esco

Lives in United States New York, NY, United States
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.photographerdan.com
Joined on Aug 16, 2006

Comments

Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

NickyB66: Make OIS or IBIS mandatory for all photographers visiting Zion, problem solved (most of the time) :-)

I'm sorry Nicky but your comment essentially made you pretty vulnerable to the wolves out here. . .most people realize that by the time I.S. is kicking in - you're essentially in survival mode and you're trying to really squeeze whatever precious light there is to even get the shot which is great when you get lucky enough to score a great keeper or two but it's far from optimal - one would imagine at that point the noise and DR to be a huge issue for a vivid landscape.

A tripod with even a mediocre camera and kit lens setup is capable of sublime results vs a hand held single shot scene with a "Fuji X Lens and X Body" setup that looks every bit a salvaged photo because of the lack of proper photography technique.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 19:38 UTC
In reply to:

thinkinginimages: I on the current version, but what I'm looking for is a massive streamlining and optimization. More like redefining what LR is. So much has been tacked on since the first release. The DAM is good. Editing is OK - but there's something not quite right there, and never has been. It's too aggressive about writing history states, and that slows it down. Those can be cached and committed when idle. Library and Develop should be combined. Do we really need Books, Maps, People, Web? White balance and color adjustments need to be better thought out. Import and convert to DNG is still hopelessly slow. I can think of more given time.

Those wanting all of that functionality that LR Classic had - essentially treating it as a Light Photoshop. . .may be better off with Elements instead. They'll also bypass the subscription that they're all whining about too.

Everyone else I know tend to have treated it as an advanced bridge with PS doing much of the heavy lifting for the most part. And while it may sound like i'm downplaying it by calling it an advanced bridge, there is great value in being able to crop, do global adjustments and batch edits at a blazing speed like it once was.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 17:53 UTC
In reply to:

thinkinginimages: I on the current version, but what I'm looking for is a massive streamlining and optimization. More like redefining what LR is. So much has been tacked on since the first release. The DAM is good. Editing is OK - but there's something not quite right there, and never has been. It's too aggressive about writing history states, and that slows it down. Those can be cached and committed when idle. Library and Develop should be combined. Do we really need Books, Maps, People, Web? White balance and color adjustments need to be better thought out. Import and convert to DNG is still hopelessly slow. I can think of more given time.

This is actually how i feel about what they did with LR CC. They've stripped away a lot of what made this software bloated and redundant for users of photoshop as well.

Lightroom was intended to be paired with PS as it was never meant to be the all-in-one solution that many photographers here have made it out to be. It takes an enormous amount of resources to scroll through gigs of raw files and the ability to edit them on the fly with local adjustments and to freely choose another file - rinse and repeat. With photoshop your resources aren't spread thin as you're working on one file at a time usually and well maybe that's how the workflow should be guided as since many don't seem to see it that way. It has always been that way for me and many others who also understood that hey this lightroom thing isn't mean't to replace the functions that photoshop does really really well already.

LR is a DAM software first. Leave the advanced stuff for PS where it's better anyway.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 17:34 UTC
In reply to:

Denis of Whidbey Island: I'm trying to understand why people would want to stand in the same spot as a dozen other photographers. The only time I took an on-site workshop was at Joshua Tree and I only spent time with the group in the lecture sessions. I learned from the instructor (John Shaw) each day, then went into the park or surrounding areas to practice what he taught.

I can tell you as a art scholar and instructor at one point of my life that the best way of learning is to go out and do it. Come back to your mentor(s) and ingest an honestly good critique and they will tell you how to rectify any issues or guide you to where you'll want to be but they'll also emphasize that this is your journey, not theirs.

You will learn a hell of a lot more about the craft and about yourself with this approach vs the hordes of people out in the same exact spot doing the same exact thing and receiving the same exact instructions.

To merely mimic what someone else is doing over and over isn't the path to finding yourself in this art. . .

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 17:21 UTC
In reply to:

Greg OH: So, who uses shutter speeds so low that a monopod won't suffice?

A shot exposed to get the best detail out of the sky, A neutral shot with blown out skies and a shot for exposing the best detail out of the foreground. Some do 2 frames or even dozens but the idea is capturing the detail you need to finish the job.

