On Aug 25, 4:23 pm, "Worn Out Retread" wrote:
"Leo Lichtman" wrote in message
"angel (”,)" wrote: it’s clear from ur reply that u don’t understand anything about active
light or how does it work and for that i recommand u to take lessons in photoshop first before u come here and bla about a thing that’s perfectly done
and i would like to see u participate with something useful instead of ur sarcastic comments\
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Is it possible that I could be wrong? Let’s hear from someone besides the OP and me.
For an example of my contributing something useful, please note the thread on printing multiple images, started by Dan Wentz.
I agree with you that all they managed to show was how to screw up a perfectly good image using Photo Shop. You can screw up the image in the same way using other graphics programs. It is the result that counts and not the program that produced it.
If this was supposed to be an "artistic" effect, they in my opinion failed miserably.
***********************************************************
i respect ur point of view .
but from the way i see it. the image is perfectly done and the effect of the active light is shown practically in a good way
and talking about artistic effects i study arts and there is nothing wrong in the image
could u please show me an example of active light tutorial that u consider perfectly done ?
thanks