Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
Hmmm... Amazon.com has Photoshop Elements 2.0 for US$49.99, so it might not be such a bad idea... ((url="http://"http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00006ANW9/ref=pd_sim_sw_1//104-5359095-7611121?v=glance&s;=software")Site(/url))
Big questions: Can Photoshop Elements use the filters/plugins/whatever they're called? And is there anything significant missing from Photoshop Elements?
------------------ (url="http://"http://www.geocities.com/ue_rd")Fatal Alliance- an upcoming quasi-TC for EVN.(/url) Secret Project: In intermediate planning stages. (No links available)
Quote
Originally posted by UE_Research & Development: Hmmm... Amazon.com has Photoshop Elements 2.0 for US$49.99, so it might not be such a bad idea... (Site)
Sweet! Good deal, well worth it.
It has a plugin folder so I think it can, but I could be wrong. Ask someone who has plugins :^) It's missing CMYK mode, masks and a few of the more advanced controls. If its primarily for EV work or editing photos, it'll be fine. If you're a professional graphic artist/designer/whatever, it will be lacking in some areas, but otherwise it's great.
------------------ (url="http://"http://homepage.mac.com/jonathanboyd/evn/index.html")Classic4Nova plug-in(/url)
No, I don't consider it very basic for WHAT I NEED IT FOR. I'm not suggesting it as a great program. In fact, I'm not suggesting it at all. Maybe you do complex thing, but I don't.
Buggy? That's your problem. It has nothing to do with AppleWorks. It has to do wih your computer.
By the way, I don't feel like quoting. You know what I'm referring to, and, if not, you can check.
Oh, yeah, and very basic would be: rectangle tool; oval tool; fill tool; line tool; pen tool, with some colors. Let me know when you see AppleWorks with that much and no more.
EDIT: This is my last post on this topic. I will ignore anything else about it, so don't bother replying. ------------------ The programmer's code of etemology: "There's always another bug." (Etemology is defined as the study of insects.) (Or was it just bugs in general?)
(This message has been edited by orcaloverbri9 (edited 09-21-2003).)
Originally posted by orcaloverbri9: No, I don't consider it very basic for WHAT I NEED IT FOR. I'm not suggesting it as a great program.
You were saying it was more than basic, which I dispute. And since we're discussing whether it id suitable for someone else to use in creating graphics for Nova, whether or not it is basic for that task is more relevant than whether you find it basic for yours.
In fact, I'm not suggesting it at all.
And I quote: "Hell, use AppleWorks, even."
What is that if not a suggestion?
Maybe you do complex thing, but I don't.
That depends really on how you define complex.
Uh huh. You know, it can potentially cause a lot of conffusion replying to 2 people in post without sating which posts you're replying to.
Actually, that's the problem. I don't know what you're referring to half the time and I don't want to waste time looking things up that I shouldn't have to. I'm sure other people feel the same way. If you don;t quote, you'll just annoy people.
Tell you what, when you find a graphics program with fewer tools than Appleworks, we'll start debating whether it should be elevated above very basic.
Originally posted by Jonathan Boyd: **Tell you what, when you find a graphics program with fewer tools than Appleworks, we'll start debating whether it should be elevated above very basic.
**
Alright, Mario Paint for the SNES. That's about as basic as you can get.
------------------ Hail to the Mage King! May the Wind of the Falcon guide you. (url="http://"http://members.tripod.com/lunarproductions/tc.html") Phoenix (/url)
No, that had animation support.
------------------ Eat blazing electric death!
Originally posted by SpacePirate: **No, that had animation support.:p
Good point... I guess Appleworks IS the most basic program I can think of.
Originally posted by UE_Research & Development: **Heh, after reading your comments, I've decided to do a few more in black-and-white. However, before I read those comments, I did a partially colored version of the black-and-white image (the sky remained white, possibly for a future superimposition of a CG image).
This will probably be my last 'rusting cityscape' image for now, unless I really see something that can be drastically improved. I'm shifting focus to drawing a couple of black-and-white images of various scenes for you to critique :).
w00t.
