D2x Pro Talk Questions

Hi Gary

Currently it is Far cheaper for a Nikon user to buy the 12-24 and say a D70
or D1x or D2h than a Canon user has to pay to access their Full Frame
camera alone with no lens purchase.

Even a D70 and a 12-24 should be cheaper and arguably better than a new
14n body only from Kodak.

And I am sure that when and or if Nikon Make a full frame camera
The same argument will be true.

BM

Gary Livingston said:

Anthony Medici said:

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

Darren Chesnut said:

We all are in waiting of the D2x, right. a full frame,

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
'I think too much, it hinders my spirits'-OneLineDrawing
'Stay positive and love your life'-311

Click to expand...

I dislike how hard it is to buy a new Windows machine and move all my legally purchased software to it when I do. I also dislike how common virus are since the platform is too popular. My feeling is that Nikon Capture and View work well on Windows in general as does photoshop. And I do like how quickly programs appear for Windows. But I'm stuck on an older machine since migrating to a faster machine promises to take too much of my time.

For the Mac, only one program has not made the move smoothly from machine to machine in two separate upgrades. This makes the decision to upgrade and throw away an old machine much easier to deal with. Viruses and Trojans are rare on Macs and I tend to use that machine for email since it is safer. The software is also more consistent as the short cut key strokes tend to all be the same. Windows does that but to a lesser extent. What I don't like about it is that they tend to be expensive and Nikon Capture and View tend to run slower on my Mac. This is a problem with the software, not the speed of the machine since photoshop doesn't exhibit the same slowness on that platform. This is caused by inexperienced Mac programmer since not to many people get good at writing Mac software since there isn't much "money in it".

I currently have a Mac laptop and a Windows desktop. I'm am considering switching that around since I need a bit more speed out of my laptop when I'm on the road and, as you mentioned, I can get a G5 dual for my desktop. (Although it would be very expensive to configure it correctly.)

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

Terry H. said:

Anthony,

Since you own both, could & would you tell us (me) what you like &
dislike about both. I would rather hear it from someone who uses
both than others who just speculate. I've always used PC's because
it was main stream and cheaper than a Mac. Mac's had always been
more reliable so it made since for graphics artist to use them, but
the impression I get is that they are pretty much online with
reliablity and speed (G5 is now faster I hear, but PC will probably
match soon?) So what's your take..?
I use PC's, but got nothing against Mac's, they are just tools and
you should use what ever works best for your sistuation, same as
with Nikon or Canon. Use what works best for your needs. I prefer
Nikon (mainly because it was suguested 20 plus years ago by
other(s) to buy Nikon, if it was'nt Nikon, it probably would have
been Contax. Canon just didn't come up in discussion at that time)
, but I believe Canon is a great system too.

Terry

Click to expand...

Thanks Anthony for the follow up...

Terry

Anthony Medici said:

For the Mac, only one program has not made the move smoothly from
machine to machine in two separate upgrades. This makes the
decision to upgrade and throw away an old machine much easier to
deal with. Viruses and Trojans are rare on Macs and I tend to use
that machine for email since it is safer. The software is also more
consistent as the short cut key strokes tend to all be the same.
Windows does that but to a lesser extent. What I don't like about
it is that they tend to be expensive and Nikon Capture and View
tend to run slower on my Mac. This is a problem with the software,
not the speed of the machine since photoshop doesn't exhibit the
same slowness on that platform. This is caused by inexperienced Mac
programmer since not to many people get good at writing Mac
software since there isn't much "money in it".

I currently have a Mac laptop and a Windows desktop. I'm am
considering switching that around since I need a bit more speed out
of my laptop when I'm on the road and, as you mentioned, I can get
a G5 dual for my desktop. (Although it would be very expensive to
configure it correctly.)

