<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: InDesign vs. Photoshop? No kidding.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/</link>
	<description>Learning to use Adobe’s tools for creative people</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:01:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: snappylee</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-11108</link>
		<dc:creator>snappylee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:13:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-11108</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the interesting comparison...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the interesting comparison&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: No Photographer</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-10570</link>
		<dc:creator>No Photographer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:41:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-10570</guid>
		<description>@A Photographer:

It seems to me that InDesign didn&#039;t crop any of the photos, it just rotated those with portrait orientation. I&#039;m fine with that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@A Photographer:</p>
<p>It seems to me that InDesign didn&#8217;t crop any of the photos, it just rotated those with portrait orientation. I&#8217;m fine with that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Photographer</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-8527</link>
		<dc:creator>A Photographer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:59:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-8527</guid>
		<description>From a photographer&#039;s standpoint your example does not have a winner.  Both contact sheets are awful.  Photoshop is ugly in layout, but accomplishes the purpose of a contact sheet, which is to view the full photos.

Your InDesign example is neater, but so what?  It crops the photos to where they are useless to show to a client to gage which photos need to be selected.  How are you supposed to tell composition on the InDesign contact sheet?

There are extension for PS that have far better contact sheets.  You can even try Lightroom, but it seems that when it comes to contact sheets, Adobe has no champion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From a photographer&#8217;s standpoint your example does not have a winner.  Both contact sheets are awful.  Photoshop is ugly in layout, but accomplishes the purpose of a contact sheet, which is to view the full photos.</p>
<p>Your InDesign example is neater, but so what?  It crops the photos to where they are useless to show to a client to gage which photos need to be selected.  How are you supposed to tell composition on the InDesign contact sheet?</p>
<p>There are extension for PS that have far better contact sheets.  You can even try Lightroom, but it seems that when it comes to contact sheets, Adobe has no champion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Photoshop Tutorials</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-6221</link>
		<dc:creator>Photoshop Tutorials</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2008 23:22:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-6221</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s interesting that Photoshop still sticks with that god awful contact sheet it has. You&#039;d think that the masters of design (Adobe) would be able to proucde something a little better than that for their flagship product. Perhaps they have a higher view of their Indesign users?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s interesting that Photoshop still sticks with that god awful contact sheet it has. You&#8217;d think that the masters of design (Adobe) would be able to proucde something a little better than that for their flagship product. Perhaps they have a higher view of their Indesign users?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PSU calc</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-6123</link>
		<dc:creator>PSU calc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:46:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-6123</guid>
		<description>Great tips, thanks for the good work!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great tips, thanks for the good work!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ovidiu</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-5576</link>
		<dc:creator>ovidiu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:46:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-5576</guid>
		<description>thx for the tips</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thx for the tips</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: simon</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-5575</link>
		<dc:creator>simon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:46:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-5575</guid>
		<description>&quot;Somebody actually had the idea to pit InDesign’s image editing features against those in Photoshop. Go figure. I guess it makes sense because it really is easier to stay in one application—especially if you need to do something fairly simple. That somebody is one Mike McHugh, and the title of his article is InDesign vs. Photoshop Smackdown: Who Will Be the Winner? It’s on the Peachpit website. &#039;
thx a lot , good post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Somebody actually had the idea to pit InDesign’s image editing features against those in Photoshop. Go figure. I guess it makes sense because it really is easier to stay in one application—especially if you need to do something fairly simple. That somebody is one Mike McHugh, and the title of his article is InDesign vs. Photoshop Smackdown: Who Will Be the Winner? It’s on the Peachpit website. &#8216;<br />
thx a lot , good post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sergey</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-4653</link>
		<dc:creator>sergey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:15:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-4653</guid>
		<description>Very nice! Thanks :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very nice! Thanks <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ckinfo</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-4235</link>
		<dc:creator>ckinfo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:34:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-4235</guid>
		<description>Thanks, good work

greetings from germany</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, good work</p>
<p>greetings from germany</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Firewalker</title>
		<link>http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-3020</link>
		<dc:creator>Firewalker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:58:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://luanneseymour.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/indesign-vs-photoshop-no-kidding/#comment-3020</guid>
		<description>From the comparison that you shows to us, it is clear that InDesign is taking the lead. Still, this one isn&#039;t matters anymore since CS3 provides us with flexibility to transfer works across Adobe CS3 software.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From the comparison that you shows to us, it is clear that InDesign is taking the lead. Still, this one isn&#8217;t matters anymore since CS3 provides us with flexibility to transfer works across Adobe CS3 software.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
