Dominic Deacon
Forum Replies Created
-
[james lang] “1. Is there a decent non-cloud Photoshop that will run
on the newer Macs?”Adobe used to still sell cs6 but I think now creative cloud for $10 a month is your only option if you want photoshop. Affinity photo is pretty capable and is the next best thing to photoshop. From memory I think it sells for about $50.
[james lang] “2. Holy cow, Which computer? I’m considering iMac or mini.
Or is it necessary to go with a Mac Pro?”I’m not familiar with the mac mini. The Mac Pro would be a pretty silly purchase at this point I think. It’s horribly expensive for it’s performance as it was pricey to start with and hasn’t been updated in years. Any iMac will do the job. Of course a good pc will the do the same job faster and for less money.
-
I don’t think the composite job is bad. It may be that having done it yourself you are more aware of it’s short comings and the edges stand out to you in a way they wont for others. Not a big fan of using the burn tool for shadows. Better to create a darker image with the curves tool and then brush the shadows in. It’s non destructive and you’ve got a lot more control. The line of shadow down the leg just feels like it ends too abruptly.
My feeling is no composite ever looks right until you add adjustment layers over the top of the entire composited image. Something like this I’d probably grab something like a slightly sepia gradient adjustment layer and layer it over the top. Just make the colours conform to each other a little bit and as all layers of your composite will be equally affected they will start to look like they belong together more.
I think I’d also want more light on the face. I feel like there’s a slight lack of a “centre” to the image. As the figure is lighting a cigarette I’d be very tempted to get in and paint a bit of an orange glow around the hands and lower face to simulate the glow from the flame. But then I work in pinup and overdoing things is what I do so that may not be good advice…
-
It’s difficult because it feels like there’s so many values that are different between the two halves but I got it close and with more time I’m sure it could be done faultlessly. Basically I used an exposure adjustment layer to brighten up the top and then used the rectangular marquee tool to select just the top bit and applied that selection as a layer mask.
No doubt someone with more smarts will now jump in with the automatic magical way to do it but that’s a quick way to do it till they turn up.
-
Why do you have to have tried something to know it would be no use to you? Everyone knows their own workflows no? It’s just a touch screen. We already use those to interact with computers so it’s hard to imagine there’s massive surprises in store. That video was a good example. High on the cool factor but did it show anything there that couldn’t be achieved more quickly and easily with a keyboard by someone who knows what they’re doing?
These days I’m more of a photoshop guy than an editor and I can’t ever see myself using one of these touch bars because to use it I would have to take my eyes off the screen. I use a gamepad programmed with macros for every tool I use and it’s an incredibly fast way to work because my eyes never leave the screen. I know where everything is by feel. There’s no feel with a touchbar and so it would be no use for me.
OTOH I haven’t used Microsofts Surface Studio yet- and the odds are I never will- but that dial looks incredibly useful. I have no idea how it’s being implemented but I can see a million uses for that. If you could, for example, dial in brush pressure with it while you’re drawing I could see it making the mouse as useful as a stylus. Again I haven’t used it so maybe it’s junk but I can say it looks to have utility that’s unique to it.
-
Do a google search for photoshop bullet brushes. Create your text and then put a layer mask on it and brush out spots with whichever bullet brush you choose.
-
Thanks guys! Very helpful indeed.
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “Dare I ask if you know what that actually means? IP67 means (in terms of liquids) “Immersion up to 1m”. IP68 stands for “Immersion beyond 1m”. Sounds great, huh?”
You’re the one who invoked the IP ratings to start with and said to point out which competitor had a higher rating. I did. But to reiterate: I don’t care about waterproofing. I was just pointing out that Bill saying the jack needed to be removed for waterproofing was not true. Point made and not really debatable.
[Robin S. Kurz] “Then I think you need to note when any and all of your questions are purely rhetorical.”
No. Again, it was in response to Bill’s claim that Apple’s earbuds were new technology that would have revolutionary new applications. I don’t care about ear buds. I was just pointing out that these are just bluetooth headsets and it’s hard to see a new application that hasn’t been around for a long time.
[Robin S. Kurz] “[Dominic Deacon] “… if there was a point to it.”
*double-take* I’m sorry?
[Dominic Deacon] “… it’s now taking up the charging socket. I fall asleep every night with the phone charging and headphones in my ears.”
That being your point, but oh well. And never mind that I said “one of many”. There are endless other ones out there that are cheaper.”
This is getting very obtuse… When I said there’s no point to it I was referring to Apple removing the jack for no reason and forcing that sort of purchase on people.
And with that I’m very definitely out on this one.
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “Or you could just get (one of many) what’s been around for years?”
Yeah isn’t that what I said? Have to buy a new adapter. Another US $40. I wouldn’t mind the expense if there was a point to it.
[Robin S. Kurz] “Do tell. Which phone that you’d actually want to carry around in public, fit in your pocket and use all day has a higher rating than IP67?”
It’s direct competitor the Samsung 7 has an IP68 rating. I don’t really care about the level of waterproofness but Bill seemed to be saying that Iphone need to ditch the audio out so it could be waterproof but Samsung has it and is more waterproof.
[Robin S. Kurz] “What has Samsung done in that respect? I sure don’t know of anything.”
No idea. Don’t use ’em. I’m not here to fly the flag for Samsung. I use HTC myself and feel no loyalty to them either. Bill was just putting forward that this was new tech that would lead to professional applications while to me it looks like Apple has just invented a Bluetooth headset. Haven’t they?
-
[Bill Davis] ”
A) Apple includes a Lightening to 3.5mm adaptor with the new phones.
So you can still do exactly what you can do today.
No changes at all except you have to be bright enough not to lose the adaptor.Well having to carry around an adapter is not great and- as you note- I’m pretty likely to lose that thing. But more importantly it’s now taking up the charging socket. I fall asleep every night with the phone charging and headphones in my ears. Have to buy another adaptor I guess and not lose that one too…
[Bill Davis] ”
B) The new connector is highly water resistant – up to expelling water mechanically if the phone gets wet. So RELIABILITY of the unit is improved. Big WIN!And yet they are still less water resistant than many android phones with the headphone jack.
[Bill Davis] “C) Did you notice what the new wireless Airbuds do?
Right now, they’re initially marketed as a stereo listening device that like many iPhone earbuds also work for phone calls.
With a tiny bit of imagination applied – hasn’t Apple maybe just engineered something that could conceivably turn into a killer instant basic wireless audio and IFB system? Think about it. With the right App to drive the system, what’s to stop someone creating a system where giving the talent a SINGLE AirPod – puts a monitor AND a mic on them which can connect to an iPhone taking the place of a wireless body pack – which could then Bluetooth into the directors system for monitoring?”I’m not following but I’m interested. Has Apple engineered anything new here? Isn’t this just the same as the Samsung Gear nonsense or am I missing something key that Apples done?
-
If I’m understanding what you’re after right you’re trying to simulate the actual texture of the paper? You probably want to play around with blending modes. Google “textures” and find something that looks about right for what you’re after- “grunge” textures should give you the dirty edges and what not that you’d see in old print. Place the texture layer over your image and then switch the blend mode of the texture layer to Overlay or Soft Light.
