How can you talk about a plug-in that was last reviewed by you in April 2000? How can it possibly function with Photoshop v. 7 & and Mac OS X or Jaguar? So what's the point???
I had to dig through Andromeda's web site [not real full of detailed information] to try and figure out its compatibility with the latest Photoshop software and Mac OS upgrades.
This is what I found: a compatibility chart that says it can be used with Mac OS X under Classic mode, and a review that quotes ""This is an incredible filter that is of particular use to digital photographers. It returns variable focus to the digital imager's bag of tricks."
David Busch, Photoshop 7: Photographers Guide, 2002. [Note: a cross-link to that article would had credence].
So I'm assuming it can only be used under Mac OS X under Classic mode ( Mac OS 9.x) and is probably usable with Photoshop 7. But is this true ??
Shouldn't your reviews cover these points and take the digging and the guessing out of your reader's experience??
A little non-plussed in Montreal -- I expect more from you. By the way, you're my default home page so... please be complete and up to date.
gsf
gsf@pubnix.net
PS: no rating because I don't know if the info is reliable so I can't agree or disagree with the article. A better gauge might be Useful or Not Useful as far as the article is concerned, which in this case would be not very useful.
Submitted by MACfroggie on Wed, 02/05/2003 - 14:59.
You should understand that we simply cannot review every product that comes out. That's why we link to stories on other sites. In this case the 2000 review you refer to is from CNet. If you had clicked on it, you would see that it was not a creativepro.com review.
Design Tools Monthly writes about plug-ins every month, so aware of the fact that we sometimes can't keep up with all the changes in the market (hate to admit it, but it's true) we turn to them to give an overview of the most recent developments.
We always encourage readers to examine the developer's site for the most complete technical information.
Thanks for the vigilant reading, and sorry if we caused you any frustration. We'll try to do better.
today's feature & Andromeda Software's VariFocus Filter
How can you talk about a plug-in that was last reviewed by you in April 2000? How can it possibly function with Photoshop v. 7 & and Mac OS X or Jaguar? So what's the point???
I had to dig through Andromeda's web site [not real full of detailed information] to try and figure out its compatibility with the latest Photoshop software and Mac OS upgrades.
This is what I found: a compatibility chart that says it can be used with Mac OS X under Classic mode, and a review that quotes ""This is an incredible filter that is of particular use to digital photographers. It returns variable focus to the digital imager's bag of tricks."
David Busch, Photoshop 7: Photographers Guide, 2002. [Note: a cross-link to that article would had credence].
So I'm assuming it can only be used under Mac OS X under Classic mode ( Mac OS 9.x) and is probably usable with Photoshop 7. But is this true ??
Shouldn't your reviews cover these points and take the digging and the guessing out of your reader's experience??
A little non-plussed in Montreal -- I expect more from you. By the way, you're my default home page so... please be complete and up to date.
gsf
gsf@pubnix.net
PS: no rating because I don't know if the info is reliable so I can't agree or disagree with the article. A better gauge might be Useful or Not Useful as far as the article is concerned, which in this case would be not very useful.
Fair comment but...
You should understand that we simply cannot review every product that comes out. That's why we link to stories on other sites. In this case the 2000 review you refer to is from CNet. If you had clicked on it, you would see that it was not a creativepro.com review.
Design Tools Monthly writes about plug-ins every month, so aware of the fact that we sometimes can't keep up with all the changes in the market (hate to admit it, but it's true) we turn to them to give an overview of the most recent developments.
We always encourage readers to examine the developer's site for the most complete technical information.
Thanks for the vigilant reading, and sorry if we caused you any frustration. We'll try to do better.
Pamela Pfiffner, editor in chief