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

Terry H. said:

Anthony,

Since you own both, could & would you tell us (me) what you like &
dislike about both. I would rather hear it from someone who uses
both than others who just speculate. I've always used PC's because
it was main stream and cheaper than a Mac. Mac's had always been
more reliable so it made since for graphics artist to use them, but
the impression I get is that they are pretty much online with
reliablity and speed (G5 is now faster I hear, but PC will probably
match soon?) So what's your take..?
I use PC's, but got nothing against Mac's, they are just tools and
you should use what ever works best for your sistuation, same as
with Nikon or Canon. Use what works best for your needs. I prefer
Nikon (mainly because it was suguested 20 plus years ago by
other(s) to buy Nikon, if it was'nt Nikon, it probably would have
been Contax. Canon just didn't come up in discussion at that time)
, but I believe Canon is a great system too.

Terry

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

MAC's may be popular with a certain niche but they are not 98% of the photography market... All you have to do is look at the article below and you can see that the PC has stolen the MAC's libido...

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6453-6821

The truth is MAC got stuck in a 2D world while PC was steadily advancing in through the ranks of 3D which ended up pushing more and more graphics houses to the PC... Photographers themselves will vary as far as what they like but I would bet the numbers are closer to even among independant artists because the advantage of software is heavily in favor of the PC side of life.

--

'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe

I disagree. I do believe Mac's are better computers for dealing with graphics. Not just my opinion, but I think a lot of other peoples as well. Every professional graphics enviroment I have ever been in; whether it be an internship for college that I am currently doing, seeing other companies' professional setups all having Mac's for graphic work, sitting in with a buddies digital art class here at UD where the room is full of Mac's. I do not own a Mac, however, I do know that within the digital art community, at least what I have been exposed to so far, it is common knowledge that Mac's are infact technically better at handling graphics than PC's.

--
-mark simmerly
[email protected]

[good] taste is the enemy of creativity - Picasso.

Darren Chesnut said:

From Raw, color corect, WB, sharpen,
save out. Currently this takes 3 softwares and all run slow compare
to others, good features but slow and alot of steps.

Click to expand...

I use CS. That's it. One software product. It does everything I need to do from RAW conversion to printing.

Darren Chesnut said:

And to print a
contact sheet takes for EVER...

Click to expand...

I guess this depends upon the printer used. Printing contact sheets takes me no longer than printing most 8x10's.

Darren Chesnut said:

I am currently running system OSX
10.3.3 and in the feild I shoot to a to a 1 GIG powerbook and in
studio I shoot to a 2x2 GIG G5 tower. It seams that Nikon is
designing for the PC Sport shooter if you know what I mean with
some studio user features. I have not used C1Pro yet but have herd
good things. They keep pushing off the Mac Nikon users.

Click to expand...

Yeah there is a reason...see below.

Darren Chesnut said:

Just a note, 98% of all Studio Digital Photographers use Macintosh,
78% Sports photographers use Mac and are converting over very fast.

Click to expand...

Umm, where exactly do you get these figures? As PC's make up 90% (approx) of the market, I seriously doubt that 98% of the studio's out there use Mac. In fact, based on the tool kits that I've seen in Studio Photography and Design, many shops have both platforms for some odd reason. But some use Mac's and others PC's, and some both!

Darren Chesnut said:

It seams the Camera compaines need to improve there direction with
their software and platforms they a focusing primarly for.

Click to expand...

Nikon focuses on the PC because that is were the market is largest. I'm not just talking pro's, but PC's are a MUCH larger segment of the computer market. EVERY company I've worked for (large corporations) use PC's.

Darren Chesnut said:

Please jump in and lets get a discussion on were we need Nikon to
devolop the software.

Click to expand...

Nikon seems to be doing a reasonable job of upgrading Capture. I'm not clear exactly where you want them to go, but if it's turnning capture into a full blown PS type of product, don't hold your breath.

Leaf makes a product for their backs that maybe the cat's meow in one step processing. Actually I'm not sure it's even leaf, but one of the big MF digital back makers. Apparently the RAW support is fantastic, it's very fast, and it has most of the things that pros need to do post processing as well. I read a review in (I think) digital pro photo...it was impressive.

