Re: Does any other program (windows or linux) do screenshotannotation efficiently?

Discussion in 'Photoshop' started by Danny D., Apr 21, 2013.

  1. Danny D.

    Danny D. Guest

    Regarding behavior ...

    One huge difference I've noted in installing freeware over
    bloatware is the HUGE difference in installation & removal times.

    For example, installing iTunes (freeware but also bloatware), takes
    quite a long time, adds hidden daemons (such as bonjour & apple device
    services), and doesn't even respect the place you tell it to put it.

    Likewise with Office, which takes forever to install, and anything
    from Adobe or Oracle (even Quicktime, ironically, takes forever to
    install).

    With almost all freeware, they install quickly - and - best of all,
    they almost always uninstall just as quickly.
     
    Danny D., Apr 23, 2013
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Danny D.

    Danny D. Guest

    The canonical rule in all software whenever you have a task to accomplish,
    is to first perform that task in freeware - and then - only when you
    can't possibly perform it in freeware - by then - you know enough to
    figure out what features in the payware are worth paying for.

    If you just dumbly go and buy payware, you'll never know what could
    have been done just as easily in freeware - and - worse yet - you may
    not have the best solution but you're stuck with it (unless you have
    infinite money).

    For example, if you need to burn a DVD, on Windows, you try imgburn.
    Likewise, on Linux, you'd try K3b or Brasero to burn DVDs.
    If the freeware doesn't do what you need, then (and only then), you
    bother researching & buying Nero or the equivalent in payware.

    The beauty of doing it first in freeware, even if you fail, is that
    you then know EXACTLY what you need in the payware - hence - you'll
    make a much smarter payware decision.

    Bringing it back to the point, were I to consider payware for screen
    annotation, I know EXACTLY what I want that payware to do BEFORE I
    lay down the money for the payware.

    Freeware is, essentially, the 1st step in the payware decision tree.
     
    Danny D., Apr 23, 2013
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Danny D.

    Poutnik Guest

    Danny D. posted Tue, 23 Apr 2013 05:26:40 +0000 (UTC)
    Very good point.
    To buy it, and to know why I have bought it
    are qualitatively very different levels.
     
    Poutnik, Apr 23, 2013
    #23
  4. Danny D.

    Danny D. Guest

    Here's one functional freeware/payware decision tree:

    a) Define the task you need to accomplish:
    e.g., Let's say you want to create a pencil drawing from this JPG:
    http://www4.picturepush.com/photo/a/12760612/img/12760612.jpg

    b) Find & test the best freeware for the task:
    e.g., Inkscape: Path->Trace Bitmap->(o)Edge detection->Update->OK
    Or, Gimp: Filters->Edge Detect->Difference of Gaussians
    etc.
    http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/12760601/img/12760601.jpg

    c) If that freeware fails, or only partially performs the desired task,
    then, after having tested it, you now know much more about what to
    look for in the payware that you shell out your hard-earned cash for.

    In fact, the payware, to be worth anything, has to do the task better,
    or easier than the freeware did it - or - it has to do a task that the
    freeware just couldn't do.

    The point is:
    Armed with freeware knowledge, you'll make better payware decisions!
     
    Danny D., Apr 23, 2013
    #24
  5. Danny D.

    Guest Guest

    which is almost always the case, otherwise nobody would pay for it.
    they'd use the free stuff.

    as they say, you get what you pay for.
    nonsense. the best way to make a decision is ask those who have done
    similar tasks what the various options are.
     
    Guest, Apr 23, 2013
    #25
  6. Danny D.

    Guest Guest

    a huge generalization, contradicted by your other post regarding cd
    burning software.

    installing either of the two examples you list is more involved than
    paid software which is nothing more than dragging the app to wherever
    or clicking a download button. but when have facts mattered to linux
    zealots anyway.
    those *have* to be installed for itunes to work.
    that is a flat out lie.
    big apps take longer to install than small ones.
    again, it depends on the apps. there is plenty of freeware that's a
    bitch to install (particularly on linux) and plenty of paid software
    that's trivial, as simple as dragging or clicking a download button.
     
    Guest, Apr 23, 2013
    #26
  7. Danny D.

    Guest Guest

    that is the stupidest thing i've heard in a very long time.

    if you don't know what features you need to do a task, how the hell are
    you going to find freeware to do it?

    there also might be freeware that does whatever it is but the user
    experience sucks and paid software is just more pleasant to use.
    nobody said to ignore freeware. if a free solution does the job,
    great. however, if a paid solution does a better job, then *that* could
    be the way to go, rather than suffer with something that doesn't work
    that well only because it's free.

    evaluate all options and choose the best tool for the job.
    or just use what's built into the os.
    nonsense. you need to know that *before* you start looking for any
    software.
    you should know what you want before you look at any solution, free or
    paid. otherwise you'll waste your time looking at dozens of apps and
    get nowhere.
    no it isn't. look at all options and see which one best fits the task.
     
    Guest, Apr 23, 2013
    #27
  8. Danny D.

    Savageduck Guest

    In Photoshop they are added to a unique layer as a vector graphic
    custom shape, using the tool box provided. Then each can be scaled,
    rotated, perspective adjusted, warped, and more.

    Each element, arrow, circle, text, etc. are added it individual layers,
    and can be returned to as you proceed to tweak the effect until you are
    ready to flatten those layers to produce your final product.
     
    Savageduck, Apr 23, 2013
    #28
  9. Danny D.

    Savageduck Guest

    Mercedes is going to be miffed that you think that 1936 540K Special,
    is a Bugatti.

    This is a Bugatti:
    < http://db.tt/HAs3aoEP >
     
    Savageduck, Apr 23, 2013
    #29
  10. Danny D.

