Arranged Delirium

I’m often asked to recommend image editing software, especially given the expense of Photoshop. My answers vary depending upon what is available when I’ve been asked; but Pixelmator has been a fairly consistent recommendation. It’s matured nicely. Truthfully, it would be my editor of choice, with the exception of a few strategic tools (like healing brushes) that makes Photoshop something I just can’t live without. Oh, and it’s Mac only, which means it isn’t an option for many…

But if you are looking for an affordable image editing application, you can’t beat it - Pixelmator is available for $59 online, and less if you buy through Amazon. Michael Roach has authored a review here of what’s been updates in the new version.

If you are at all interested in digital video production, you’ll want to check out a couple of excellent guides on Ars Technica regarding shooting and post-production:

Start with “How to shoot pro-quality video on a budget” for a nice concise tutorial on capturing your video. In order to address some of the issues raised in the article, you would need some additional equipment - but even a nominal expenditure would net some great benefits to the quality of video you could shoot. In essence, with a shotgun mic and a cheap set up reflectors, you shoot quality footage.

The follow-up with “How to do pro-quality video post-production at home” which does a very nice job of recounting the editing process, while also helping develop a good understanding of the overall workflow for such projects. I’m sure it does indeed seem like a lot of work - but this is what it takes to create footage that doesn’t seem amateurish.

If you work with Adobe software, your already checking out Layers Magazine. It full of tutorials though that might be helpful to folks learning how to complete specific tasks. Sine I do most of my work in Photoshop, I find myself frequently referencing the section on InDesign to look up a technique when I’m working on a project in that software. For the DVD cover assignment in New Media, this might prove to be a particularly valuable resource…

I’m frequently talking in class about what a designer can count on, and what’s out of our control. In web development, fonts are a good example. Even as you specify fonts, you cannot necessarily assume that the viewer’s machine has those font installed. Or, that they will render similarly - particularly given the differences of platform and browser. I think the image below from a post at The Small Wave makes the differences clear. Both of these render form the same code, but obviously appear different:

Now I know that some will argue that I’m just trying to applaud the Mac here - but I’m really not trying to do that. This is all about being able to see the fact that fonts render differently on different machines and/or browsers.

This Associated Press article regarding ABC News coverage of the Toyota recall should make clear the power of video on shaping our opinion and understandings. It should also prove indicative of the dangers of shoddy journalism. It a good example of what we are always talking about in New Media: how visuals shape our understanding of the world, through both intentional means and unintentional decodings. This is the very reason why it’s important to pay attention to details when crafting new media content.