Ron

I am. I don't care about the 1.5x factor. I will jst get a different lens. I need the image size so that I won't have to rely on the software to enlarge the photos. Dealing in the CMYK world 300DPI you can only bllow up a photo so much. and beleave me you can see the difference between a true 5 MEG A Pixel camera and a 11, 14, or even a 16 MEG A Pixel back when you are going to a full page gate fold or even a Trade Show Sinage size like 8' x 8' banners.

Anthony Medici said:

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

Darren Chesnut said:

We all are in waiting of the D2x, right. a full frame,

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Darren
Nikon D1x, 17-35, 28-70, and sb80DX
Canon Digital Rebel, 18-55, 28-135 IS, 75-300

Thank you Plini for getting my original questions back on track.

I have herd different oppions about CS converting Raw files. Is this a good solution to by pass Capture 4.1? I like the new features in CS but I was wondering about batch converting. Can you do as in Cature Editor (Select an image, WB, adj curves, push color, etc... and then apply to a selected folder of images to batch out?) And is the CS RAW preview window a true color image. or just a preview image?

• Darren

Plini said:

This was started as a really good topic but was driven to stupid
discussions about Mac vs Intel or FF vs smaller CCD.
Regardless what we all have as preferences for the PC (I'm on the
Intel Side but understand Mac lovers as well) or what technical
features we expect from the new camera - a very imprtant thing is
the software and the workflow.
This forum could serve as a way to express our requirements
regarding these two as the form an important part of PROFESSIONAL
Photography (as important as the Camera if you have to produce!).
Lets get this discussion back on track!!

Look at the Kodak workflow which is very good! You shoot in RAW
which is the easiest for the camera and then have the ability to
tune it all on the PC. they have a tool called Photodesk that can
do it but also an import into CS brings good results.
The important point for me is that I need Software enabling me to

• immediately view the pictures all of them as thumbnails (but big

enough to judge their quality)

• change basic setting on a complete set of pictures very fast

(color temp, ISO, curves,...)

• a fast conversion into JPEG and TIFF

and then I don't care whether its on a Mac or PC...

Click to expand...

--
Darren
Nikon D1x, 17-35, 28-70, and sb80DX
Canon Digital Rebel, 18-55, 28-135 IS, 75-300

Thank you. A true Mac and PC person just answered my question. The software does run faster on a PC with less flaws. Not because of the machine but becouse of the software. That is what I wanted to address: the flaws in the software and how we as Nikon users would like to see it go.

Anthony Medici said:

For the Mac, only one program has not made the move smoothly from
machine to machine in two separate upgrades. This makes the
decision to upgrade and throw away an old machine much easier to
deal with. Viruses and Trojans are rare on Macs and I tend to use
that machine for email since it is safer. The software is also more
consistent as the short cut key strokes tend to all be the same.
Windows does that but to a lesser extent. What I don't like about
it is that they tend to be expensive and Nikon Capture and View
tend to run slower on my Mac. This is a problem with the software,
not the speed of the machine since photoshop doesn't exhibit the
same slowness on that platform. This is caused by inexperienced Mac
programmer since not to many people get good at writing Mac
software since there isn't much "money in it".

I currently have a Mac laptop and a Windows desktop. I'm am
considering switching that around since I need a bit more speed out
of my laptop when I'm on the road and, as you mentioned, I can get
a G5 dual for my desktop. (Although it would be very expensive to
configure it correctly.)

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

Terry H. said:

Anthony,

Since you own both, could & would you tell us (me) what you like &
dislike about both. I would rather hear it from someone who uses
both than others who just speculate. I've always used PC's because
it was main stream and cheaper than a Mac. Mac's had always been
more reliable so it made since for graphics artist to use them, but
the impression I get is that they are pretty much online with
reliablity and speed (G5 is now faster I hear, but PC will probably
match soon?) So what's your take..?
I use PC's, but got nothing against Mac's, they are just tools and
you should use what ever works best for your sistuation, same as
with Nikon or Canon. Use what works best for your needs. I prefer
Nikon (mainly because it was suguested 20 plus years ago by
other(s) to buy Nikon, if it was'nt Nikon, it probably would have
been Contax. Canon just didn't come up in discussion at that time)
, but I believe Canon is a great system too.

