[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[New search]
To: Bart Windrum <bart.windrum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Need clear screenshots
From: Dov Isaacs <isaacs@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:44:05 -0800
Cc: framers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, framers@xxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: jeremyg-freeframers:org-ffarchiv@freeframers.org
References: <LYRIS-70969-451895-2004.01.07-12.24.09--Bart.Windrum#diogenesinc.com@lists.FrameUsers.com>
Sender: owner-framers@xxxxxxxxx
You hit it on the head. It is a "raster CONVERSION" which means that entire page, not the image on it, is output to whatever format you specify, let's say TIFF. Depending upon how the image was pasted into the page, you may get some resampling or other artifacts. Again, this is just not the way to go. Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements) is for images; Illustrator for primarily vector manipulation. If all you want is Snag-It (or the Mac equivalent), that will also "do the job." - Dov At 1/7/2004 11:38 AM, Bart Windrum wrote: >But wait a minute. Altho I rarely use Illustrator these days, I certainly >have noticed it's got a raster conversion engine in it (File>Save For >Web...) which looks like it was lifted right outa Photoshop. Not taking >sides but wanting to understand whether or not these implementations are >identical or different, and if different, how... > >> Steve Rickaby wrote: >> >>>> Secondly, Illustrator is not really an image-handling program. >>> >>> Seems to work fine, though. >>> >>>> Third, better solution is: >>>> >>>> Capture=>Photoshop=>TIFF >>>> >>>> where "Photoshop" could be Photoshop Elements! >>> >>> Hmmm.... are you actually telling me I should be using Photoshop >>> rather than Illustrator? If so, why? >> >> Because screen shots are bitmap (raster) images, and Photoshop is a >> raster graphics application. Illustrator is a vector graphics >> application. >> >> Richard ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx ** ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body. **