CompuServe Messages

Tim; I'm not as shy as Ben <caugh> <gag> <choke> 🙂 People that have been on this forum for many years know that I have not been hesitant about "flaming" Ben when I thought he was wrong or even when I thought that he might be "over-doing it." HE IS NOT OVER STATING THE SITUATION! I like ADPro and have used it for a number of years, not extensively mind you because I really am limited to just a bit of "minor" corrections to bit map images for use in DTP. I have been using IM R/t since it came out. It is (IMHO) a much more "intimidating" program. While there are several things that I have tried to do in IM R/t that I have not been able to accomplish successfully yet, I don't believe that ADPro can under any circumstances do them. Probably the single most important feature of IM R/t is that it is very easy to try something, compare the "before" and "after" and save either (or both). Amount of memory available limits the practicality of some sequence of operation type things, but as you no doubt know, the order in which you perform certain types of image processing affect the results. IM R/t is the only program that I know of where you can experiment with such things and not get lost (named buffers and the ability to save/load and switch any buffer at any time). IM R/t has ARexx macro capability that can be called from just about anywhere in the program (the only place that I have seen myself where I don't think that you can call an ARexx macro is when IM R/t has the Macro Requester Open – and of course you could just select your macro if it is in the group for that requester). This program is beyond amazing. Also, my attempts at comparitive processing have led me to conclude that IM R/t does a better job. My perception is that it is also faster but that is definately subjective. -bill