graybalanced

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 11, 2009

Comments

Total: 1052, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Father Bouvier: Kind of meaningless. These film simulations make sense for jpegs for those who don't know or don't want to do the post processing. They are a crude way of making your image to look acceptable.
But if you do post processing you want to start with the flattest, least modified image. There is no point screwing up your image first and then trying to get to where you want.

@M Lammerse - No, you completely twisted the thread back to where we were trying to get it away from.

An Instagram filter (it's easy to tell you are biased based on who you called it) is usually the "end point." Most people slap the filter on it, think it looks "cool," and call it done.

Several of us in this thread, including me, are saying it can be the opposite for raw shooters, where a preset is not the "end point" but the "starting point."

I just don't see the prejudice against starting from a known good point like a Velvia simulation, and then going from there to create your own final look. Are you saying we should tell art schools to never again their students any paintings by the masters, because young painters should avoid all existing historical styles and always start from zero? That does not seem like the right thing to do. Art has always built upon the styles of others, not as an exact copy, but as a way to teach and then reach a new style.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 23:26 UTC
In reply to:

dudewithcamera: Wouldn't raw shooters kinda want to end up with their own look? To me the profiles make sense for jpeg ...you're basically saying screw it I don't feel like editing raw and these profiles are going to be good enough for me. You're living with the dynamic range that the camera spits out,and you're trying to get metering and white balance right in camera.

I guess the profiles for raw editing are for people who like the vibe of Astia/velvia/chrome/across/Provia but also want to pump up DR beyond what the camera can do in jpeg...

People talk like this is a forced binary choice of "click the Easy button" or "develop your raw from scratch." As long as the software still leaves you full editing control, the choice is not that stark. What's wrong with using a preset as a starting point and then tweaking the sliders some more? Especially if you're learning how to get to a good edit?

I'm saying that and I don't even use presets myself. I create my look from the ground up. But I still see presets as useful, would probably try them out to learn from if I was starting out right now.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 23:44 UTC
In reply to:

Father Bouvier: Kind of meaningless. These film simulations make sense for jpegs for those who don't know or don't want to do the post processing. They are a crude way of making your image to look acceptable.
But if you do post processing you want to start with the flattest, least modified image. There is no point screwing up your image first and then trying to get to where you want.

I don't use presets. But I don't see anything wrong with using these. Since it's raw, this isn't "screwing up your image first," it's just a good starting point and you are free to back off to reveal more detail if you want, it's not like if it was all locked in like a JPEG.

I see this as being analogous to choosing which film you want to shoot with, then editing the scan to get the final look. Nothing wrong with that, and yet this way is more flexible.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 23:40 UTC
On article Instagram update adds threaded comment replies (29 comments in total)
In reply to:

fyngyrz: Instagram doesn't let users post from the desktop. It's pretty useless for anyone using a decent camera until/unless they change that. There are sites out there that support both, and they're going to get my patronage for that very reason.

Just use any cloud service that syncs with your desktop. Export from desktop to synced folder (Dropbox, OneDrive, etc.) then pick it up from the Instagram phone app and upload. It's not really an issue.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 23:24 UTC
In reply to:

DesoloZantas: Tablets and laptops today needs to start putting in USB type-c port connectors so we can go faster in speeds

Faster ports wouldn't help with this drive or most laptops, which only use SATA.

Where you need faster ports is with the high-end PC laptops or MacBook Pros which have nVME storage inside. While the Samsung ad copy here likes to point out how the T5 SSD is 5x faster than a hard drive, NVMe SSDs are 4-5x faster than this T5! If you also have an NVMe drive externally (this is rare), that is when you really need the fastest USB-C ports or a Thunderbolt port.

But as long as either the internal or the external is bottlenecked by a 500-600MB/sec SATA SSD like this one, you don't need a faster port than what USB.3 already gives you.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 22:13 UTC
In reply to:

Dante Birchen: Sounds like a regular American Guy to me.

There's a difference between "the way we are" and the way we need to behave. Men will always be men, but there is also the idea of "responsibility." We should never ban men from reacting the way we have programmed to be by instinct like any animal, but the difference is that we exist in a civilization...to be civil. We have a choice and responsibility to draw a line between how we react and how we behave.

If he thinks the women around him are attractive, fine, I bet we other men would find those women just as attractive. That is OK. But that doesn't give any of us the right to make disparaging personal remarks, or threats.

The proof? If you're a male, should you "man up" and just take it if your elder photography teacher constantly eyes you up and down, makes comments on your body and clothes, threatens your career, and views scantily clad males on his or her phone while you're in the car? Your answer should be exactly the same of what you should expect of a woman.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2017 at 00:26 UTC

Thanks for linking that. I definitely needed to learn more about this man, even though I was already familiar with some of his images. And his wonderful quote:

"Available light is any damn light that is available!" - W. Eugene Smith

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2017 at 01:07 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

cosinaphile: what is the complaint rate for apple after 2 years

The Verge posted the chart of reader survey results from the Consumer Reports article. In the same reader survey where the Surface Pro lost its recommendation, readers reported the fewest problems with Apple Macs, at the top of the chart. And the margin between Apple and the second place manufacturer was rather large compared to the rest of the field.

