Talk:Adobe Photoshop/Archive 2

Omission/flaw regarding Photoshop's development--

There's a problem, and it's exacerbated by the Photoshop/Adobe Photoshop name issue.

Adobe did not create Photoshop. It bought an existing product called "Barneyscan XP" that had already been commercially distributed, which it renamed, continued to develop, and published as "Photoshop".

This means the release history is faulty. It omits the first commercial distribution of Photoshop, which was bundled with a scanner before Adobe had any involvement.

Refer to this page for further information: http://www.storyphoto.com/multimedia/multimedia_photoshop.html

Search for "Barneyscan XP" to see corroboration of that point.

Re: page name change Photoshop to Adobe Photoshop

I changed the page name from Photoshop to include Adobe as our usual practice is to refer to such products by their proper name rather than their colloqiual name (c.f. Powerpoint, Excel etc). I don't think this is a big deal but thought I should leave a talk page note explaining my rationale as the page has had a long history at the old name. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 08:34, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I like GIMP better then Photoshop.

I still like the GIMP better than Photoshop. For one thing GIMP is 100% open source software. And I just find the enviroment nicer and more user friendly.

No HTML editing

Adobe did license the Opera technology, but it went into their GoLive product. Photoshop has no HTML editing capability.

Yup. I removed that line. --minghong 15:44, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

GIMP v. Photoshop

It seems that the majority of people favouring GIMP do so beacuse it is open source, not because it is a particularly good product. I don't know much about GIMP myself, given that I'm quite happy with Photoshop, but it would be interesting to read any comments that cared to shed light on the two programs head-to-head.

Wikipedia is not a repository of links

According to the official Wikipedia policy of What Wikipedia is not, that it is not a "mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files." The reason why is that "excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia." As of July 13th, the Adobe Photoshop article has way too many external links that I think are distracting to the general purpose informing visitors why the program is notable. Do we need all those Photoshop tutorial links? I don't think so. Most of those websites are just redudant information like using a polygon lasso. --Krystyn Dominik 17:07, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Problem is, cleaning out the list and keeping it short is quite a bit of work. Figuring out what is a good link is a non-trivial task. It has been done for HTML, for example, but the list there was much shorter to begin with. Rl 18:25, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I've made a first pass through removing things that didn't look appropriate. The items I've removed are below, for easy restoration if anyone is able to make a convincing argument for including them. I've probably been a bit arbitrary where choosing between similar sites, but the primary criteria I've tried to consider are:

1. How many sites we already have listed with similar content

2. The content-to-advertising ratio

3. Whether the link is a duplicate - we only need ONE link to photoshopsupport.com at most, not three or four!

4. And, of course, several of the links were broken or dead anyway.

In practice, this disqualifies most of the links that were there; what's left seems to me to be an appropriately representative sample.

I guess some of my decisions may be controversial - if you disagree with sites I've removed, please restore individual links rather than doing a wholesale revert! Think of this as a first attempt to tidy things up: I'm not trying to present this as a definitive list of what should stay and what should go, just trying to get things moving on keeping the list under control. Disagree, discuss, change things back, whatever. Just remember that our common goal here is to write an encyclopedia, not to make a list of all the best Photoshop sites on the web, so please try to think in terms of what's notable, not just what's your favourite! Haeleth 13:27, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

*[http://www.restoring-photos-made-easy.com/index.html Using Photoshop to restore your treasured photographic memories]
*[http://www.photoshopsupport.com/photoshop-blog/index.html Photoshop Blog - News & Tips]
*[http://www.artworld.si/photoshop-tutorials-1.art ArtWorld] - 61 Photoshop Tutorials
*[http://biomech.area09.com/ Biomech: the Website] - B|TW: Photoshop Tutorials
*[http://www.savva.com.au/forums/savva/forum/portal_content.asp Extensive List of Photoshop Tutorials on Special Effects]   
*[http://www.photoshoptutorials.us Adobe Photoshop Tutorials] - PhotoshopTutorials.us   
*[http://www.tutorio.com/free/8-Photoshop-tutorials Tutorio.com Photoshop Tutorials]   
*[http://www.designtutorials.info/tutorials/photoshop-tutorials/ DesignTutorials.info Photoshop Tutorials]   
*[http://www.newtutorials.com/photoshop-tutorials.htm NewTutorials.com]   
*[http://www.photosector.com/ Photosector]   
*[http://www.photoshoproadmap.com/Photoshop-tutorials Photoshop Roadmap]   
*[http://www.solidgx.com/tip_convert_psd.htm Solid Converter GX]
*[http://www.phong.com/tutorials/ Phong]   
*[http://www.planetphotoshop.com/tutorials.html Planet Photoshop]   
*[http://www.dubtastic.com/tutorials/ Dubtastic]   
*[http://www.lunacore.com/photoshop/tutorials/tutorials.htm Lunacore]   
*[http://www.photographycorner.com/ Photo-related Photoshop Tutorials]   
*[http://www.Shiver7.com/tutorials/ Shiver7]   
*[http://www.n-sane.net/tutorials.php/ N-Sane.net]   
*[http://biorust.com/index.php?page=tutorial Biorust]   
*[http://www.idigitalemotion.com/tutorials/tutorials.htm/ Eye Digital Emotion]   
*[http://www.lombergar.com/v5/list/tutorials Lombergar.com] - Free Video Tutorials   
*[http://www.eyewire.com/ Eyewire]   
*[http://www.graphic-design.com/Photoshop/tutorials/index.html Graphic-design.com Photoshop Tutorials]   
*[http://www.digitalmediatraining.com/products/photoshopcs/index.html Free Photoshop Training Video]   
*[http://www.photoshopcafe.com/tutorials.htm Photoshop Cafe Tutorials]   
*[http://www.photoshopsupport.com/tutorials.html PhotoshopSupport.com - Free Photoshop Tutorials]
*[http://www.tutorialpod.com/ TutorialPod Photoshop Tutorials and More]   
*[http://www.tutorialized.com/tutorials/Photoshop/1 Tutorialized Photoshop Tutorials]   
*[http://www.good-tutorials.com Good-Tutorials.com]   
*[http://blog.ressourceweb.com Design Blog by Roni Deli]
*[http://www.pixel2life.com Pixel 2 Life Photoshop Tutorials]   
*[http://www.zymic.com Zymic]   
*[http://www.greycobra.com Grey Cobra]   
*[http://www.3dbuzz.com 3D Buzz - free video training modules]   
*[http://www.cooljeba.com/tutorials/photoshop Cooljeba Photoshop Tutorials]   
*[http://www.photoshoparea.com Daily updated Adobe Photoshop Tutorials] - PhotoshopArea.com

Getting a little POV here

I've cut the following sentence: Photoshop CS features a revolutionary command : 'Shadow/Highlight' which allow user to 'suppress' highlights and/or 'push out' shadows while maintaining most of the 'image details' (that is, the histogram would remain virtually unchanged). The language sounds like it was lifted straight from an Adobe press release, and at the end of the sentence I still don't have a clue what the feature in question is supposed to do. If this is really a notable feature, maybe someone could describe it in a way that makes sense, and explain how it differs from equivalent features in other programs. Haeleth 12:46, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Not to mention providing some example pictures showing why it's so good. Shinobu 15:10, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Reference to plugins?

Perhaps a section should refer to photoshop plugins, they are a software market on their own, as mentioned in the wikipedia plugin article.