Terry

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Darren
Nikon D1x, 17-35, 28-70, and sb80DX
Canon Digital Rebel, 18-55, 28-135 IS, 75-300

Thanks Ron for your info. I have really cause a ruckus in a good forum didn't I. I hope everyone will forgive and forget about a different stated facts.

If we can lets get down to just Nikon issues. I have used or demo all Digital 35 MM style cameras recently and found that I liked different features on different Cameras I found soom only to be best shooting sRGB and saving out to JPGs and others to work best for Raws and AdobeRGB settings. But all had decent images if you are just shooting for pleasing color. I find the real difference when shooting for correct color in different light settings. Meaning Catalog style shots. Matching hardline tabletop product shots to a fashion photo with the same product on. If you know what I mean, this is were the men stood out. White balance, product color, flesh color, different light settings, etc... software is just a critical. CS does make life simpler but not if I am batching and going through alot of selects. This topic is open for discussion. Dealing with CMYK I have not felt comfortable with batching them out of Nikon Capture. There is a big difference with the way it looks compared with CS conversion. Even with the same ICC profile selected. Darren

Ron Frank said:

Darren Chesnut said:

From Raw, color corect, WB, sharpen,
save out. Currently this takes 3 softwares and all run slow compare
to others, good features but slow and alot of steps.

Click to expand...

I use CS. That's it. One software product. It does everything I
need to do from RAW conversion to printing.

Ron Frank said:

And to print a
contact sheet takes for EVER...

Click to expand...

I guess this depends upon the printer used. Printing contact
sheets takes me no longer than printing most 8x10's.

Ron Frank said:

I am currently running system OSX
10.3.3 and in the feild I shoot to a to a 1 GIG powerbook and in
studio I shoot to a 2x2 GIG G5 tower. It seams that Nikon is
designing for the PC Sport shooter if you know what I mean with
some studio user features. I have not used C1Pro yet but have herd
good things. They keep pushing off the Mac Nikon users.

Click to expand...

Yeah there is a reason...see below.

Ron Frank said:

Just a note, 98% of all Studio Digital Photographers use Macintosh,
78% Sports photographers use Mac and are converting over very fast.

Click to expand...

Umm, where exactly do you get these figures? As PC's make up 90%
(approx) of the market, I seriously doubt that 98% of the studio's
out there use Mac. In fact, based on the tool kits that I've seen
in Studio Photography and Design, many shops have both platforms
for some odd reason. But some use Mac's and others PC's, and some
both!

Ron Frank said:

It seams the Camera compaines need to improve there direction with
their software and platforms they a focusing primarly for.

Click to expand...

Nikon focuses on the PC because that is were the market is largest.
I'm not just talking pro's, but PC's are a MUCH larger segment of
the computer market. EVERY company I've worked for (large
corporations) use PC's.

Ron Frank said:

Please jump in and lets get a discussion on were we need Nikon to
devolop the software.

Click to expand...

Nikon seems to be doing a reasonable job of upgrading Capture. I'm
not clear exactly where you want them to go, but if it's turnning
capture into a full blown PS type of product, don't hold your
breath.

Leaf makes a product for their backs that maybe the cat's meow in
one step processing. Actually I'm not sure it's even leaf, but one
of the big MF digital back makers. Apparently the RAW support is
fantastic, it's very fast, and it has most of the things that pros
need to do post processing as well. I read a review in (I think)
digital pro photo...it was impressive.

Ron

Click to expand...

