Pregled posta

Marketing

[Fuji ISO200 > Minolta 500si Minolta 35-70 > CVS processing > Epson V300 scanner 4800dpi cae dg 1.8 ael -3 > Lightroom]

This is a nice little result that was easy to generate in LR.

So after a couple of days of playing with it, "off and on":

Pros:
Much easier to do crops, rotates, fill-light, the "basic" adjustments, the auto wb is rational, all the lens-corrections are right there and user-modifiable, it has decent vignetting which is good, CA, etc, I don't need lens-corrections at this point, but it's good to know that it's there, and that it is easy to disable entire sections by flipping the switches. Unlike the French and their problems with presentation, this is straightforward, and that is good: "one less problem". It saves to jpeg with a certain Q value below a given filesize, though beyond the Q value it doesn't tell me what the compression-scheme actually is in detail like Gimp does, But neither do most programs that save to jpeg. 90% of Lightroom is great.

Cons:
It still has that same stupid process that DxO uses where if you point it to a directory of images of any real size it just falls down and dies. In fact DxO is better in that regard, though I've yet to try it with a directory full of 80MP scans. It's just not designed to handle a lot of image-data especially on a computer with limited resources.

Gimp *is*.

Also the sharpening routine both sucks and simply can't handle high-resolution images. The radius tool stops at 3...I need at least 5 for a 24MP film scan. My scanner can easily generate 9600dpi scans, that would be over 120MP...a radius of 3 wouldn't even make a dent in their sharpening-needs. The smart-sharpening, eh, it's better than nothing, but not good and I can't really get it to do what I want, there's virtually no control over it, certainly Gimp is far better in this regard. Again, LR is designed for the level of detail that you get out of a digital camera. It simply does not work well for high-resolution film scans.

And I just pointed it to the folder of scans that I have on my laptop not my external hard drive, maybe 50 tiff files in the 35-100MB range. And when I tried to import them it just went "shannanannannana....." and died. Twice. Sure, my laptop has 1.5GB of ram and LR used 900k of that just editing an image. But Gimp handles that just fine. There is simply no need for it to scan through all those files and create thumbnails of them when I have already done that in Explorer. All I need it to do is open and edit one file. You could perhaps do that in the quick-edit, but in the quick-edit you don't see the details for the settings. All you get are the arrow controls. And certainly you can rotate and crop the image there.

So I think that it's good for a first-pass, for a single image import, doing what it does well (and it does *very* well) but then I'd have to go back into Gimp to finish it up and then I'm paying $250 for a tool to do 80% of the work and still using a free tool to do the rest of the work. Or I don't sharpen the image at any more than Lightroom will.

That still leaves the clone-work. Guess which tool has better clone-tools. I suppose that in a few more days of playing with it I may very well resolve these issues but right now, LR is looking like 3/4ths of the solution and 1/2 of the problem.

However, at this point I would use LR for one thing and one thing only: the fill-light tool, and maybe the auto-wb tool for when things are really bad, because it doesn't push the exposure as much as the AutoWB tool does in Gimp. Everything else I can do fine in Gimp. If Gimp had a decent fill-light tool I would not use LR except maybe for extreme lens-corrections.

Though I can see how it works fine for a bunch of 2-10MB images from your average 6-14MP digital camera. LR is great if you are posting small shots for the web. I wouldn't want to rely on it for large prints. Likewise, digital cameras are great if all you're doing is generating a bunch of 1MP images for web use or for small prints. But let me ask you a question: what sense would it make to spend $1500+ on camera gear to make a bunch of 1MP images, that are way too big even for the average cell-phone or pda, at a quarter-VGA? The irony is that most cameras produce far more pixels than required for the overwhelming percentage of viewing-conditions, and I say this yet again: what we really need is cheaper gear, more speed and less noise with the same level of fine-detail, not more pixels.

All while I'm sitting here scanning 35mm film to 4800dpi and thinking that I should scan higher, The point is that with film the difference between 300dpi, 2400dpi, 4800dpi, 9600dpi etc is relatively insignificant. The files are larger, that's the main concern. Aside from the implications of file-size it still takes the same time to scan and edit the images. So it doesn't really *matter* to me that I scan at 4800dpi vs 9600dpi vs 300dpi, except

Hello my Friend...

Sorry for this big effect... I just really nead your help

Today I was making a lot of Photography... suddenly my screem become blanc and White and change colors...

I turn off, and turn on... I made a new pics and the camera told me my memory stick pro sony was full (memory stick pro Sony 512 mo)...
I change Memory stick... no more pb...

But at home... I connect my camera to my laptop with USB cable... no pb with the other Memory Stick Pro but the 512 Mo is seen by the computer with capacity 0 octetµ... and format RAW and my camera told me .. The format is not supported...

Windows proposed to Format the card... after hesitating ... I decide to do it... all my other MEmpry Stick pro are FAT format... then I decide to change the format RAW I can saw and use the FAT format... after the format ... the camera and the Memory stick pro work together as usual but I lost all the pics stocked on this memory card...
Other pics on the other MEmory Stick are okay...
Someone had an idea ???
I have no copy, it's Sony Original Material...

I cannot understand how the format can suddenly turn into RAW... I do not made any violent disconnection...
I just change my battery 3 pics before this pb happened

Thanks for you help

See you

I'm back on the web 13th of April...

Your Marie !