting or preference I'm missing?<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Adobe Photoshop Elements vs Graphic Converter &amp; Gimp