--
Darren
Nikon D1x, 17-35, 28-70, and sb80DX
Canon Digital Rebel, 18-55, 28-135 IS, 75-300

I don't see what image size has to do with the sensor size. Resolution determines the image size in a digital camera, not sensor size. As long as they bring up the resolution, I see no need at this time to increase the size of the sensor.

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

Darren Chesnut said:

I am. I don't care about the 1.5x factor. I will jst get a
different lens. I need the image size so that I won't have to rely
on the software to enlarge the photos. Dealing in the CMYK world
300DPI you can only bllow up a photo so much. and beleave me you
can see the difference between a true 5 MEG A Pixel camera and a
11, 14, or even a 16 MEG A Pixel back when you are going to a full
page gate fold or even a Trade Show Sinage size like 8' x 8'
banners.

Click to expand...

If that is true that would be fine with me. Is that like what Fuji is doing with the S3?

Anthony Medici said:

--
Tony

http://homepage.mac.com/a5m http://www.pbase.com/a5m

Darren Chesnut said:

I am. I don't care about the 1.5x factor. I will jst get a
different lens. I need the image size so that I won't have to rely
on the software to enlarge the photos. Dealing in the CMYK world
300DPI you can only bllow up a photo so much. and beleave me you
can see the difference between a true 5 MEG A Pixel camera and a
11, 14, or even a 16 MEG A Pixel back when you are going to a full
page gate fold or even a Trade Show Sinage size like 8' x 8'
banners.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Darren
Nikon D1x, 17-35, 28-70, and sb80DX
Canon Digital Rebel, 18-55, 28-135 IS, 75-300

Darren Chesnut said:

. CS does make life simpler but not if I am batching

Click to expand...

dear Darren

I personally feel that the CS import is producing worse colors than the camera software which does not mean its not possible to get it right with both. For me the CS import is more difficult to tune to get it right (and sometimes I do not succeed to get the 100%)

Anyway regarding the batch processing there is a very nice tool called Dr. Browns image processor which is a script for CS doing all what you need for batch image processing very well.

from a workflow point it is excellent my problem as said before is more with the colors of the CS import...

Carol,

I believe the original comment had to do with studio photographers, not wedding photographers. Wedding photograhers tend to use PC due to the software they use for managing the large volume of images they sell to seniors, weddings, etc.

Professional studio photographers use Macintosh because they spend more time in PhotoShop and other creative programs (Illustrator, Freehand, etc) creating ad layouts or working with graphic designers.

Just look at Hallmark Cards - 800 graphic artists, everyone of them on a Macintosh. Or National Geographic magazine.. or Better Homes and Gardens, etc etc...

PCs are fine if you want to put up with Microsoft's imitation of the Mac interface, new viruses every week, etc.

Carol Steele said:

Elk Meadow Images said:

Carol,

If you read the independent reports from IDC, Gartner Group, and
others, you will find the great majority of studio photographers,..........

Click to expand...

I don't know where these people purportedly do their research, it
certainly isn't in the real world. Of around 50 professional
photographers that I know personally, only around 10 use a Mac. A
recent survey in the Digiatal Wedding Forum (worldwide and with
about an 80% pro user base) showed a 50:50 split in usage.

Whilst it may be true that more design houses use Macs than PC's,
this has more to do with tradition and the cost of switching
systems rather than speed and stability.

--
Carol

Click to expand...

Tell you what Dave... come to Jackson WY next week and ask Rob Galbraith what he USES... its a Mac. And I'll check to be sure, but I believe you are quoting the specs from Rob's test with a G4 processor Macintosh, not a G5.

If it would make any difference, I would quote the current performance tests of PhotoShop on both platforms, which were conducted against a Dell dual processor Pentium 4 at 3.x Ghz... it lost badly.

But it wouldn't change your mind now, would it? So, enjoy having a new virus or two every week... and figuring out what video card driver to load, etc.

I'll take the Macintosh with a very stable Unix kernel, whose ports are shipped closed to hackers, with the best networking speeds around... and the best integration between applications... Just remember, even Intel now agrees that processor speed is not the only measure of performance.

