Photoshop Is Not a Brand of Facial Tissue.

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Photoshop gets the press because they have the $$$ to make sure of it! Gimp is free, so they just get word of mouth and massive patron loyalty.

Now if you'll excuse me I need to Google ( I hate Google and use other search engines exclusively ) some facts about the cut on my arm because my medicated Band Aid ( A generic adhesive medical strip of the Equate brand ) isn't taking care of my wound. Oh, and since I am thirsty I am also going to grab a Coke ( I actually drink Pepsi ).

All this points out that the folks at Adobe not only love the idea that their trademark is becoming a generic verb for photo editing - I imagine that it's entirely possible they've invested a bit of their money into helping this process along.

~Heff




posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by davespanners

Originally posted by Ex_CT2

I get it. From here on in the UFO forum we'll say: "Naww... That's been Gimped, Paintshop Pro'd, Photo Pros II'ed, MS Paint'ed, and/or Photoshopped." Sounds really convincing and professional....


I think the point is that before you say something is "photoshopped" you should have some knowledge of how the image might have been manipulated using a piece of software to produce the effect that you are saying has been used. Understanding the limits of what you can do with image manipulation software.

Granted Gimp and Photoshop can be used to produce the same results but a lot of people use "no it has been photoshopped" as a seemingly more "intelligent" way of just saying "I don't believe this picture / video is real" so it's just a short cut for incredulity

It's more or less "pics or it didn't happen" for use when someone actually has pics
edit on 3/2/13 by davespanners because: (no reason given)


Boy, do I feel stupid now. I had it all planned out, too. I was going to be on the cutting edge for once....



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
I admit that I am guilty of the above.

But in my defense........People look at you funny if you tell them that you Gimped an image.






Too true.
Then throw nOOb at them and be done with them......



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


LOL I guess it is just me. I call facial tissue simply tissue regardless of the brand. I search not Google. When I need more Mountain Dew I say Dew but if I need Mountain Dew, my wife needs Pepsi and my children need Root beer or Sierra Mist I simply say Pop or Soda but my wife knows what it means. A bandage is a bandage unless its Band-Aid lol. I guess I just call it like it is.
edit on 3-2-2013 by Agarta because: Wording



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agarta
reply to post by Hefficide
 


LOL I guess it is just me. I call facial tissue simply tissue regardless of the brand. If I do a search not Google. When I need more Mountain Dew I say Dew but if I need Mountain Dew, my wife needs Pepsi and my children need Root beer or Sierra Mist I simply say Pop or Soda but my wife knows what it means. a bandage is a bandage unless its Band-Aid lol. I guess I just call it like it is.


You and I are similar when it comes to those kinds of things. Though, I do use the term Google when I mean to search something, and that's simply because Google is the only search engine I use. I use the terms soda or pop, bandage, tissue, etc. when talking about something like that as well.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:16 AM
link   
I see what you're getting at, most "Photoshops" aren't really photoshopped with...Photoshop. But rather, Gimp usually or MS Paint (if you're really lazy) and other Image editors.
Not to be that guy but.. You can edit video in Photoshop.
Files>Import>Video Frames to layers, then Export>Render video, when done.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by kx12x
 


I suppose that is true in a round about way, but in actuality you are converting it to an animation(usually .gif) working the individual images and reconverting back to video but this distorts the original so much that you can't even pretend it was not edited in this way why because it Indexes them then converts to RGB then back to Indexed and then back to video. It destroys pixels in the transparent so your shading is no longer smooth. This is why you see outlined shading.
edit on 3-2-2013 by Agarta because: Spelling



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:32 AM
link   
I've worked in two advertising firms and they both used call the edit suite where I was working "The Avid". It secretly drove me absolutely mental. Although understandable, because they both did once use Avid but had since switched to Final Cut but no matter how many times I told people it wasn't "The Avid" it never stopped.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Bah humbug.