    Poutnik Guest

    nospam posted Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:56:29 -0400

    There is plenty of payware that have better freeware alternative.
    People are tricked to buy it, as do not know better options.
    It is easy to pay for junk.
    Sometimes it is unbelievable what authors want to be paid for...
    That is already a part of a good decision tree.
     
    Poutnik, Apr 23, 2013
    #30
  11. Danny D.

    Poutnik Guest

    nospam posted Tue, 23 Apr 2013 01:56:33 -0400

    Before that you cannot know
    what freeware cannot provide you,
    or just by sufficient way.

    What you should know before is
    what you want to do,
    eventually ways how it can/usually is done.
     
    Poutnik, Apr 23, 2013
    #31
  12. Danny D.

    Poutnik Guest

    Poutnik posted Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:15:43 +0200
    P.S: You may have not noticed he said payware, not software.

    You need in payware something you miss in freeware,
    otherwise freeware is sufficient.
     
    Poutnik, Apr 23, 2013
    #32
  13. Danny D.

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Eric Stevens, Apr 23, 2013
    #33
  14. Danny D.

    Savageduck Guest

    Oh! Come on! You could have come up with a more recent shot of what
    probably became German mess kits in 1940.
    ....and even if it survived WWII, it was just a boulevardier, an
    overweight sled, which oozed down the road and would have been less
    than adequate on the track.

    The magnesium body, 1935 Type 57S Competition, "Electron Torpedo", I
    shot at Laguna Seca in 2010 would have left your sled in its dust.

    ....and then there is this very driveable 1937 Bugatti Type 57 SC.
    < http://db.tt/8JKBVixQ >
    or this 1938 GP streamliner
    < http://db.tt/DZTELetj >
     
    Savageduck, Apr 23, 2013
    #34
  15. Danny D.

    Guest Guest

    not really. there are a few exceptions, but in general, commercial
    software is much better, often significantly so.
    bullshit. nobody is tricked into buying anything.
    it's also easy to not pay for it.

    people are smart enough to decide if something is junk or not.
    sometimes it's unbelievable the crap people use just because it's free.
     
    Guest, Apr 23, 2013
    #35
  16. Danny D.

    Poutnik Guest

    nospam posted Tue, 23 Apr 2013 10:28:50 -0400

    Many exceptions. In spite of the fact avg quality of commercial software
    is higher. It is the same as with avg life of smokers and non-smokers.

    Avg is higher for non-smokers, but there is huge number of smokers living
    longer than most of non-smokers. And vice versa.
    You are overestimating people.
    You are overestimating people.
    Some are, like you. Some are not. There are many not well oriented
    people, easily convinced to buy crap, thinking they bough great thing.
    Sure. Both happens. There is not much to say about payware nor freeware
    in general, except of one is paid and one is free.

    Both manifest huge range of quality and usability, where standard
    deviation is much bigger than average difference, so statistically the
    difference is not significant.
     
    Poutnik, Apr 23, 2013
    #36
  17. Danny D.

    Eric Stevens Guest

    The last time I saw it, it was in the International Automobile Mueum
    in Geneva. That would have been about 15 years ago. The museum has
    closed since then and I don't know what happened to the cars.
    It was never made for that. Basically it intended for royalty and
    Ettore Bugatti had to approve your table manners. I kid you not.

    In any case, 120 mph whould not have been called 'oozing' in the
    1930s.
    Not in a straight line. They both had about the same maximum speed.

    The car you shot appears not to be an entirely genuine Bugatti.
    Certainly all major parts are genuine but different parts seem to have
    come from different cars. I suspect it is patterned on the Bugatti
    Aerolithe.

    See http://www.bugattibuilder.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2120
     
    Eric Stevens, Apr 24, 2013
    #37
  18. Danny D.

    Savageduck Guest

    That is good news. Since the museum has closed it has probably survived
    and crossed the boards at some auction house. Check with Jay Leno.
    Do you mean I am not permitted to bait Eric?
    The "Aerolithe" is a totally different car. It is a fast back
    streamlined coupe, and while technically a Type 57, its only physical
    resemblance to the Type 57 roadsters, is the familiar radiator. The
    Type 57 was the basis for a whole line of very different cars between
    1935 and 1939.
    < http://www.guildclassiccars.com/1935_Aerolithe_coupe_1109/Aerolithe.html >

    The Type 57S above was undergoing a full restoration, and is not a
    replica as suggested. This car won the Paris Salon of 1935.

    One thing to remember about Bugatti of that era, no two were completely
    identical. Most especially the high end models were build with custom
    coachwork with several designers involved at that stage of
    construction, very much in the same manner as Duesenberg, DelaHaye,
    Bentley, and Rolls-Royce.

    Some of the most valuable Bugattis are the unrestored running survivors
    such as this Type 54GP:
    < http://db.tt/kXSlavPM >

    You can see the Type 57S in the background/

     
    Savageduck, Apr 24, 2013
    #38
  19. Danny D.

    Savageduck Guest

    Your bugattibuilder.com site seems to have mis-IDed the photos in its
    story and speculated on replica status.
    Note the "?", the writer seems unsure.

    This is the reconstructed Type 57SC with a replica body.
    <
    http://www.mullinautomotivemuseum.com/car-20-1936-bugatti-type-57sc-competition-roadster.html
     
    Savageduck, Apr 24, 2013
    #39
  20. Danny D.

    PeterN Guest

    On 4/21/2013 4:53 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:


    The businessman side of you is showing. It's all too obvious that you
    are more interested in photography, than playing with tools.
     
    PeterN, Apr 24, 2013
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.