See this poll on: https://poll.fm/9456064/embed
Give others the chance to vote.
Share this poll, because the more votes the better.
Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
closed
The trouble with the internet is that any fool can set themselves upas an "expert" and post so-called "tutorials" and unfortunately many do.
I've seen some shockingly bad stuff posted on "YouTube" under the guise of tutorials.
I held correspondence with one so-called "expert" who was adamant that changing focal length alone altered perspective, without changing viewpoint. Unfortunately some novices may be taken in by such rubbish.
That's not to say everything posted is bad, just be wary of the quality of your source material.
The moral of the story is "Just because it's on the internet does not mean it's accurate or true."
There are some fantastic tutorials on YouTube but recently I've been using it for product reviews.
Yes, but it does irritate me (and other software makers) that in magazines, when image-editing tutorials are written for techniques that use functions that are available in the vast majority of image-editing packages, only Adobes products are displayed in tutorial shots .... Adobe is getting it's software advertised for free and it also strongly implies that only their software is worth purchasing. What about shots showing the actions used in for instance, Capture 1 and Paintshop Pro? The articles invariably say they can be used in these, so why not show them being USED in these?