Blow your nose with a kleenex, stick a q-tip in your ear, get some visine eyedrops, some tylenol for your headache, and put yoyr sandwhich in a baggie. In the meantime, get the swiffer out and clean the kitchen floor, and don't forget to put a hefty bag in the kitchen can. After that, we can reminisce about the nintendo days, and check out the photoshops we have from the 80's.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agarta
reply to post by SpearMint
 


You are correct in that "Paint" and "Photoshop" are in a different class but that is by today's standards not 15 years ago and 25 years ago when all you had was "Paint" it was awesome. The issue is that the motto of this site is "Deny Ignorance" and we should say what we mean. In fact, it was "edited" is half the number of keys to hit than "Photoshopped" and gives a more accurate description.


Photoshop was the industry standard more than fifteen years ago. I graduated in 95 and at that time "Photoshop" was THE tool for image manipulation....



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dondylion

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Agarta
 

Indeed... In all honesty as I hinted above, I think Gimp and Inkscape are more intuitive and easier to use than Adobe stuff.


I have to whole-heartedly agree with you there, Wrabbit. GIMP is so much easier to use than Photoshop. I've tried them both, and out of the two, I will always choose GIMP. Once you go through some trial and error stuff, GIMP is a lot easier to figure out than photoshop. It does a lot more, too.

Just had to throw my 0.2 in there, sorry to get a bit off topic!


That is just plain wrong....If you don't understand Photoshop then really you have no understanding of the awesome power you have with that tool set

Respectfully.....
edit on 3-2-2013 by minkmouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by minkmouse

Originally posted by Dondylion

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Agarta
 

Indeed... In all honesty as I hinted above, I think Gimp and Inkscape are more intuitive and easier to use than Adobe stuff.


I have to whole-heartedly agree with you there, Wrabbit. GIMP is so much easier to use than Photoshop. I've tried them both, and out of the two, I will always choose GIMP. Once you go through some trial and error stuff, GIMP is a lot easier to figure out than photoshop. It does a lot more, too.

Just had to throw my 0.2 in there, sorry to get a bit off topic!


That is just plain wrong....If you don't understand Photoshop then really you have no understanding of the awesome power you have with that tool set

Respectfully.....
edit on 3-2-2013 by minkmouse because: (no reason given)


Hon, as I said in my original post, I've tried both GIMP and Photoshop. Photoshop was mandatory for a course I took in college and I used GIMP in my spare time. In MY opinion, GIMP is easier to use and does a lot more.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Fair enough but In my opinion PS walks all over Gimp in the ability department. When the smoke clears though, I guess the path of least resistance that delivers what you're looking for in terms of finished product would be the way to go



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Agarta
 

It doesnt have to be indexed to a lower color palette i believe, its been awhile since ive edited any video with photoshop (i have a crappy joke video on youtube that i threw together in photoshop) but it is very time consuming since you have to go frame by frame and they have to match up in order for the video to look "legit", so you are right, and it would be very tedious to make a video look somewhat real. But as far as image/video quality goes i think you're only limited by the processing power of your PC. Heck you can even paint 3D files with Photoshop now.
I will say though, Photoshop by far is not the most ideal video editor out there.



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Agarta
 
Ummm............Your right....we should lobby that ATS add that to the TOS and while we're at it we should also...POST BAN...anyone that forgets to spell or grammar check...huh? We could get rid of all of those "English Is Not Your First Language" posters, and people that purposely ignore convention and choose to write after their OWN fashion.....OOps...that would be...self...
Could I ask a question...WHY do you care about this so darn much that you just...HAD...to make a thread about it?...Better yet...Why on earth did I even bother to read the thread and comment in it? It must be a really slow morning....I need another cup of coffee.

YouSir



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by davespanners
 



As a side note, English people call all vacuum cleaners "Hoovers" after a specific brand name of vacuum cleaner in much the same way that people have started to call all image or video manipulation as "photoshopped"


Haha..yes, so true, I have both a Hoover (branded) and a Dyson, but no matter what model I'm using, I'm always doing the hoovering...





top topics
 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join