>>>Nowadays, with Photoshop, all they would have to do is a couple of simple cut-&-paste operations and, presto, here is the new Party team! You could even select the new team based on how well they fit in the picture...! There's no end to the creative potential of technology! -:))>>> This is a tough discussion for me. I remember when I retouched images with masking, friskets and an airbrush. If I saw a dust speck, out came the Kodak Retouching Colors and/or the SpotTone. Crociean Scarlet for the negatives; occasionally intensifiers of all types. Now, we have Photoshop. I just "PS'ed" a picture of my best friend, Goofy Dog Shorty. It took about ten minutes. In the traditional way, it would take a few hours. So the question for me is what is better? Fast and quick, or as I was trained? I would suggest that my way is better in many cases. Speed does not always mean better; then again, faster does mean cheaper and perhaps we have arrived at a point where that is fine. I remember stripping color images into layers and reassembling them on a new support. Chemicals were used to lift each layer and manually combine them. Pre home PC, and before the net arrived. Few PS users have that skill. Heck, few have the old skills I routinely used for decades. No offense. PS (and other such programs) do fill a space and to be perfectly honest, had I had a PC and PS in the good old days, I would probably use it. Bob ... Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com |
