Chris Cookson

Joined on Aug 27, 2006


Total: 18, showing: 1 – 18
In reply to:

VENTURE-STAR: This does seem a little strange to me. Nikon has been moving away from the amateur market in recent years, but there must be a market in Brazil for pro quality cameras? As I recall, Canon were starting to make or assemble cameras in Brazil a few years ago, so there should be a strong market down there. I assume Nikon will continue to operate in the other South American countries like Argentina, Chile, Peru, etc?

Might this actually say something about Brazil's economy, the political situation, or the level of crime in the country? Or does it mean that Nikon has its own problems and this is the start of a considerable business contraction?

I suspect taxes and bureaucracy could be a big part of it. Even if only 10% of Brazilians have the money to afford a DSLR, that's still around 20 million people, getting up there towards Australia, and certainly far bigger than NZ, but Nikon seems to be fairly active in NZ with only about 4.5 million people.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2017 at 23:56 UTC
In reply to:

PhotoRotterdam: I use Lightroom for photo management (as a DAM) and DxO for conversion of RAW images.

Been trying other DAM's, but so far haven't found any that can match the support of Lightroom for key words, IPTC etc.

I see the end coming (like Aperture was killed of), so what will be a durable solution? I only want a proper photo management tool with great cataloging and tagging features which plays nicely with other post processing tools.

Interesting... Lightroom's keyword hierarchy is a killer feature for me, but otherwise, Corel Paintshop Pro has quite reasonable organisation capabilities, with an editor that's not too bad either, dirt cheap, and available on perpetual license.
The main reason I don't use it apart from having a CC photography subscription, is the lack of a decent RAW editor.
If I had something else to do the RAW conversion, then I could use it for most of my organisation and editing needs.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 21:50 UTC
In reply to:

danieladougan: Meh, try RawTherapee. It's very sophisticated, and it's free.

sophisticated != easy to use. I tried RawTherapee for a while before I surrendered and got an Adobe CC subscription, and I've found Lightroom makes it far easier to get results I'm happy with.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 19:56 UTC
On article Review: Affinity Photo 1.5.2 for desktop (302 comments in total)

Is there anyone who's used this and Paintshop Pro who can comment on how they compare? PSP is dirt cheap for a perpetual license too, but the RAW editor is an embarrassment. As an actual editor, I found PSP not too bad, and actually use it occasionally even though I have Photoshop CC, because PSP has both 32 and 64 bit versions, and the 32 bit one will work with the native software for my scanner whereas Photoshop CC won't.
PSP also supports 16 bit layers, which Elements doesn't, so until I got my CC subscription, I found PSP a useful step up in functionality in many respects over Elements.
Affinity Photo also seems quite reasonably priced, so perhaps a comparison with other second tier editing software would be interesting. eg Elements, PSP, Affinity, Gimp?

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2017 at 21:19 UTC as 62nd comment

My DSLR would be in the $500 category, and my smartphone is in the sub $100 category, and does all I need except photography.
The smartphones that can do good photography typically are not cheap, potentially up there in the same price range as my DSLR, but they still can't do as much photographically.
My wife on the other hand, just wants to press a button and take a photo. She has a cheap smartphone too, but rarely touches a camera.
I'd make a comparison with smartphones and Laptops. Laptop sales have dropped, but there are times when a computer with a real keyboard and screen are far more convenient than a small, touch only screen, and even an entry level laptop has those advantages.
I suppose in the past, someone could have made a similar claim about high quality zooms killing primes. Most of the time, a single zoom does what I need, but there are times I'm very glad I have a couple of primes in my kit.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2017 at 00:48 UTC as 131st comment
In reply to:

Prairie Pal: Raw conversion is very important to many photographers. What's PSP raw conversion like now? And are there camera updates periodically?

My impression is that Aftershot is vastly inferior to Lightroom/ACR in terms of RAW editing.
However if you have Lightroom standalone or some other RAW processor, Paintshop Pro is potentially a viable alternative for people who don't want an Adobe subscription.
Lightroom can send TIFFs to Paintshop Pro, and Paintshop Pro is a step up on Elements, as it supports 16 bit layers, and scripting/macros like full Photoshop.
Photoshop can still do more than Paintshop Pro, but not everyone may need everything that Photoshop offers, and plugins like Nik, Topaz, On1 etc work with Paintshop Pro.

Link | Posted on Aug 12, 2017 at 09:49 UTC
In reply to:

yanisha: Generally the same philosophy behind open source software -- which many photographers use and are glad to have and have no qualms about.

