I use photoshop and imageready every day and they're the best. I've never used ps elements, but had a brief run in with photodeluxe and I assure you it was a HUGE piece of crap.
reasons I would love iPhoto ... there's many a time when I'm using my digital camera that I'm just taking snapshots. I don't want to wait for classic to load up and then for ps to load up. Just gimme a couple of quick fixes right in iPhoto so I can grab my photos, quick color correct, print and run.
second, it's just an obvious gap in the iApp line. If apple really wants the mac to be a digital hub, you've GOT to put some image editing, even really dumbed down. I don't know the stats, but I will bet that more people own digital cameras than they do own mp3 players.
future potential - I've said this before, but it's my personal soapbox... give the iPod an additional menu for photos and a cable that allows me to hook up my iPod to the TV. Now, sync up iPhoto with the iPod and whammo, you've got about 800 songs in your pocket PLUS over 500 jpg'd images! If I wan't to go over to my parents' house and show them picture I took on my vacation, just hook up iPod to their TV and I'm good to go!
Oh, and while you're at it, why not add an iPod sync for iMovie? now if I happened to make any digital movies on vacation I can show those too!
This has to be SO easy to do and yet SO helpful!! This is digital hub! This is leveraging existing hardware to create the appearance of 'future hardware'! Am I the only one who would LOVE to see this happen!?
image capture does pretty well. only thing it could offer more is maybe cropping and exporting of different formats</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, but it's not really an editor. You know, for low-level, consumer type things: cropping, removing red-eye, retouching, adding type (for making Christmas cards or invitations or whatever), etc.
Stuff like that.
The same way that iTunes and iMovie put digital movie-editing and easy mp3 playing/organizing into the hands of consumers with a pre-installed, Apple-written app with a snazzy, intuitive interface, this iPix or whatever would do the same for people with digital cameras.
Actually, kinda shocked that this iApp wasn't first because I'm betting WAY more people own digital still cameras than digital video cameras.
That, to me anyway, has ALWAYS been the big, glaring ommission from Apple's stable of iApps: a basic, friendly and easy-to-use photo-editing iApp.
Hopefully one will be unveiled Monday. THEN Apple can truly say they've got the digital hub thing down: music, movies, photos, etc. with built-in, cool application to work with each one.
Maybe somehow the importing features of Image Capture can be rolled into this new iApp? You wouldn't even need a standalone thing like Image Capture if part of iPix's function was to do what Image Capture does and sense when your digital camera is plugged in and it goes and loads them all up, ready for you to choose, edit, print, view, etc.
Part of me thinks that Image Capture is like a temporary "placeholder", simply to get photos easily into the Mac, until a more full-featured solution from Apple comes along, AND incorporates the importing thing as well as all the other functions I spoke of above.
Ha, ricRocket and I typed VERY similiar posts, one minute apart. We were writing them at the same time, apparently, and talking about how it's the "missing iApp", how more people probably own digital camers more than other digital devices (camcorders and mp3 players) and how it ties in to the whole digital hub thing.
Great minds...
Not everyone needs (or can afford) Photoshop. And you know anything Apple writes is going to be simple and fun to use...WAY more than Photoshop Elements, even.
Think about it: would any of us believed, just three short years ago, it would be so easy to pull footage off a digital camcorder and make a decent, totally slick and presentable video with it, complete with music, special effects, titles, etc.? iMovie comes along and suddenly grandparents and junior high students are doing pretty snazzy things with their camcorders, with hardly any effort or learning curve.
And still photos are MUCH less complicated (no sound, no mulitipe parts to tie together, no synching, etc.), so if people can get a handle on iMovie and understand IT, then iPix should be a cakewalk!
Yeah, it's not going to compete even with Elements since it won't even have layers. So no pictures of you and Sammy Hagar hangin' at the Playboy Mansion, sorry! Like 'scates says, the software features will likely be spot fixes, some color correction, text, special borders and possibly some special "painterly" effects. Add that to what Image Capture and Quartz toolbar scripts do now: auto-detect and download, build a web page, upload to iTools (like Homepage with its themes), resize, rotate and change file formats.
<strong>That, to me anyway, has ALWAYS been the big, glaring ommission from Apple's stable of iApps: a basic, friendly and easy-to-use photo-editing iApp.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You say that like the iApps have been here for 20 years
Heh, pscates. If it's coming out at MacWorld, there's no way they're gonna get a brand new registered trademark just to get rid of a syllable. It will be iPicture.
P.S. iPix is already taken anyway by an online picture service.
[quote] iMovie is the only one that isn't two syllables. <hr></blockquote>
what about that 'oh-so-smooth' iDVD? that rolls off my tongue like sand ... not that I eat sand or anything... <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
I've never been sure that any of these i-words have roll off my tongue. I still wish they would just drop the i and leave them be. Like "Mail." Man, that name is a classic!
I should hope Apple cares more about names being obvious as to what they mean, than being of as few syllables as possible...
I mean, iDV? Digital Video? That doesn't sound like it has anything to do with burning a DVD. iDVD is just.. obvious. Which is what consumers, I'm sure, identify with.
iFlick? That vaguely has the connotation of cinemas and movie-going, but while it rolls off your tongue, it isn't as good as iMovie. Especially internationally where slang is different ("flick" is slang, "movie" is english).
Same with iPix. iPictures or iPicture (or even iPhoto, too bad it's taken) are a tad more obvious, plus seem more straightforward and less "trying to be cool."
Anyway, heh, I don't even know why I am posting this, shouldn't we be talking about the software rather than it's more than likely already decided (by the higher-ups) nomenclature? <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
If iPhoto does what I think it does (only seen on picture but it looks to be an image storage and organizational tool), Apple just trashed my Cocoa project before I even got a chance to finish it. Had a fully prototyped paper mock-up and had begun GUI work in IB. Suddenly the market has gone from non-existant to saturated.
