if you get more than 50% correct you're doing well.

And remember, keep photoshop closed and NO CHEATING!

http://www.photoshopuser.com/quiz/test.php

"iehsmith" <inezhsmithspammenot@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BFEB18D6.4545C%inezhsmithspammenot@earthlink. net...
| On 1/11/06 4:33 PM, woods commented:
|
| > if you get more than 50% correct you're doing well.
| >
| > And remember, keep photoshop closed and NO CHEATING!
| >
| > http://www.photoshopuser.com/quiz/test.php
|
|
| Before I try it, how much of it is about versions higher than 6?
|

There's at least a few CS2 *specific* questions, so I'd say most of it.

I didn't do so well, but then, I don't deal with alot of the issues in the
questions (the quiz is much more photography oriented).

In article <5Bjxf.400$MN4.196@news-wrt-01.rdc-nyc.rr.com>,
"fungusamungus" <fungusized@hotmail.com> wrote:

that's a far assessment.

there's a few RAW file questions that i had to guess.

woods wrote:
I eat and sleep PhotoShop CS2 and I got 45%! Eep!


--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
# this post (c) Miranda Thomas 2006
# explicitly no permission given to Forum4Designers
# to duplicate this post.

J. A. Mc. wrote:
I dont really do much colour correction and that sort of thing!


--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
# this post (c) Miranda Thomas 2006
# explicitly no permission given to Forum4Designers
# to duplicate this post.

In article <42qrc6F1kh2jdU1@individual.net>, SpaceGirl
<nothespacegirlspam@subhuman.net> wrote:

I got 15 right . . . the camera RAW questions really threw me. How
many people really use that format anyway??

I do alot of photo-editing and color correction - but really, I got
mostly quick-key questions . . . are the questions different each time?

--
Constance Pierce
principal/designer
info@pierceillus.com

"you can't polish a turd."

"iehsmith" <inezhsmithspammenot@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BFEDFE13.4582A%inezhsmithspammenot@earthlink. net...

Are you kidding? There's nothing wrong with your score.
I did it in a little less time, and got 60 percent.

It's a fun quiz, and I like the way you can see the correct answers at the
end.
--

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com

Constance Pierce wrote:
Lots I imagine. I do. Most of the photographers I know shoot in raw
(when not using traditional film).


--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
# this post (c) Miranda Thomas 2006
# explicitly no permission given to Forum4Designers
# to duplicate this post.

Constance Pierce <pierceillus@knology.net> wrote:

I don't use anything else.


--
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl
Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

woods wrote:
80% in about 7 minutes.

Don't know jack about RAW.

--
Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html

In article <42sfb4F1kon2dU2@individual.net>, SpaceGirl
<nothespacegirlspam@subhuman.net> wrote:

Yeah, but from what I understand, PS's support of RAW is fairly new (at
least Adobe's been saying that it is - was one of CS2's selling points
- "Now with RAW support!"). And I know cameras capable of RAW are
priced (low-end) from $1K + . . . so I guess I meant how many people
here at ADG are receiving RAW formats?

Most of the other questions were fairly universal, but as someone who
never receives RAW formats, I was completely unprepared for the ?s on
it.

The hardest part for me was remembering the quick-keys - I use them all
the time, but if you asked me what was the QK for such-and-such and
I've have to DO it - I coudn't just tell you what it was . . .

All in all, I'm proud of the score I got - I thought it was going to be
waaaay lower than that. I was guessing as I did it, that I'd end up
with a score of 5 or something. ( :

--
Constance Pierce
principal/designer
info@pierceillus.com

In article <BFEEAA2C.45961%inezhsmithspammenot@earthlink.net> , iehsmith
<inezhsmithspammenot@earthlink.net> wrote:

personally, have never seen one. My formats are usually JPG, TIFF and
PSD and the ocassional PDF. RAW is like some sort of exotic animal to
me and my clients.

When I do ads, I'm lucky (honestly) if I get 300ppi . . . usually it's
an image that needs to print at 5x7 and is only an inch square, 150 ppi
.. . . and more often than that an image that's been scanned (poorly)
from an image that has fingerprints and boogers on it! LOL.

The funniest thing, though, is that's usually from those who are
spending a near mint on the design. No one seems to understand the
phrase "garbage in, garbage out" . . . and sometimes it seems that the
higher paying clients understand it less than the rest!

Connie

--
Constance Pierce
principal/designer
info@pierceillus.com

Constance Pierce wrote:

I dont know any digital cams that save TIFF or PSD. Generally you have
RAW or JPEG, and only RAW is lossless. You dont use RAW for production
work - RAW is just a copy of exactly what a digital camera "sees" along
with some EXIF data (which contains all your camera's settings,
exposure, speed etc). Once you open a RAW file in PhotoShop CS2 you get
a special window that reads the EXIF data. PhotoShop "understands" this
file and adjusts the image for display and lets you do lots of
adjustment before actually getting into PhotoShop proper. After that you
can treat the image like any other image inside PhotoShop - you save the
file as a regular PSD. RAW, by its very nature, cannot contain anything
other than image data - no layers, masks, text - just the data the
camera captured on its CCD.


--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
# this post (c) Miranda Thomas 2006
# explicitly no permission given to Forum4Designers
# to duplicate this post.

SpaceGirl <nothespacegirlspam@subhuman.net> wrote:

That couldn't be further from the truth. Photoshop only reads the white
balance data, and sets the intitial white balance as such. Any other
data in the EXIF headers about camera settings are ignored. It's *you*
who have to do the work, and that is exactly why so many professional
photographers like to use RAW. We don't want our camera or photoshop to
decide for us, we want to decide how the image should look.


--
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl
Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

Johan W. Elzenga wrote:
Which means I was half right, rather than "further from the truth". I'm
not sure the process PS does.





--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
# this post (c) Miranda Thomas 2006
# explicitly no permission given to Forum4Designers
# to duplicate this post.

SpaceGirl <nothespacegirlspam@subhuman.net> wrote:

Not by half a mile. You suggested that Photoshop reads the EXIF data and
"understands" this and adjusts the image. The whole purpose of using RAW
is that Photoshop does *NOT* adjust the image. You do.


--
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl
Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

In article <42t49tF1kocfoU1@individual.net>, SpaceGirl
<nothespacegirlspam@subhuman.net> wrote:

from clients - not implying that I know of any cameras that save to
TIFF or PSD.

formats I routinely get from clients . . . I do three fairly big
magazines and each of them receive JPGs (even though they're using,
from what I understand, digital SLRs) from their photogs. I was just
saying that I've never (despite my continued requests) gotten any
images in RAW format.

I'd really like to play with RAW, but I've not come across it in my
real world workaday life. I think it would be pretty interesting to
take for a test drive! ( :

--
Constance Pierce
principal/designer
info@pierceillus.com

Mike Russell wrote:
Oh really, well I feel a lot better now then. I am new to Photoshop
really, I have always used 'alternative' software. My results were as
follows:

Time spent: 9 min. 36 sec.
Score: 12 / 20 (60%)
Grade: Intermediate

Give me a few months and I reckon I will be right up there :-)

Regards,
Brian.

SpaceGirl wrote:
actually taking any notice of what you are clicking or selecting. Put on
the spot and asked a question, you probably got wrong some of the things
you would do correctly in PS if you were sitting there working.

Brian.

Constance Pierce <pierceillus@knology.net> wrote:

That is only logical. RAW is the 'digital negative' that still needs to
be 'developed'. Just like in the old days, the photographer does his own
developing, dodging, burning and sends you the final result. I shoot
everything in RAW, but I would never send a RAW file to a client, even
if he asks for it.

--
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl
Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/