Not quite. Open source software generally comes with licenses. Even the permissive BSD license requires you to retain the copyright notice. It's a bit like CC Attribution license.
Unsplash dispenses with even the requirement for credits.
Whereas open source can make sense particularly with big software projects if you're a developer yourself, as you give some of your own work away, but receive the work of others for free in return, I'm not sure about photography.
It might make sense for design agencies that happen to have people who take photos on staff. Eg if you're a web design agency and take your own photos in house, but suddenly need something that would be expensive to set up, then sharing and using Upsplash might make good sense if you're charging on a project basis.
It doesn't look so good for full-time or freelance photographers without other skills.

Link | Posted on Aug 5, 2017 at 08:04 UTC
On article Google will no longer develop Nik Collection (392 comments in total)

Google seems to have a habit of doing this kind of thing.
While Picasa was extremely limited as an editor, it was a decent photo organiser, and I think the facial recognition was actually a bit better than Lightroom.
Picasaweb had a nice API so it was possible to create interesting web apps to do stuff with the images. Google Photos has no such capability, and apparently there's no plan to add it.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 09:59 UTC as 13th comment
On article 10 cool DIY photography techniques that anyone can do (13 comments in total)
In reply to:

chshooter: Copying some "creative ideas" from a video on YouTube that is viewed by thousand of viewers in search of the latest photography trend or fad is about the most uncreative thing one can do

The flash modification one was OK, as there are probably lots of ways to modify flash output without being an exact replica of someone else's idea.
The magnifying glass one? I tried that I think 25 years ago!
Honestly though, I think it's all about getting Youtube views. The video has quite a cliched style just like lots of clips showing new ways to bake an apple pie or apply makeup.
Someone must have made a Youtube video "10 ways to make your Youtube video stand out", and everyone has gone out and imitated it. ;-)

Link | Posted on May 18, 2017 at 00:55 UTC
On article Adobe Creative Suite 6 has been officially retired (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

tlinn: While I understand the concern of many who worry that Adobe will pull the rug out from under LR perpetual license customers, this move doesn't make that event any more likely. This is the predictable culmination of the announcement Adobe made almost four years ago. Adobe has said or done nothing since to signal a change in policy on LR and perpetual licenses.

I think there is good reason for Adobe to continue to provide LR with a perpetual license option, but not Photoshop.
LR is used for organising image archives - with some RAW editing thrown in for good measure. Photoshop is an editor.
For archival purposes, it makes sense that it's possible to be able to buy a license once and be sure that the software will continue to function for years.
For editing, not so much. The archived results of editing need to be accessible, but LR can achieve that.
Say an artist ends up deceased, then Photoshop becomes somewhat irrelevant, as it's no longer their art if you open it up and start making adjustments to it, however if they have a well organised library of images LR makes sense to access their image collection, and updates become irrelevant if the original creator is no longer adding to it.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 22:07 UTC
On article Corel PaintShop Pro X9 arrives with improved workflow (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

AkashRana: Not sure how much of an improvement this is over the last version as after using X8 and photoshop side by side, I am far from impressed

In order of decreasing functionality:
Photoshop CC
Paintshop Pro
Photoshop Elements

I worked up from the bottom, starting with Elements now with Photoshop CC
The biggest fatal flaw with Paintshop Pro is its complete lack of decent RAW processing, but compared to Elements it was quite a step up wtih full 16 bit support, scripting, and other stuff that Elements lacks.
If Corel charged twice the price it currently goes for, and fixed all the weak points it would be excellent value for money.
As it stands, it's a useful alternative to Elements, but it's not up to Photoshop standard.
That said, I've been surprised to find a number of professional photographers using only Elements.
Lightroom + Paintshop Pro might be an interesting option for people who don't like subscriptions. Lightroom provides the RAW capabilities PSP lacks, but can spit out 16 bit TIFFs from RAW for further editing in PSP.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 00:48 UTC

I still have the successor to the S5100/5500, the S5200/5600.
I upgraded to an S200EXR then a Pentax K-x and current use a Pentax K-50.
The close-up capabilities of the S5200/5600 are superior to the S200EXR or the Pentaxes with kit lenses. Clearly a DSLR with a dedicated macro lens would be vastly superior to the S5200/5600, but a good macro lens costs considerably more than what the S5200/5600 is worth, and although the camera is only 5M pixels, I'm not wanting to print big posters of bugs or fungi, so it's still handy to have around, and it's cheap enough that I'm prepared to let my preschool daughter learn photography with it.
Looking at my Lightroom catalogue, I've captured more images with that camera than any other, including some that have done very well in competitions.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2016 at 21:54 UTC as 35th comment
On article Picasa will be phased out in favor of Google Photos (154 comments in total)
In reply to:

ObiDonQuixote: I've been using Picasa Desktop for many years, and also started using Google Photos when it was released. It seemed like the start of a great service, but is clearly missing many critical features.