Dave Harpe said:

Anticipating the anticipated, "Sez who" response:

Rob Galbraith:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6451-6423
"Ultimately, the Mac tied or led the PC in 19 of the 77 tests that
comprise this report. Put another way, the PC was faster in 58 of
77 benchmarks."

pcworld.com:
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,112749,pg,8,00.asp
"Apple Power Macs did well on Photoshop, but the 64-bit AMD-based
systems won handily on most tests."

And on and on and on.

Another factor is the FACT that you get much more bang for your
buck when you buy PC hardware versus Mac. Someone that spends
$2,000 on an Intel PC will be in MUCH better shape than someone
that spends that same $2,000 in an Apple store. It's not even
close, really. $2,000 will barely get you a single CPU Mac G5 @
1.6GHz with 1GB of RAM. That same $2,000 at Dell will get you a
Dual CPU Xeon @ 2.4 GHz with 1GB RAM. Or you could go with a
single CPU configuration and bump your CPU speed up to 3.2GB w/2 MB
of L3 cache.

It may make you feel better to use a Mac. But don't kid yourself
into thinking it's faster, cheaper or anything other than cool
looking.

Dave

Click to expand...

Dave Harpe said:

Elk Meadow Images said:

Carol,
The performance of PhotoShop on Macintosh is substantially faster
than Windows based systems, even though the code in PhotoShop is
80% the same on both platforms.

Click to expand...

That's simply not true.

Dave

Click to expand...

Yes, it is true....

Derrick,

If you have worked in IT for 11 years, then you KNOW that viruses are a major problem and 99.7% (from Brightmail's statistics) are from Windows...

Derrick Siu said:

Derrick

adanac said:

It's all about freedom to choose whatever component you want to
create your machine... Mac is a Mac... doesn't get more exciting
than that

Again, every machine has it's advantages and I'll just quit at that.

I don't know why people get so "attached" to certain camps... as if
they were getting paid as the 'official spokesperson" for them.

Cheers,

Arjh

Pride said:

Well all the graphic design and photo pros I know ( and its quite a
few ) almost all use Macs. In fact, I cannot think of one off the
top of my head who uses PC.

OSX Panther is fantastic. Simple as that.

Don't care about the measurebating to be honest. Mac works,
does'nt have any glitches , and is not bothered by viruses.

Life is sweet. Can't imagine going back to PC ( we had both until
Panther came along) ,and the protection from viruses is reason
enough.

Each to their own I guess. If people are happy with their windows
box - cool. If they prefer Mac, fine.

I cannot understand how people become confrontational about
inanimate objects..they are just tools

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Elk Meadow Images said:

Derrick,

If you have worked in IT for 11 years, then you KNOW that viruses
are a major problem and 99.7% (from Brightmail's statistics) are
from Windows...

Click to expand...

Two words: Norton Antivirus.

It ain't that tough to prevent virus problems...

Elk Meadow Images said:

But it wouldn't change your mind now, would it? So, enjoy having a
new virus or two every week... and figuring out what video card
driver to load, etc.

Click to expand...

I have never had a virus on any of the FIVE machines that I currently have. Know why? I don't open attachments from strangers, and I keep a copy of Norton's Antivirus running on each machine. Not exactly rocket science, is it?

Not sure what you're getting at with the video driver comment. Ever heard of an installer disc? Besides, it's not like you have to do it more than ONCE ever couple of years...

What I'll continue to enjoy is the advantage of having lots of choices in hardware, software and pricing instead of the monolithic world of Apple.

Dave

Elk Meadow Images said:

Carol,

I believe the original comment had to do with studio photographers,
not wedding photographers.

Click to expand...

Depends on your definition of studio photographers - most wedding photographers here in the UK also do studio portrait photography - and the majority of those that I know use PC's. If you are talking about commercial studio's then I would have no idea of the figures as I don't know many commercial photographers personally enough to know which systems they are on.

--
Carol