> Let's suppose you have a computer system running Photoshop 3.0. You are
> happy with the set up and evrything is fine. My point is that you neither
> have to sell your computer nor upgrade the software. You can continue to
> work with them until the end of your years. The final file format is
> TIF or .EPS which are standards and are sure to be with us for a very
> long time. So long as you are able to create output in one of these
> formats it doesn't matter what version of software you are running.
Ho ho, you wish! In the first place, if I've got the computer
installation and knowhow, I might decide to do something else with it --
like read fortunes or design a rocket ship. Rest assured that if I want
the latest software for the purpose it will not be compatible with any
operating system older than, let's be optimistic -- two years.
And upon "upgrading" the system, experience tells me, there's a good
chance I'd lose some other things, such as perchance my "perfect"
photoshop. And I'll also add from experience that once you have the
"perfect" software, the upgrade, with its detours and annoying bells and
whistles added on will drive you *crazy* !!! Not only will it be more
difficult to do your simple everyday operation, certain things aren't
going to work as well. Odds are good too that some of your most
treasured features will be eliminated. (I've read witness to this "upgrade
effect" by no less than Peter Norton, so it's not just my luddism.)
Secondly, as things change, the service bureaus and outside accomodations
I work with will not "interface" with my old system. For instance when I
wanted to get on-line, I could find only one modem and one service
provider could be used with my equipment (which was, really, only 8 years
old at the time).
So in time no service bureau would be able to process from my old Syquist,
or whatever... (True, I am planning on living a long time.)
There are probably some thirdly & 4thly's but you get the idea.
> Surprisingly (and thankfully), I find extremely good correlation between
> what I see and like on my monitor, and what I see and like in my prints.
Of course in a school situation where others use and "adjust" the monitor
after and before you use it, correlation becomes iffier....
> As for training a novice, can I assume some basic computer knowledge, such
> as what a floppy disc is, how to use a mouse, and how to turn on the
> computer?
I had been using Pagemaker, a data base, MSW & a couple of other programs
(including a graphics program or two) for some years when I failed to get
usable hard copy from photoshop. It wasn't that the actual operation was
hard -- it wasn't -- it was trying to encompass & coordinate all those
parameters, to select the *right* curves and output format, etc., and then
get them from the virtual to the real -- by clairvoyance, or X power it
seemed at the time.
> > Give me a complete novice, and I could teach the fundamentals of the
> whole process in 1 day. Really. I've done a little teaching, so I'm not
> just speaking through my hat. Now, to become a Photoshop wizard will
> take longer. I can get people to make passable output in a day, but
> masterpieces take longer. I could probably bring someone up to my level
> in about a week of classroom time.
David, if I'd only known, I would have camped on your doorstep....
> Right hand raised, swearing on the grave of Captain Pizzaghelli,
Well we can always use the pizza...
cheers,
Judy