That said, the one feature that has kept me loyal to picasa desktop for so many years is the ability to add/edit location data (geotags) to my images. To date, I have yet to find any software that will offers this feature is a simple/easy-to-use way. Whether they plan to in the future or not (doubtful) Google Photos clearly doesn't offer the feature either.

Does anyone know of a decent deskop application that allows geotagging? Would appreciate any suggestions.

Lightroom isn't free, but it does allow geotagging, and in some respects is better than Picasa, as if you have a bunch of photos taken in a similar location, you display the map, then drag the thumbnails from the list onto the map. You can tag a bunch of photos really quickly that way.
If you don't like the idea of paying for a subscription, Paint Shop Pro has a similar geotagging feature, once again allowing you to geotag a bunch of images at once and it's quite cheap.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 20:31 UTC
On article Picasa will be phased out in favor of Google Photos (154 comments in total)

The one thing Google does really well - search, they've decided you no longer need to be able to do with images on your computer, but instead you should upload them all to the cloud first.
Did Google actually consider that some people might not want or be able to upload their entire image collection to the cloud, and that they might like a good desktop search and organising tool to help them locate the images they do want to put in the cloud?

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 02:15 UTC as 45th comment
On article Picasa will be phased out in favor of Google Photos (154 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daniel Lauring: This seem akin to Apple killing Aperture for the Photos app. They aren't interested in software for professionals or even enthusiasts. They make software for Instagramers and FB posters.

This leaves the market wide open to companies like Adobe and their Photoshop Elements.

Corel offers a reasonably priced deal with Paint Shop Pro, and it's a perpetual license vs subscription for Adobe's CC.
To put it kindly, Paint Shop Pro has poor RAW editing capabilities, but compared to Picasa, it's still a step up, and unlike Elements which is crippled with limited 16 bit support, PSP fully supports 16 bit for most operations. It's no Photoshop, but it's fairly cheap, does everything Picasa can do and more.
I have Picasa, Elements, PSP and Adobe CC acquired in that order.
The thing I really like about Picasa ,which beats all the others, is the ability to locate images anywhere on your computer even if you can't remember where you've put them.
Being free, I've frequently recommended it to clients with no image editing software as a safe and easy way to find and email me images or to export and put on their web sites if they maintain their sites themselves.
Google Photos is no use for this, and much as I like Lightroom, it's not something I'd recommend to a novice.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 00:33 UTC
On article 10 Photo Editing Programs (that aren't Photoshop) (352 comments in total)

I guess the article was trying to stick to exactly 10 for a nice round number and not feature too many products from the same vendor, but hey there are two Adobe products listed, so why not make it a dozen, and add a couple more from Corel which has always seemed a bit like the 'poor folks Adobe'.

Corel After Shot Pro offers similar features to Lightroom at a cheaper price, and Corel Draw Graphics Suite X6 probably comes closest to Adobe suite with Corel Photo Paint as its imaging editing component with support for phootoshop plugins, but also with a decent vector graphics and page layout component, 16 bit and CMYK support. It's not super cheap, but it's cheaper than Adobe and offers both subscription and perpetual licenses.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2013 at 22:01 UTC as 184th comment
On article Fujifilm releases X-S1 premium EXR 26X superzoom (383 comments in total)
In reply to:

olakiril2: 920g for a 2/3"!
Ok with a lens but still..

Apart from the larger zoom range, and the HD video, I'm not sure what this will do that the S200EXR doesn't. The S200EXR is a fairly heavy camera too, and was realtively expensive. The sample images suggest the same EXR blurring as the S200, especially with green foliage. I'd like to see how this handles in high ISO with the CMOS sensor, as that could perform differently to the CCD in the S200EXR, but so far I can't see any reason to rush to 'upgrade', although this probably is a more realistic successor to the S200EXR than the HS10 and 20.

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2011 at 10:32 UTC

Hopefully this will overcome some of the limitations of the S200EXR. In EXR modes the DR or noise are excellent depending on which EXR mode is selected, but fine detail is blurred even in 12MP mode.
The HS10 and HS20 extended the zoom but went to a smaller sensor than the S200EXR, so I've been thinking of going to DSLR.
The X-S1 might tempt me to stick with Fuji, but it will need to be priced right, and offer a significant improvement in IQ over the S200EXR in all modes.
When I bought the S200EXR it wasn't a great deal cheaper than an entry level DSLR, and it starts to get a bit shaky at full zoom without a tripod or higher ISO although it's not a 'super zoom'.
I occasionally make some quite large prints, so it's a shame the X-S1 sensor is only effectively 6MP in EXR mode. Put the 16/8MPixels EXR of the HS20 on a large sensor, with a reasonable zoom, and you've just about got my ideal all-in-one.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2011 at 09:32 UTC as 11th comment
Total: 18, showing: 1 – 18