Digital BW, The Print

>
> I don't know about anyone else, but I am tired of this ranting maniac.
> 
> I appreciate and have no problem with having a post informing people 
> that CS3 may have printing problems.  However, if I was experiencing 
> problems, I would search/post on the Adobe forums and find out about 
> this fairly easily.
> 
> The problem is I am seeing these ranting, argumentative posts FROM 
> THIS ONE PERSON on just about every forum I read relative to printing.
> 
> I don't care if he is making money or not.  He is on a form of jihad 
> and I would appreciate if he took it "offline".
> 
> John
> 
> BTW...I would never have a problem with PS' printing as I never use 
> it.  Even when it worked it was weak in function.  I use Qimage.  Not 
> necessarily for it's better quality, which it does have, but because 
> of its function and that it makes the printing process easy.  For 
> that same reason, I don't use PS' noise and sharpening tools.  Noise 
> Ninja and Focal Blade (or similar tools) are so much better than the 
> current PS capabilities.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Editor P.O.V. 
> Image Service" <editor@> wrote:
> >
> > donbga wrote:
> > 
> > >Eric,
> > >
> > >  
> > >
> > >>Keith you seem to be on a personal war
> > >>path here.
> > >>    
> > >>
> > >
> > >Just read Keith's e-mail signature. That will tell you the whole 
> story.
> > >
> > >Don Bryant
> > > 
> > >  
> > >
> > Don,
> > 
> > I don't often call people simply ignorant.  But:
> > 
> > 1) I'm not an attorney
> > 
> > 2)  I have a history of getting people back money in the inkjet & 
> > printing biz for products that don't perform as advertised.
> > 
> > That history started with getting thousands of people millions of $ 
> back 
> > around the world when EPSON  promised (with the 1280) series, and 
> > endorsed by the PPA,  "Professional prints that last as long as 
> > traditional silver prints."  EPSON refunded not only the cost of 
> > individual printers, BUT also the cost of consumables (including 
> > expended ones) WORLDWIDE, because of the work Bob Meyer, Laurie 
> Solomon, 
> > others and I did - Bruce Fraser even eventually joined with us. And 
> we 
> > received not a dime...
> > 
> > Try this link from 2000 for starters:
> > http://www.p-o-v-image.com/epson/links.htm
> >  
> > So, whether or not, you, care to recognize it or like it, those 
> others 
> > and I ARE considered experts in the digital printing field.
> > 
> > 3) Large corporations have inordinate advantages in preventing 
> consumers 
> > from learning the failures of their products. Read most of the 
> reviews 
> > at most photo or pc publications - everything is great - especially 
> when 
> > it comes from a MAJOR established player in the field. Right now, 
> Adobe 
> > is the only real digital imaging/editing game in town. They surely 
> > aren't going to publicize shortcomings themselves.
> > 
> > 4)  That signature line was added so that I didn't have EPSON and 
> other 
> > vendors suing ME when I told the truth about their products. I'm 
> not 
> > making a cent off of this and never did. However, I'm not about to 
> let 
> > lawyers hit me with a SLAPP lawsuit to shut the truth down. (feel 
> free 
> > to google "SLAPP lawsuit")
> > 
> > Part of it was also added because I had a MAJOR institutional 
> client 
> > take sample images that had been emailed and violate copyright.
> > 
> > Don't believe any of the preceding?  Ask this list's own Paul Roark.
> > 
> > 5)  You've seen the posts on here by others confirming personally 
> some 
> > of the problems.
> > 
> > 6)  Finally, Adobe's new 18 month "ready or not" product cycle and 
> the 
> > new "extended" pricing model (which many discussed here in late 
> April 
> > and early May), means they are forcing more $ from consumers and 
> > breaking the former Adobe paradigm.  When you break the paradigm, 
> you 
> > have a responsibility to produce a MUCH BETTER product. (Which is, 
> by 
> > the way, what they promised.) 
> > 
> > Instead, they've produced what longtime aficionados and lovers of 
> Adobe 
> > software have called "The Worst Photoshop Release Ever."  That's 
> > bass-ackwards and it deserves to be highlighted at least once.  
> Adobe is 
> > using their name and reputation to convince people to buy into an 
> > upgrade that should not have yet shipped. It's a cash-stream play, 
> pure 
> > and simple.
> > 
> > So, please, feel free to blow your ill-informed pontification out 
> of 
> > whatever bodily orifice you prefer.
> > 
> > Oh, and don't you, or didn't you used to, work for a large 
> international 
> > manufacturer of traditional photo supplies as a sales manager?  If 
> so, 
> > you wouldn't have any particular axe to grind on behalf 
> of "unfairly 
> > maligned corporations" when they produce products that get poor 
> > reviews?  Nah...
> > 
> > Don, if you have a personal issue or wish to continue this, I 
> suggest 
> > you email me offlist. I'm not going to debate this part of it 
> further 
> > onlist.
> > 
> >  
> > Keith Krebs
> > 
> > "Just some guy," caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON 
> printer 
> > User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
> > Publications), at:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
> > and  the Multiverse's largest Canon printer User  Community at:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon-printers
> > "For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks 
> together 
> > guys"
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > ****************************************************************
> > CONFIDENTIALITY & COPYRIGHT NOTICE:
> > This e-mail message, including attachments and contents, is © 
> Copyright, 
> > Keith Krebs, 2001-2007, All Rights Reserved. It is expressly for 
> the 
> > sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and 
> > privileged information. Absent the express written authorization of 
> the 
> > author, any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, transfer, or 
> > distribution is explicitly prohibited and taken at your own risk. 
> If you 
> > are not, or are unsure whether you are, the intended recipient, 
> please 
> > contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the 
> original 
> > message. Violations will be prosecuted to the FULL extent allowed 
> under 
> > applicable civil and criminal law. Imagery published or distributed 
> in 
> > violation of these conditions shall be subject to a $1500/image 
> > liquidated damages charge, in addition to any applicable Copyright 
> > violation penalties.
> > 
> > POV IMage Service Banner
> > ****************************************************************
> > { The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-
> image.com/ }
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>