------------------ Moderator- (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number;=9&SUBMIT;=Go&mrxak;=cool")EV Developer's Corner(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number;=69SUBMIT=Go&mrxak;=cool")Uplink Web Board(/url) | (url="http://"http://forums.evula.com/viewforum.php?f=18")mrxak's Assorted Webspace Forum(/url) | (url="http://"http://forums.evula.com/viewforum.php?f=48")Starcraft Forum(/url) | | (url="http://"http://directory.perfectparadox.com/profile.php?id=00008")My Profile(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/postdisplay.cgi?forum=Forum10&topic;=007599-2&whichpost;=mrxak11-06-200203:22PM")mrxak(/url) (url="http://"http://www.evula.org/mrxak/")mrxak's Assorted Webspace(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.evula.org/mrxak/Haikus/haikuarchive.html")The Haiku Archive(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.evula.org/mrxak/EV/N/mbspt/mbspt.html")mrxak's Big Secret Plug-in/Tutorial(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.evula.org/mrxak/EV/N/amtc/amtc.html")A mrxak TC(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/vftp/dl-redirect.pl/TheChallenge102.sea.bin?path=evn/plugins&file;=TheChallenge102.sea.bin")The Challenge v1.0.2(/url) (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/search.cgi?action=intro")Search First(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.macgamer.net/games/uplink/")Uplink Guide(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.evula.com/survival_guide/")EV/O/N Guide(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number;=31&SUBMIT;=Go")Plug-in Guide(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/webboard/Forum9/HTML/003091.html")Plug-in Testers(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/webboard/Forum9/HTML/003196.html")Developers(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/games/evn/addons.html")Nova Addons(/url) | (url="http://"http://www.resexcellence.com/support_files/resedit.shtml")ResEdit(/url) | (url="http://"http://w00tware.ev-nova.net/")NovaTools(/url) "When you burn your bridges, just make sure they aren't in front of you." -mrxak
And since we're discussing whether it id suitable for someone else to use in creating graphics for Nova, whether or not it is basic for that task is more relevant than whether you find it basic for yours.
Ah, but I never once mentioned graphics for Nova. Whether it is suitable to your needs depends on them; I only use it because Photoshop is very hard for me to use.
An alternative, if he decides that it is silly to be obliged to get something else.
Might I point out that it is difinitively NOT a graphics program? Oh, and it has animation support as well...
Why are you acting like I said "APPLEWORKS IS THE BEST! USE IT FOR EVERYTHING! NOTHING CAN MATCH IT LET ALONE MEET IT!"? All I said was that it could be used for certain things. I never tried to say it was better than the others.
Perhaps you should take a look at Word, then AW's WP. Both are fairly close in power (AW tailing behind, again because the other aspects make up for it). Also note that it has a spreadsheet, not quite as good as Excell, but still pretty damn good (read previous). You can do less advanced editing with Drawing. You can make slide shows (no animation support? HA!). And then there's Painting.
Does that seem basic to you?
Oh, and by the way, the Paint utility in Windows is more basic. So there.
------------------ The programmer's code of etemology: "There's always another bug." (Etemology is defined as the study of insects.) (Or was it just bugs in general?)
Originally posted by orcaloverbri9: An alternative, if he decides that it is silly to be obliged to get something else.
Oh come on, that's just a suggestion by another name :^)
Ah, but I never once mentioned graphics for Nova. Whether it is suitable to your needs depends on them;
But we were discussing his needs, so why mention Appleworks at all, if it isn't in the context of the discussion? I assumed that when you suggested it and said things along the lines of 'In any case, Photoshop is called PHOTOshop for a reason. It is meant more for photo-quality images rather than the slightly cartoonish style used in EV.' you intended it to be used for editing EV graphics. If I was mistaken, I apologise, but surely you can see how such a misunderstanding would arise?
I only use it because Photoshop is very hard for me to use.
It's hard at first, but if you mess about for a while, trying out the different tools, it gets easier. Give it a go, it's well worth it.
Might I point out that it is difinitively NOT a graphics program?
But we are discussing it in the context of editting graphics, therefore it must be judged as a graphics program.
Oh, and it has animation support as well...
In the paint/draw modules?
I'm not acting like that. I've simply said that when it comes to editing graphics, it is very basic and a dedicated graphics editor would do a better job. Given the low price of a program such as Photoshop Elements and its vastly enhanced feature set, it would be a better choice.