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/8/10/16125294/microsoft-surface-consumer-reports-hardware-freezing-shutdowns-problems

This is consistent with the PC Magazine link posted earlier. Macs seem to give people fewer problems.

Even though my own MacBook Pro had to go into the shop twice for motherboard replacements (at no charge) due to a known graphics hardware fault that affected thousands of Mac users. On the other hand, I knew a guy who went through several Surface tablets at his business. He really really wanted to like the Surface, but it broke down so many times he went back to his ThinkPad.

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2017 at 00:58 UTC
In reply to:

matthew saville: If I'm gonna pay good money for a "dummy" flash, I'd rather go on eBay and pick up an "indestructible" Nikon SB 80 for $70-90. Those things just refuse to die; it takes multiple 7-ft falls to concrete to kill one. Most everything else in the budget price range is utterly destroyed on 1st impact.

AmazonBasics represents everything that is wrong with consumerism and the greed of this global economy we have created today. Making crap this cheap is not sustainable on such a massive scale, not until we (the whole human race) can find a way to affordably and safely recycle all this cheap-o electronic junk when it breaks in 1-6 months.

Let's stop it with the downright disposable camera gear, please. Either that or, take extremely good care of your stuff, and budget to replace it once a year anyway.

"AmazonBasics represents everything that is wrong with consumerism and the greed"

Agreed. It's often the same people first complaining "This gear is overpriced, everybody should buy this one that's $25" and then 5 minutes later in another thread complaining "It's immoral that nobody makes things anymore in America!"

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2017 at 23:21 UTC

And yet, the same graybeards who complain about the "selfishness of millennials" will also complain because the latest Canikonsonic was missing a feature "incomprehensible as to its omission because it is so essential to MY photography"

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 23:56 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
On article Throwback Thursday: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: Maybe, they will have a throw back Thursday for the latest version and get to it soon.

If the option with that and other software was to keep files in the PC type directory hierarchy, allowing you to move files and subdirectories around with no side effects and you were not forced to use catalogs, even I might have been interested. After all, it does have some good points.

Fair enough. :)

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 19:46 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: Maybe, they will have a throw back Thursday for the latest version and get to it soon.

If the option with that and other software was to keep files in the PC type directory hierarchy, allowing you to move files and subdirectories around with no side effects and you were not forced to use catalogs, even I might have been interested. After all, it does have some good points.

keepreal, once again, QED does not apply to the end of your post based on what you wrote.

We have already explained that there is no need for Lightroom storage to be separate from or any different than for any other program. I already said imported my existing directory structure which Lightroom preserved and respected as is. Even today, I will process in Lightroom, can let it launch a file into another editor using LR's automatic renaming feature to differentiate the .tif as you said, and when the edit is done the new TIF will already be seen in Lightroom when I return, or can be made to be seen.

Because Lightroom folders are anywhere you like, since they can be the same folders already used, I routinely have other photo software open and edit the images in the folders cataloged by Lightroom if they are better for the job. No problem.

Again...do not confuse LR with other software that imprisons your photos into secret folders. That is not how LR works!

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2017 at 04:22 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: Maybe, they will have a throw back Thursday for the latest version and get to it soon.

If the option with that and other software was to keep files in the PC type directory hierarchy, allowing you to move files and subdirectories around with no side effects and you were not forced to use catalogs, even I might have been interested. After all, it does have some good points.

(continued due to character limit) These misunderstandings are partially Adobe's fault. They use "Import" and "Copy" terminology that freaks people out. "Import" does not really import. It really means "Register in the catalog" since no image files are ever actually "imported" into the Lightroom database. And I already explained how "copy" does not mean "redundant duplicate on the same disk."

For me the catalog is no excuse for "spray and pray." What the catalog does is overcome what the file system is incapable of, with features like virtual copies, tracking and working with images on unmounted disks, and infinite undo history.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2017 at 23:28 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: Maybe, they will have a throw back Thursday for the latest version and get to it soon.

If the option with that and other software was to keep files in the PC type directory hierarchy, allowing you to move files and subdirectories around with no side effects and you were not forced to use catalogs, even I might have been interested. After all, it does have some good points.

@keepreal, who said "The files for images from a quality camera are pretty big. So, Greybalanced, being able to copy them into Lightroom and having to is not acceptable"

Once again...you're not understanding how Lightroom (and programs like it) work. Just about nobody does it that way. Even if you pick "Copy" as the import method, you are typically NOT duplicating images on your hard drive, "Copy" usually means "copy them from the camera card where they are sitting, to your hard drive, as master versions."

