Re: Canon better for Raw?

Article View: adobe.photoshop.camera.raw.plugin.windows

Article #113

Back to adobe.photoshop.camera.raw.plugin.windows Previous Next

#113

From: Jeff_Schewe
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:40

3 lines
759 bytes

That Canon reps are paid to say that. . .so are Nikon reps (that Nikon's software is better).

It's deffinately different, but define "BETTER".

Technical Details

Message-ID: <3bb4d71f.0@webx.la2eafNXanI>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!webx

References: <3bb4d71f.-1@webx.la2eafNXanI>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Thread: 16edff,49dc2ab017c78007
X-Google-Attributes: gid16edff,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
From: Jeff_Schewe@adobeforums.com
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!webx
Newsgroups: adobe.photoshop.camera.raw.plugin.windows
Subject: Re: Canon better for Raw?
Message-ID: <3bb4d71f.0@webx.la2eafNXanI>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 23:40:47 -0700
References: <3bb4d71f.-1@webx.la2eafNXanI>
Lines: 4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Reply to Parent Message