Edit to your taste even if it's just to retain the integrity of what you saw I can guarantee you this won't happen unless you process. You could also play around with graduated ND's and such but that doesn't compensate for the fact that you'll still need slow shutter speeds to keep your iso low and your aperture deep (I use FF and still do this) to have a file that won't fall apart in post.

These are the fundamentals. This is also why those huge large format film cameras were so highly desired for landscape photography back in the ansel adam days - they needed to capture as much detail and range possible as to have the headroom to finish the job in the darkroom.

Contrary to popular belief, capturing was just the beginning.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

mart1234: Easy.. bring three monopods and some tape.

this. . . . .i've spent half of my time in Zion actually not photographing but instead enjoying the beauty and fully being in the moment. You really don't feel like you've experienced much when most of your time is spent tinkering with a camera and the hordes of photographers who often carry an entitled attitude for having paid for a workshop really detracts from everyone elses experience.

A good workshop instructor will LIMIT their group size because lets be real theirs only so much quality time you can dedicate to each individual and they should also emphasize that these park lands are for the greater use of the people/public and that paying for a workshop doesn't entitle you to any more benefits than anyone else in the park.

Yes i'm a photographer and i'm willing to recognize that some of us can be an annyoing bunch!

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 15:32 UTC
In reply to:

NickyB66: Make OIS or IBIS mandatory for all photographers visiting Zion, problem solved (most of the time) :-)

Something tells me you've never been to this part of the world or heck even inside a forest on a sunny day. . .even the best FF cameras coupled with the best lenses and the best photographers in the world couldn't properly capture a vivid scene at Zion (or any high dr scene) in a single shot.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 15:27 UTC
In reply to:

MaxiMax: Sometimes, I wonder how do pro's make a living when they have to spend zillions in hardware and software so they do not become "outdated".

spending just $10 a month or ($120) a year on software vs $1,300K on photoshop software plus $200 for lightroom to not "rent" or have the ability to "own" every couple of years (you're paying for a license of usage regardless) helps a bit too. . . .

I kind of wonder if adobe just sold lightroom for $120 which included 12 months of updates vs marketing it as a subscription service would qualm some of the complaints people have. For me personally It doesn't matter how it's worded.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 15:10 UTC
In reply to:

MaxiMax: Sometimes, I wonder how do pro's make a living when they have to spend zillions in hardware and software so they do not become "outdated".

My pc builds (minus monitor) have all costed less than any pro lens or body.

The responses by some of the pc fanboys are exactly addressing what you're pointing out. They're willing to save 50% of the cost of computing by putting together a powerful computer inside a questionable looking box that won't get any thumbs up by other photographers that are part of the mac tribe. A couple of years down the road they can pop in a stick or two of ram and or add a mid-level videocard and extend the life of that pc.

Programs feel and function identically across both platforms.These folks are going for what gives them the most bang for their buck regardless of what logo, idle desktop environment or aesthetic it possesses.

Mac's are designed beautifully (I recommend them to people that aren't creatives) I won't deny that but my logical brain kicks in and starts to ask: "does any of this matter to me when i'm crunching away on a 50mp file?"

Nope, performance wins everytime.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: 12 GB of RAM? That rules out most laptops, and means that my desktop will need to be replaced to take advantage of the improvements.

I agree. . . .8gb of ram and a spinning platter hard drive + a 50mp file still doesn't compute very well is all i'm saying

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 14:29 UTC
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: 12 GB of RAM? That rules out most laptops, and means that my desktop will need to be replaced to take advantage of the improvements.

The point that was made is that we have photography technology moving at a pace that is outpacing a lot of people's computer setups. We have still image files rivaling what video files were a few years ago. Only MF shooters were dealing with this kind of data and they had pro workstations.

8Gb's may be fine for jpegs, d700 raws etc. . . - not so much for raws coming out of the latest nikon, canon or sony FF camera. Math tells me that those cameras will easily munch 50% more storage, ram and processing power.

My 8gb laptop did fine with my 5d mk1 files but still slow with pano's and hdr. . .I'm not sure it's resonable for me to expect my laptop to even remotely perform well with a 5ds. . .

My desktop built a couple of years ago has 32 gigs of ram and an 8 core amd cpu built on a budget. . . it cruising along just fine.

