Isn't it obvious?

[FJBrad]

For us Mac users, anyway. The Mac version is "stripped" of the "album" features found integrated in PSE3 for PC's.
iPhoto is nice (heck, the price is right!), but it isn't as robust as PSE in many ways.
Can't you guys twist some arms at Adobe for us Mac addicts and get them to bring the Mac PSE version up to the PC version? :roll:

[Wendy]

Brad,

I can't see it happening ...

The background is that the Organiser replaced Album and Album was never available for the Mac ... so its not been stripped out, it just never was available in the first place. The Mac version does have CS browser which does more that the standard browser.

Lots of rumours are going around about a new version of iPhoto ... including a Windows version that will integrate with the iPod photo. :)


Wendy

[Jodi Frye]

FJBrad, please don't feel left out. I'm not thrilled about having the Organizer....at all ! I wish this integrated idea had been put out to pasture....but then I am not the queen of the Eleventh floor so I had no say in the matter.

[Wendy]

Jodi,

I now have the "How to disable the Organiser" in my cut and paste file ... I am using it on a daily basis. I bet that the next version has an option to do just that :)


Wendy

[FJBrad]

Brad,

Lots of rumours are going around about a new version of iPhoto ... including a Windows version that will integrate with the iPod photo. :)


Wendy
Hi Wendy,

I hope you're right on this. iPhoto is almost there (in features). A good thumb directory to CD/DVD library is what's needed most (asset management with a good searchable data base).
If an upgraded version of iPhoto isn't available soon, I'll go to a third party solution, like Media Pro, ACDSee, or Portfolio. I just don't want to have to many apps to deal with.
I tutor people in digital photography and postprocessing with Elements and PS full. Most are on PC's, so I was very pleased with the thoughtful improvements evident in PSE3.
Although Windows and Mac OS are much more similar than they were five years ago, I still have much fewer "issues" with Mac OS.
My approach to teaching is "workflow" and task oriented. For example, rather than talking about the Levels function as part of tonal correction during postprocessing, I start the topic with a discussion of how to use their camera Histogram to evaluate images while they're shooting, and make exposure-comp adjustments, then go right to Levels (and curves in PS).
I'd like to see Dave add a section devoted to image capture techniques, primarily with digital cameras, as many folks are new to both digital photography and post-processing. A holistic approach with a nuts and bolts approach would demystify a lot of the concepts used in PSE.

[Childsplay904]

I'd like to see Dave add a section devoted to image capture techniques, primarily with digital cameras, as many folks are new to both digital photography and post-processing. A holistic approach with a nuts and bolts approach would demystify a lot of the concepts used in PSE.
_________________
Brad

AMEN....I would love to see a section each month devoted to digital photography, although it may fall outside the mission of this newsletter. A lot of my post-processing could be simplified if I could use my camera in a more effective manner....Suzanne

[MikeH]

Suzanne,

I agree to a degree but I wouldn't want to see this site go the way of just about every other and try to become everything to everyone.

There is a plethora of sites out there that try to cover every subject from digital photography techniques and equipment to scanning, imaging software etc.. As a result they cover all of the areas to some extent but don't specialise in any.

The attraction of this site and the Newsletter is that it has the potential to provide all the resources on Elements that you could ever need - a centre of Elements excellence if you like.

Mike

[FJBrad]

I get Mike's point about this being a site devoted to PSE, and I see the merit in this...but if the approach were to be more workflow oriented, I still think it would be better.

Afterall, if people knew how to get better image captures in the camera, PSE could be tasked with more interesting and fun things than correcting for badly exposed images, or color aberations because the WB wasn't set correctly, etc.

Sure, PSE can apply an adjustment to "fix" a dark foreground subject against a bright background, but the results are not nearly as good as they would be if the photographer had applied his/her knowledge of fillflash techniques and captured a more correctly exposed image in-camera from the getgo.

I think we can all agree, that it is preferable to get the best image possible in the camera, rather than relying on postprocessing to fix errors. EVERY postprocessing tweek degrades the image, usually adding noise, tossing out chunks of the tonal range (Histogram combing), losing image detail with each fix.

Isn't it easier to get a shallow DOF blur in the camera, by using appropriate aperture settings, than it is to spend an hour or two at the computer using PSE to select foreground, then Gaus blur to fake a shallow DOF? How many people are aware that they can achieve this in their P&S DC, or that their camera's variable aperture means shooting at the short end of their zoom to get the largest aperture/shallowDOF.? One needs photography knowledge to do this.

Speaking of varible aperture zooms, how many are using camera techniques to extend the pitiful flash range of builtin flash by shooting at wide angle to extend flash range, while selecting larger apertures manually?

The Fuji S3 Pro has a feature that increases dynamic range by sandwhiching two bracketed exposures taken simultaneously in-camera. (No, I don't have an S3...sigh). But I do have a tripod, and for landscape shots and still lifes, sometimes I'll shoot some bracketed exposures to blend on separate layers in PS. This involves both a knowledge of dimroom technique AND camera technique.

If this site is going to strictly limit itself to postprocessing using PSE, without a more real world approach, bringing in camera technique where appropriate as well, I think it's a mistake.

We're all interested in getting the best final image we can get with the tools we have available. It's not just the camera, nor is it just the dimroom...it's both, and they relate closely to each other.