I loved ClarisWorks. Always used it where possible for school work. Now that I'm at uni, I still use Appleworks for a lot of stuff, though I do the typing in TextEdit since the rendering in AppleWorks is pig ugly by comparison. Given its low price and versatility, AppleWorks is a great app, but when it comes to editing graphics, it simply can;t compare with a dedicated program.
Perhaps you should take a look at Word, then AW's WP. Both are fairly close in power (AW tailing behind, again because the other aspects make up for it).
Heh heh, that's funny. AppleWorks doesn't come close to the power of Word. I had a rather bizarre workflow for one computing project where I was writing code on NeXT boxes, documentation in TextEdit, sticking it together in AppleWorks, then finally dumping it into Word to generate the table of contents and fiddle round with a couple of other things. There is a huge number of features that Word has over AppleWorks. 95% of the time, you won't even think to look at them though, let alone actually use them. I suspect you don't realise most of them are there. This does, however, come at a price. AppleWorks is cheaper, less clunky and handles images embedded in a document much better. Sticking images in in Word drives me nuts. It still rles supreme when it comes to features though.
Also note that it has a spreadsheet, not quite as good as Excell, but still pretty damn good (read previous).
It's okay. Excel is vastly more powerful and a fair bit faster. One of the better Microsoft apps, IMHO. For the average user though, AppleWorks is fine and I've used it on occasion to edit files with ConText and ResStore.
You can do less advanced editing with Drawing.
Less advanced than painting you mean? If so, it's not actually less advanced, but rather of a different type - vector as opposed to bitmap.
You can make slide shows (no animation support? HA!).
Slideshows in the presentation module are a little different to actual animation support. With that logic, I coudl claim that iPhoto has animation support.
**And then there's Painting.
Does that seem basic to you?**
Yes. As we are discussing the usefulness of AppleWorks as a graphics editor, rather than an all round office/productivity/creativity tool, the fact that it has word processor, database, spreadsheet, drawing and presentation modes is irrelevant. They make it no better at editing graphics. They make it a great all round package, but no more than a basic graphics editor.
I like AppleWorks. I loved it when it was ClarisWorks too. But I will never chose it over Graphic Converter, Photoshop Elements or Photoshop when it comes to editing graphics and neither will I rate it close to them for that task.
Perhaps I should have said 'on the Mac'. Is Paint the one that comes with Windows Office? I'm not very familiar with it.
BTW, thanks for doing some quoting this time. Makes life a lot easier. Much appreciated.
(This message has been edited by Jonathan Boyd (edited 09-22-2003).)
Whatever...
I was assuming that what he meant were simple operations (e.g. scaling)... UE, it would help if you could clarify this...
Uh, which version? I have 5.0...and 4.0...
Whatever. My point was that it really can't be judged too much in this way as it would be extremely huge if all its aspects were extravagant programs.
I never mentioned such a thing...
a dedicated graphics editor would do a better job
I believe I have mentioned this multiple times...
I was actually referring to the text editing itself. i am sorry if you misinterpreted my statement. Also, I am quite aware of the features. Half of them are virtually useless, the other half are extremely hard to find. Yeah, Word can be a bitch about images...even though it has a built-in extremely simple drawing thingy.
Yeah, it is a lot better (why, Apple, why are you letting your reputation be ruined?)...I tend to exaggerate things, sometimes to the extent where it is a flat-out lie. I agree with all of that, by the way.
Fine. Be that way.
They make it a great all round package
You have just agreed with half of what I've been trying to say. Can you seriously expect it to be great with all that other stuff?
Is Paint the one that comes with Windows Office?
I am referring to that "Paint" app in the "Programs" submenu under "Start" ( I have a deep corner of my mind that contains comprehensive knowledge about Windows for the ignorant fools who use Windows, or worse (and completely wrong), think it is better). It is so pathetic. It plainly SUCKS.
BTW, thanks for doing some quoting this time.
You're quite welcome.
Oh, and by the way, when I said it would be my last post, I lied. points to previous statement about exaggeration hehe...
Originally posted by orcaloverbri9: I was assuming that what he meant were simple operations (e.g. scaling)... UE, it would help if you could clarify this...
Even for scaling, I would argue that Photoshop does a better job given that it smoothes out the image if you want. Which looks better than a scale then blend in AW.
Hmm, been a while since I used them. I'm using 7 at the moment and Elements 2. If you're pre-Mac OS X still, try looking for Photoshop Deluxe. It's the old equivalent of Elements - a fair bit of Photoshop's power, but a simplified interface. Good stepping stone up towards PHotoshop. We've got a bunch of CDs of it lying round the house that came with computers. You could probably find guides to Photoshop 5 and 5 relatively cheaply now as well.
It can and in fact must be judged as a graphics program, ignoring the other modules, as its intended use is as a graphics program. If it was a general product review, then the other features would become relevant. I'm not slamming AW for having a basic paint module, in fact I think its very useful to have it in the program, particularly given the way you can so easily ***** modules within each other, but as a graphics program, it leaves a lot to be desired.
Which is why I sought clarification. Sorry if you thought I saw saying you said something you didn't. I can clearly see now that you meant the presentation module.
Then why argue that AW is anything more than very basic? I don't think that that is inherently a bad thing, BTW. Being very simple and basic is good for computer illiterate people and the best option for a light office suite.
I was actually referring to the text editing itself. i am sorry if you misinterpreted my statement.
No problem.
Also, I am quite aware of the features. Half of them are virtually useless, the other half are extremely hard to find. Yeah, Word can be a bitch about images...even though it has a built-in extremely simple drawing thingy.
I would hesitate to say 'virtually useless,' rather saying 'rarely required,' or something in that vain. But that's just me being picky :^) One feature I'm actually very glad AW doesn't have is the infernal grammar checker. Evil, evil, evil thing.
I agree with all of that, by the way
Is that one of the signs of the coming apocalypse? ;^)
To be honest, I haven't really used the presentation module. Never had a need to and I have Keynote and Power Point on my system anyway. If you thing there are valid reasons to say it has support for creating animations, I'm willing to listen.
I don't expect it to be great. My expectations are irrelevant as we are discussing what is actually capable of.
I don't believe I've had the misfortune to use that. I vaguely recall the icon looking repellant, which is quite tragic for a graphics program.
When you've spent several years seeing and making announcements about leaving newsgroups, only for people to reappear several days later, you learn to filter that kind of thing out. Or start taking bets on how long until the next post.
orcaloverbri9, Johnathan Boyd...Could you two just let it go? This is coming dangerously close to topic hijacking, and little is being accomplished. Comparing Photoshop to AppleWorks is not something which demands much time or thought. One is a professional digital imaging tool, the other a consumer office suite. You know what the most basic imaging tool is? Pencil and paper. Some even feature an eraser, I hear. Does a pencil limit your potential as an artist? Hardly. I hope we can all agree different tools have different jobs.
As for the drawings, UE_R&D;, I would suggest if you are to color them, try to eliminate all the white of the page. If they are to be just black on white, try using more black. Photoshop Elements will contain many, many tools you can use for digitally coloring and painting on your drawings, and is certainly less messy. When you reach the last few landing pictures to be drawn, I'd imagine you'd have improved a fair bit. It's hard not to after over a hundred drawings.
As for acceptance, I would say at current your style certainly jives with Nova's 3D-rendered ships. It'll take some work to make the landing pictures look as though they belong, but I would say it's entirely possible with hand-drawn images. To the best of my knowledge yours would be the first plugin with such graphics, which could bolster its popularity if only for novelty. All in all, I look forward to seeing more!
------------------ - () () / }{ - (url="http://"http://www.pacifier.com/~kkey/shipyard/index.html")Onyx's EV Shipyard(/url)
(edit: missed some punctuation)
(This message has been edited by Onyx (edited 09-23-2003).)
True enough...
If you're pre-Mac OS X still
Nope, I have Jaguar (got it for free, bwahaha!)...and I rarely use 9 as my startup disc because my freaking computer gives me the same damn error (1,010) for most of my apps, so I have to run them in classic (AW is one of these...ironic, eh? I use it in OSX, though)...and MacErrors, which came with my computer (got it used, which was handy 'cause I got Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator...and QuarkXPress, but I have no use for it (actually, I dont know what to use it for)...I also got Office '98, which is good enough for me). So, should I use 5? According to Captain Skyblade, 5 is best besides 7...is he notorious for bad advice? 0_o
Being very simple and basic is good for computer illiterate people and the best option for a light office suite.
