14nx 7 weeks on

I realise that - but I shoot tethered a lot and it seems so much easier alongside camera manager. On reflection the other things I like about Photodesk is the ability to cut and paste settings between files so easily, batch click balance multiple files - and also the now adjustable lens optimisation ( I just opened a portrait on a white background in ACR to see the green cast at the top of the frame, nothing to do but go back to photodesk and lens opt. to fix it). If ACR was able to read photodesk settings that would be really, really something.

Flick said:

Flick said:

I find the
magnifier and eyedropper tools indispensible, particularly for
checking image sharpness ( its amazing the difference one slight
bit out of focus can make)

Click to expand...

You can do both in ACR too!

Thanks for the info on Quantum Mechanic.

Click to expand...

Okay, understood

I just don't like the looks in PD. I wish they would give the ability to turn them off and use curves.

SeanS said:

Flick said:

SeanS said:

I find the
magnifier and eyedropper tools indispensible, particularly for
checking image sharpness ( its amazing the difference one slight
bit out of focus can make)

Click to expand...

You can do both in ACR too!

Thanks for the info on Quantum Mechanic.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi Flick,

I use PD for its speed. I have it switched to faster. You will think the shot looks a little pixelated if you go to 100 percent, but if you then go to the "set" button, you've got roughly the same control as levels/curves.

Then if you go to product reduced I think that is about the least impact available. However for speed to look at several different product versions its really quick especially for sepia.

but if you run it at better, the image is correct but slow.

Anyway, I use it to get a quick feel for bulk shots and then use PS CS to do the real work.

Regards

Paul

Flick said:

SeanS said:

Flick said:

Flick said:

I find the
magnifier and eyedropper tools indispensible, particularly for
checking image sharpness ( its amazing the difference one slight
bit out of focus can make)

Click to expand...

You can do both in ACR too!

Thanks for the info on Quantum Mechanic.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I have got to the stage where I use ACR 2.2 almost exclusively. I used to decode using Photodesk, then run Quantum Mechanic Pro to get rid of colour noise artifacts. But ACR is in my opinion a better bet because

• The colour noise slider I think does a slightly better job than QM Pro in removing artifacting and overall colour blotichiness;
• ACR can remove other lens related defects like chromatic abberation and vignetting. CA removal is intuitive with ACR, and this is for me a good enough reason on its own to use ACR over Photodesk.
• You can keep your workflow in Photoshop.

I now only use Photodesk to do a quich check of files for sharpness uing the magnifiier function.

One or two have said PD has higher resolution. I have checked this and on the very limits, maybe it just wins out, but it is so hard to see and such a miniscule diffference (if it exists at all) that I think it is irrelevant.

Quentin

PaulLandscape said:

I use PD for its speed. I have it switched to faster. You will
think the shot looks a little pixelated if you go to 100 percent,
but if you then go to the "set" button, you've got roughly the same
control as levels/curves.

Then if you go to product reduced I think that is about the least
impact available. However for speed to look at several different
product versions its really quick especially for sepia.

but if you run it at better, the image is correct but slow.

Anyway, I use it to get a quick feel for bulk shots and then use PS
CS to do the real work.

Regards

Paul

Flick said:

SeanS said:

Flick said:

PaulLandscape244043 said:

I find the
magnifier and eyedropper tools indispensible, particularly for
checking image sharpness ( its amazing the difference one slight
bit out of focus can make)

Click to expand...

You can do both in ACR too!

Thanks for the info on Quantum Mechanic.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Quentin
http://www.barleigh.com

Quentin, I agree with you. I find ACR and CS brilliant. I don't like the colour PD applies to images. I want ultimate control over my end results, and ACR and CS give me that control with infinite choices and variations, not bound by a specific look.

Quentin (UK) said:

• The colour noise slider I think does a slightly better job than

QM Pro in removing artifacting and overall colour blotichiness;

• ACR can remove other lens related defects like chromatic

abberation and vignetting. CA removal is intuitive with ACR, and
this is for me a good enough reason on its own to use ACR over
Photodesk.

• You can keep your workflow in Photoshop.

I now only use Photodesk to do a quich check of files for sharpness
uing the magnifiier function.

One or two have said PD has higher resolution. I have checked this
and on the very limits, maybe it just wins out, but it is so hard
to see and such a miniscule diffference (if it exists at all) that
I think it is irrelevant.

Quentin

PaulLandscape said:

I use PD for its speed. I have it switched to faster. You will
think the shot looks a little pixelated if you go to 100 percent,
but if you then go to the "set" button, you've got roughly the same
control as levels/curves.

Then if you go to product reduced I think that is about the least
impact available. However for speed to look at several different
product versions its really quick especially for sepia.

but if you run it at better, the image is correct but slow.

Anyway, I use it to get a quick feel for bulk shots and then use PS
CS to do the real work.

Regards

Paul

Flick said:

SeanS said:

Flick said:

Quentin (UK) said:

I find the
magnifier and eyedropper tools indispensible, particularly for
checking image sharpness ( its amazing the difference one slight
bit out of focus can make)

Click to expand...

You can do both in ACR too!

Thanks for the info on Quantum Mechanic.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Quentin
http://www.barleigh.com

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree Quentin. The only thing I use PD for is speed. Its quick to load and gives me 3 automate clicks to see roughly what the shot is gonna look like. This way I can decide if I've got what I want or keep shooting. I should teether, but quite often I do my shots in the sun light outside. Anyway as I said before the real work is doen in PS CS and I don't use Quantum because I think ifthe noise needs more work than the noise slider can hancle, it means I've under exposed and either need to reshoot or blend 2x ACR corrected exposures, one for the highlights and one for the shadows. If I don't get it right then, the shot need to be redone.

I don't think that the digital is as forgiving as many seem to think. I bracket a lot of my shoots so that I can be sure I have got choices for including as much dynamic range as available/possilbe. Underexposed seems to have noise in the shadows.

Hey but that's just my take on it.

Paul

Quentin (UK) said:

• The colour noise slider I think does a slightly better job than

QM Pro in removing artifacting and overall colour blotichiness;

• ACR can remove other lens related defects like chromatic

abberation and vignetting. CA removal is intuitive with ACR, and
this is for me a good enough reason on its own to use ACR over
Photodesk.

• You can keep your workflow in Photoshop.

I now only use Photodesk to do a quich check of files for sharpness
uing the magnifiier function.

One or two have said PD has higher resolution. I have checked this
and on the very limits, maybe it just wins out, but it is so hard
to see and such a miniscule diffference (if it exists at all) that
I think it is irrelevant.

Quentin

PaulLandscape said:

I use PD for its speed. I have it switched to faster. You will
think the shot looks a little pixelated if you go to 100 percent,
but if you then go to the "set" button, you've got roughly the same
control as levels/curves.

Then if you go to product reduced I think that is about the least
impact available. However for speed to look at several different
product versions its really quick especially for sepia.

but if you run it at better, the image is correct but slow.

Anyway, I use it to get a quick feel for bulk shots and then use PS
CS to do the real work.

Regards

Paul

Flick said:

SeanS said:

Flick said:

Quentin (UK) said:

I find the
magnifier and eyedropper tools indispensible, particularly for
checking image sharpness ( its amazing the difference one slight
bit out of focus can make)

Click to expand...

You can do both in ACR too!

Thanks for the info on Quantum Mechanic.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Quentin
http://www.barleigh.com

Click to expand...