Re: Happily using Linux for 20 years
Just Wow. I hadn't seen that comment. The one that also implies that the OS is crap because the software he insists on using isn't available for it, and that this is somehow Linux's fault and not Adobe's.
Yeah.. Some of my toys are "linux only" or 'dos only", so Windows must be crap. My ancient V3 RAZR had a game I liked that I've not seen elsewhere and it's calendar was not compatible with other standard ones, so all other OS's must be crap and all other calendar systems must be crap.
Really would be cool if Adobe released their CC stuff under Linux.. Cooler still would be if it had a few extra features only available in the Linux version :)
Snake is well and truly out of credibility at this point.
Yup.
"only Photoshop can do!"
I know right. it's almost like they're making statements about the usability of software they've never actually tried.
I wouldn't go that far. In fact, I'd only go so far as "software they've never seen. As yo so rightly point out, the layers window is quite visible when you first open it, as is the "Layer" item on the menu bar of the main window. Any screen shot of GIMP in operation would show at least one of those. So either Snake hasn't seen GIMP, or Snake is knowingly making false statements.
I also note that nobody has come here to tell me about how great photoshop is at bulk-processing hundreds of exposures and stitching gigapixel images together.
Oh but no real photographer would ever do that! If you cannot do it in Photoshop you aren't a photographer! Snake tells me that anyone who is a professional photographer uses Photoshop and anyone who doesn't use Photoshop is not a professional photographer. And he knows what he is saying! After all he is the single person the entire industry has designated as official spokesman! (Well, given his posts you can't blame me for thinking that's how he views himself can you? :) )
After all, I'm sure photoshop is probably what NASA used to stitch this together.
<jaws mode>I think we're gonna need a bigger screen!</jaws mode>
Actually I don't think that's a real image. Looks photoshopped to me.... :)
Thanks for the pic BTW. Tonight I shall turn out lights, turn down brightness, sit real close to the screen and enjoy. Mum might be screaming from the grave about how I'll hurt my eyes, but I won't care - some things are worth a bit of risk :)
I did have a look at sharing one of my better ones but I'm not sure about copyright (it's one I've licensed someone to use). I will have to plan a nice cold clear winter's day to re-shoot - and maybe I can do it better. 360° mountain/plain panorama, 300 individual images (so each one covering just over a degree of view), taken IIRC in groups of 30 pictures from 10 positions around a tall water tower. Took me some effort to work out the geography for the shooting angles as well as the lens/focus to get the best mix for what I wanted. I may actually try doing two cylinders next time, one for foreground and one for distance, but just thinking about thinking about it makes my head hurt. At least I can probably use 2 lenses, 50mm for the near stuff and 300mm for the far stuff. Set the lenses, re-position the camera, shoot, swap lens, shoot, move, shoot, swap lens, shoot... Maybe use 2 cards (1 per lens) as well so I can keep better track of stuff.. Ug.. Result should be great but the effort....
One thing I've noticed with "must use photoshop no real photographer uses anything else" types is they never actually go to any real effort to take the shot. Most of my work is done before the first photon hits the censor, most of their work is done falsifying what the sensor captured. I don't sell many images, but what I sell is something I can be proud of, not hang my head in shame knowing it's a lie.