Fair point.
One feature I'm actually very glad AW doesn't have is the infernal grammar checker. Evil, evil, evil thing.
ANOTHER SIGN OF THE APOCALYPSE! AAAH!
To be honest, I haven't really used the presentation module.
Neither have I...
I have Keynote and Power Point on my system anyway.
I have PowerPoint, too...and if I want to get into McFatter (a technical school I want to go to), I'll need it...wtf is keynote?
I don't believe I've had the misfortune to use that.
Lucky little twirp...
Yep, I've done that...
orcaloverbri9, Johnathan Boyd...Could you two just let it go?
No way. Arguing over the internet is far too much fun.
This is coming dangerously close to topic hijacking
Topic what?
little is being accomplished.
On the contrary, we're already 87.9318245% of the way to peace.
Comparing Photoshop to AppleWorks
Excuse me, but we are not discussing this...GET WITH THE PROGRAM!
You know what the most basic imaging tool is? Pencil and paper.
I REPEAT: Get with the program. We're talking about on the computer.
Some even feature an eraser, I hear.
Was that an attempt at a joke?
Man, It's 3:42 and I have yet to do my homework...
Topic hijacking is taking a perfectly good topic, and filling it with scarcely relevant posts. While it is certainly interesting to hear your arguments, some people here would rather not have your posts filling this topic. Personally, I am interested in seeing UE's finished product, and your discussion has little to do with it. While I don't usually care about off-topic discussions, I can not stand people flaming others for making a perfectly good point. Furthermore, you were indeed comparing Appleworks to Photoshop (a worthless conversation, you are defending a lost castle...), and there is no need to get on Onyx's case when he makes a valid point. The pencil and paper is an allusion to the topic you were discussing beforehand, he was actually agreeing with you by stating that no matter how basic a tool is, incredible things can still be done with it.
I don't think I will say any more on the matter. UE, keep up the good work!
~ SpacePirate
Originally posted by SpacePirate: **Furthermore, you were indeed comparing Appleworks to Photoshop
On the contrary, I never once said it could measure up to Photoshop, rather that it could be used.
EDIT: I'd like to point out that the "argument" is officially over. ------------------ The programmer's code of etemology: "There's always another bug." (Etemology is defined as the study of insects.) (Or was it just bugs in general?)
(This message has been edited by orcaloverbri9 (edited 09-24-2003).)
I plan on getting Photoshop Elements, but thanks for the advice anyways...
This little 'debate' keeps this topic alive (at least until I can get the next hand-drawn B&W; pic up :).
Originally posted by UE_Research & Development: **I plan on getting Photoshop Elements, but thanks for the advice anyways...
Personally I'm getting sick of all the whining, and would strongly encourage people to give it a rest. If you like it, I suppose that's your decision, since you started the topic. However, since you've already decided to go with Photoshop Elements, what's the point?
Don't worry about the topic dying. You can always revive it when you have something new to show.
So basically, if you want to argue over the differences between AppleWorks and Photoshop, take it somewhere else... please?
Originally posted by mrxak: Personally I'm getting sick of all the whining,
'Whining'?
and would strongly encourage people to give it a rest. If you like it, I suppose that's your decision, since you started the topic. However, since you've already decided to go with Photoshop Elements, what's the point?
The suggestion for Elements came up only after the discussion about AppleWorks and Photoshop began.
**Don't worry about the topic dying. You can always revive it when you have something new to show.
So basically, if you want to argue over the differences between AppleWorks and Photoshop, take it somewhere else... please?**
Our little debate over their relative merits is finished. No-one objected while it was going on, least of all UE_R&D; and it had some relevance to the thread as we were discussing programs which UE_R&D; might find of some benefit when doing the graphics for his plug. If he had no problem with the discussion, as thread starter, the discussion had at least some relevance to the topic and no-one was flaming, what is the problem?
Originally posted by Jonathan Boyd: < snip>
I just found it to be off topic and a little out of place. I'm not denying that nothing good came out of it, I just don't see the reason to continue.
Like I said, it's up to UE_Research & Development to make the call. I'm just mentioning my preference.