You do not undergo any storage penalty for bringing your "really big" files into Lightroom. They take up the same amount of space as they would if you didn't use Lightroom, because they are not duplicated. This is in contrast to for example, Apple Photos, which does make duplicates when you put images in it.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2017 at 23:27 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: Maybe, they will have a throw back Thursday for the latest version and get to it soon.

If the option with that and other software was to keep files in the PC type directory hierarchy, allowing you to move files and subdirectories around with no side effects and you were not forced to use catalogs, even I might have been interested. After all, it does have some good points.

But Lightroom does allow you to use a regular subdirectory structure. That's how I imported my entire existing photo directories when I started using Lightroom. Just tell it to "Add" instead of "Copy" and it will catalog the structure as it is. Inside LR I would locate my images the same way as I did before, but now using the many new benefits of the catalog.

You can move files and folders around, as long as it is done in Lightroom. Yes it's a problem to move them outside Lightroom since LR will lose track of them. This is a personal decision: Is the cost of managing files inside LR more than the benefits of the catalog? If yes, then you use LR. If not, then LR is the wrong solution. But the computer file system is not optimized for photography.

But there are too many people judging Lightroom based on wrong information like "you can't use normal folders or move things around." Even if LR is not the right software for you, at least decide based on true information.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 23:43 UTC
On article Throwback Thursday: Adobe Lightroom 1.0 (124 comments in total)
In reply to:

lathspell: I never got the idea of LR's (or RawTherapee's) GUI. Bibble (before V5), C1 or Silkypix made and make it so much easier to work in a dual or tripple display environment, while LR's GUI has IMO always been a waste of space in either single and multi display setups. All this endless vertical scrolling through the toolsets while there was plenty of unused space on my second monitor - nope, I just couldn't adjust to that kind of workflow. Adobe's PS, AI, ID all have floating toolsets, freely arrangeable anywhere on the deskto; so what on earth made Adobe stick with LR's inflexible GUI?!

(It's my very own theory that 16:9 was only invented to give LR a chance to keep all this vertical nonsense; LR on single 4:3 displays was just *beep* IMO.)

I agree that we should have the freedom to move panels to the second monitor. But my second monitor is always in use in Lightroom. I always have the Grid view of the set of images I'm working in, which means I can hide the Filmstrip on the main monitor to increase space for the image being edited. Or if I am trying to match image edits, I keep multiple images on the second monitor in Survey view so I can see the current state of the image in Develop in the context of the rest of the image set.

It's such an efficient way to work that I miss having a second monitor when I have to use Lightroom on my laptop. At least they added the new Reference view.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 23:29 UTC
In reply to:

scoobysnapstories: is apple trying to take film makers away from adobe and devinci ? lmfao. well is it a smart move?

It may work against Adobe that they require a subscription, but the problem with Final Cut is that it requires payment.

DaVinci Resolve or Avid are currently the most appealing options for budget and student videographers, because Resolve, and as of this week Avid, have fully functional versions available for free. But there's no way to use Final Cut without paying.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 22:12 UTC
In reply to:

rxb dc: Please see https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#mywork.

Basically, copyright protection is automatic and you do not need to register a copyright. The registration seems help in expediting lawsuits against infringing parties but as such, does not seem to add to or detract from your rights as the creator.

** When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

** Do I have to register with your office to be protected?
No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration.”

...

@rxb dc, what you post is _exactly_ the line of thinking that the article is warning us to avoid! The fact that you are under "copyright protection" from the moment of creation is "nice," ...but absolutely useless. It is not enough to help you.

What makes copyright worth anything is giving you the ability to defend your economic interest in a photograph. That only comes with registration. That is why registration matters.

What the US really needs is a change to the law so that small/individual creators can defend their livelihoods without having to file a formal registration. I think it is that way in some other countries. You should be able to show up in court with your raw file and say "I can provide the original raw file and the plaintiff cannot. This image is mine, and so is that money." That is not how it is today.

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2017 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

Danielvb: Well.. you can´t overheat on space, right?

I can see how it would be confusing to some. for example the ISS is held in orbit by Earth gravity, yet the astronauts in the station are weightless, so to a layman it appears there is no gravity in there. Even though they are subject to gravity from the Earth, the Sun, and every other body in the Solar System, even the galaxy; it's just a matter of relative influences.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2017 at 22:34 UTC
In reply to:

Copal Fit: From what I see this article seems correct. Many friends and colleagues use an iphone, and images taken with this phone are relatively speaking better than what I can get from my Android-based Samsung phone camera. This has never been a big issue for me since I only use my cellphone's camera to take a few snapshots. For me a cellphone does simply not replace a good camera (for both digital and film).

Right. The key is he said it is the end of the DSLR "for most people", since most people buy a DSLR because they want those blurred background photos they see in ads and model shoots and portrait studios.

He knows no phone is better than a DSLR for the people who need what a DSLR can really do...but that's not "most people." We are those people who cannot trade a DSLR for a phone. We are not "most people." His comment has us covered just fine.

Link | Posted on Jul 31, 2017 at 22:26 UTC
Total: 1052, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »