otherwise I wouldn't participate here as much as I have been. Whilst I agree with dassd32255842 I unfortunately don't think this is very easy to enforce in any way without either creating lots of red tape or further availability for exploit.īut that's neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things. but this depends on your definition anyway. I'm not going to say that they're aren't any "good guys". The whole world is one large pot of various shades of grey. If I need to ever use he more advanced versions for work, I'll just make my employer pay for it.Microsoft? I thought everybody hated them? They're the good guys now? Noted. There is a risk that I might get hungry for features in the CC versions. I will try out CS6, instead of a third party product, because, like I said, I dislike learning new software." If that is true, it would be very good news and I will take back some of my criticism of Adobe and try to take advantage of it, even though I dislike learning new versions of software that already worked for me. You wrote: "CS4, CS5 and CS6 can still be activated and used." What sold me on CS3 is that it speeded up the making of vast composite images I have to do that in my line of work, which is biomedical research. I was annoyed when I had to learn Photoshop 7.0 after years of enjoying Photoshop 6.0. I can use this software for artistic purposes and also to make my baby pictures look better!" Eventually I figured out: "I don't have to use Photoshop just for science! I was a painter before I became a scientist. Scientific journals are picky about how many "figures" you include for publication. May I tell you a story? I spent years using Photoshop 6.0 just to put photographs and drawings and graphs and data into one publishable JPEG. Thank you John! And I apologize for my grouchiness.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |