[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Corel Vs. Photoshop
>>There is a big problem with Corel Photopaint as far as the pro market
is
>>concerned, in that it does not, at least up to version 8 which is the
most
>>recent that I have seen, allow the user to add the international
standard
>>information text file (<file<file info in Photoshop). This feature
allows
>>captions to pop up in browsers, can be used to add copyright details,
and
>>interfaces with a range of database search programs, which makes file
>>management a breeze. Many magazines and newspapers simply will not take
>>images which do not have this file completed to their specs these days.
Are you referring to the information that pops up when the mouse hovers
over an image? I seldom see this as a requirement - certainly not a deal
breaker. I see perhaps 30 - 40 Writer's / Photographer's Guidelines each
month, and this has never been a requirement.
As for Corel (I have run every version, currently I am using version 7) ,
there is Digimarc which allows you to embed this type of information if
desired. Info like Copyright info, A Digimarc watermark carries a unique
Creator Id, and image attributes. You provide a complete set of contact
details, including your name, phone number, address, e-mail and web
addresses, and specialty.
Perhaps I am missing something here.
Another reason I prefer Corel is my familiarity with the program, ease of
use, uses a huge variety of plug-ins, integrates well with Corel's range
of web tools, etc. As for file management, I never worry about that. I
wrote an Access Database that helps me tremendously. With Access I can
add any features I desire with a minimum of problems. But I am an Access
sort of guy.
Bob