Comments
reasons I would love iPhoto ... there's many a time when I'm using my digital camera that I'm just taking snapshots. I don't want to wait for classic to load up and then for ps to load up. Just gimme a couple of quick fixes right in iPhoto so I can grab my photos, quick color correct, print and run.
second, it's just an obvious gap in the iApp line. If apple really wants the mac to be a digital hub, you've GOT to put some image editing, even really dumbed down. I don't know the stats, but I will bet that more people own digital cameras than they do own mp3 players.
future potential - I've said this before, but it's my personal soapbox... give the iPod an additional menu for photos and a cable that allows me to hook up my iPod to the TV. Now, sync up iPhoto with the iPod and whammo, you've got about 800 songs in your pocket PLUS over 500 jpg'd images! If I wan't to go over to my parents' house and show them picture I took on my vacation, just hook up iPod to their TV and I'm good to go!
Oh, and while you're at it, why not add an iPod sync for iMovie? now if I happened to make any digital movies on vacation I can show those too!
This has to be SO easy to do and yet SO helpful!! This is digital hub! This is leveraging existing hardware to create the appearance of 'future hardware'! Am I the only one who would LOVE to see this happen!?
rr.
<strong>
image capture does pretty well. only thing it could offer more is maybe cropping and exporting of different formats</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, but it's not really an editor. You know, for low-level, consumer type things: cropping, removing red-eye, retouching, adding type (for making Christmas cards or invitations or whatever), etc.
Stuff like that.
The same way that iTunes and iMovie put digital movie-editing and easy mp3 playing/organizing into the hands of consumers with a pre-installed, Apple-written app with a snazzy, intuitive interface, this iPix or whatever would do the same for people with digital cameras.
Actually, kinda shocked that this iApp wasn't first because I'm betting WAY more people own digital still cameras than digital video cameras.
That, to me anyway, has ALWAYS been the big, glaring ommission from Apple's stable of iApps: a basic, friendly and easy-to-use photo-editing iApp.
Hopefully one will be unveiled Monday. THEN Apple can truly say they've got the digital hub thing down: music, movies, photos, etc. with built-in, cool application to work with each one.
Maybe somehow the importing features of Image Capture can be rolled into this new iApp? You wouldn't even need a standalone thing like Image Capture if part of iPix's function was to do what Image Capture does and sense when your digital camera is plugged in and it goes and loads them all up, ready for you to choose, edit, print, view, etc.
Part of me thinks that Image Capture is like a temporary "placeholder", simply to get photos easily into the Mac, until a more full-featured solution from Apple comes along, AND incorporates the importing thing as well as all the other functions I spoke of above.
Great minds...
Not everyone needs (or can afford) Photoshop. And you know anything Apple writes is going to be simple and fun to use...WAY more than Photoshop Elements, even.
Think about it: would any of us believed, just three short years ago, it would be so easy to pull footage off a digital camcorder and make a decent, totally slick and presentable video with it, complete with music, special effects, titles, etc.? iMovie comes along and suddenly grandparents and junior high students are doing pretty snazzy things with their camcorders, with hardly any effort or learning curve.
And still photos are MUCH less complicated (no sound, no mulitipe parts to tie together, no synching, etc.), so if people can get a handle on iMovie and understand IT, then iPix should be a cakewalk!
<a href="http://tess.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=95kqk3.2.1"; target="_blank">http://tess.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=95kqk3.2.1</a>;
[edited from orginal for better viewing]
[quote]
Word Mark
Goods and Services: Computer software, Treatment of materials, Internet-based services; on-line applications; storing, enhancing, distributing, editing, manipulating of data.
Mark Drawing Code\t(1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number\t76227641
Filing Date\tMarch 20, 2001
Owner\t(APPLICANT) Apple Computer, Inc. CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 1 Infinite Loop Cupertino CALIFORNIA 95014
Priority Date\tSeptember 21, 2000
Type of Mark\tTRADEMARK. SERVICE MARK
Live/Dead Indicator\tLIVE
<hr></blockquote>
Anyway looks like it will be tied into iTools directly somehow. Also, apple does not have any trademark under the listing "iPhoto" or "iPic"
<strong>That, to me anyway, has ALWAYS been the big, glaring ommission from Apple's stable of iApps: a basic, friendly and easy-to-use photo-editing iApp.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You say that like the iApps have been here for 20 years
By the way, it's iPix (or even iPics). Gotta keep it two syllables, if possible.
iMovie should've been called iFlicks or iVid. Two syllables just rolls off the tongue nicer. iMovie is the only one that isn't two syllables.
iMac
iBook
iPod
iTunes
iTools
iCards
You saw what happened to iReview, didn't you?
P.S. iPix is already taken anyway by an online picture service.
what about that 'oh-so-smooth' iDVD? that rolls off my tongue like sand ... not that I eat sand or anything... <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
rr.
iDVD...that IS a mouthful! FOUR syllables...the worst offender of the bunch!
Or for sailors and strippers, they could buy iVD.
I mean, iDV? Digital Video? That doesn't sound like it has anything to do with burning a DVD. iDVD is just.. obvious. Which is what consumers, I'm sure, identify with.
iFlick? That vaguely has the connotation of cinemas and movie-going, but while it rolls off your tongue, it isn't as good as iMovie. Especially internationally where slang is different ("flick" is slang, "movie" is english).
Same with iPix. iPictures or iPicture (or even iPhoto, too bad it's taken) are a tad more obvious, plus seem more straightforward and less "trying to be cool."
Anyway, heh, I don't even know why I am posting this, shouldn't we be talking about the software rather than it's more than likely already decided (by the higher-ups) nomenclature? <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />