RE: [APML] Picture Window Pro vs. PhotoShop

[Brian Sledz <brianhome@linkus.net>]

Hi Alan,
It seems like PWP takes less resources but I am not sure.   I have both PWP 
and PS.  If you want to get fast decent results PWP is hard to beat.  It 
took a few months before I got used to PS.  But PWP seemed real easy to get 
to use.  The gradient removal stuff was much easier for me on PWP.  One 
operational thing I like about PWP, when manipulating images say a 
brightness adjustment, you get another window to see the changes and then 
can hit apply.  But when you hit apply, a new image is created while the 
old one is untouched.  So you can have both side by side without doing a 
revert or closing and reopening.  It does however leave you with many 
windows, so just close down the ones you don't want.
Also I think PWP is much cheaper! ;-]
HTH
Brian



At 07:06 PM 10/3/2002, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
> > > Is there anything PhotoShop can do for processing
> > astrophotos
> > > that Picture Window Pro cannot? How about vice
> > versa?
>
>Well, since this thread started I've heard many good
>things about Picture Window Pro. For those of you who
>have used both PWP and PS, which one is easier to
>learn? Which one requires less computer know how to
>manipulate?
>
>Thanks,
>Alan
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
>http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
>--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>



--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>