Digital BW, The Print

I would go with PW Pro. I have Photoshop and use it some. But PWP is 
much more intutive and easier to use. There may be some functionality in 
Photoshop not in PWP, but from what I have found you won't need it very 
often if at all. The good news is PWP is fully functional on 16 bit 
data. Not even Photoshop can claim that.

I think the Pro version for I think $89.00 is a better deal the regular 
version. At least that was the conclusing I came to some time back.

Truman

steve1t wrote:

> I'm having a ball learning to use Photoshop Elements.
> But, one feature that Adobe left out of the "Elements"
> Version of Photoshop is the Channel Mixer. I can
> already see that this is a very powerful tool for digital
> b&w work. I want it! Reality is I'm retired on a fixed
> income. The full version of Photoshop is a lot of money
> for a lot of features I'll never use - or am I being a
> "penny wise and a pound foolish?"
>
> Anyway, Picture Window, by Digital Light & Color,
> claims some pretty sophisticated filtering capabilities.
> Does Picture Window 3.1 allow one to manipulate b&w
> RGB images like Photoshop's channel mixer?
>
> Would Picture Window compliment Photoshop Elements
> or be redundant? At $49.95 it looks like heck of a buy.
>
> Thanks,
> stephentucker@...
>