8gb is a serious bottleneck if you're a creative and it's the standard amount of ram that they're putting in low end computers which is already a sign to up the ante.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 20:30 UTC
In reply to:

cpugourou: This lightroom speed issues are due to raw files getting fatter as well as low ball laptop or apple computers.
For a mordern 46MP raw file, 16Go ram sounds minimal to manipulate multiple files.

Also most should consider trashing their apple device and use a modern PC or laptop.

Not really a tact response, i'm sure it'll ruffle some feathers but you speak a lot of truth.

LR Classic is slow. . . but I do get your point. . .some on here operating on a very consumer friendly Imac with a single hdd drive which are already being taxed by their current o.s. and programs mated with horrible igp's. . .with a reaction of disbelief even at the pedestrian 12gb's of ram suggested for improvement. . .

Mathematically 8gb of ram and single HDD isn't gonna cut it for any software handling hundreds of your 50mp raw files at any given moment. . . .you've got serious bottlenecks to address

I can only imagine how video editing forums look as people are trying to shove 4k raw video footage into similar setups. . .

There is a reason why there was at one point in time an apple workstation(overpriced but it had its market) looked like a PC with multiple drives. The market was not happy with the new pro and left and those that thought they could get by with an imac. . .well. . .

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 17:24 UTC
In reply to:

plantdoc: How about some testing on a more common PC? What % of LR users have PC's in this performance and price range? These results aren't meaning to me with a 4 year old I7 PC with 24 gigs of RAM and SSD and Nvidia card. Import and export speed are the least important aspects compared to zoom, editing, etc.
Greg

You should have pretty decent performance with those specs - what os are you running? I'm running a similar setup and it flies but i'm using win10 and am very keen about system updates and maintenance.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 15:13 UTC
In reply to:

Clint Dunn: So a machine with 32/64GB of RAM will be 30% quicker...that's great. How about the majority of us that are running 16GB??? Not everyone running LR is using a $6000 computer.

panorama and hdr junkies need that ram like a druggie needs their fix i'm afraid =D 32gb could definitely be used by them (and me)

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 15:10 UTC
In reply to:

SarahTerra: I just tried converting to Lightroom CC, you lose your folder structure so unless you have your albums sorted into collections you lose them all...

The new UI does seem better and it is slightly faster....but There is also no history lol....

So Not ready for real work yet...

Check back in 6 months maybe...

Sarah. . . I highly doubt Adobe is conspiring to hold people's data hostage. . .

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 15:07 UTC
In reply to:

David Mintzer: Adobe hate is the current rage. Nothing they do at this point will assuage the anger of many. They waited to long to address issues that have been prevalent for years. Having said that, I'm still going to use their products. I don't have the time to learn something new, and both LR and Photoshop work well enough for me that changing is not happening. No use getting upset about--it is what it is.

Lightroom classic does indeed slow down even on cutting edge setups. . .that's common knowledge by now. The phenomenon seems to occur more so when you're working on it for extended periods of time. It may never affect you if you're working with jpegs or with smaller batches of files for 30min at a time though.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 15:02 UTC
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: 12 GB of RAM? That rules out most laptops, and means that my desktop will need to be replaced to take advantage of the improvements.

We have phones today with 8gb of ram in them. Most lines of laptop's sold within the last few years can be had with 16gb, 32gb or more. I wouldn't buy a new laptop or desktop with at least those amounts or more in it and then a couple of years down the road adding another 16gb or more for a total of 32gb or 64gb makes it a sound technology path that will serve you well for a decent amount of time depending on how heavy handed you are with layers, hdr etc. . .

The imac's that apple or other pc makes offer for entry level lines with a paltry 8gb aren't ideal for creatives - they'll also more than likely come with slow hdd's, low vram and other bottlenecks. With 8gb you're just skating by. My laptop currently has 8gb(it began life as 4gb of ram) - I can use lr cc and ps cc just fine but if i have a music program, browser and a multi-image panorama being worked on - it's gonna bring it to it's knees. It's not my sole computer, it's always really been my light duty on the go machine.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

SarahTerra: I just tried converting to Lightroom CC, you lose your folder structure so unless you have your albums sorted into collections you lose them all...

The new UI does seem better and it is slightly faster....but There is also no history lol....

So Not ready for real work yet...

Check back in 6 months maybe...

LR was never meant to replace PS and in it's fully mature form overlaps certain features that PS does much better and much faster. Now that LR will be Piggybacked with PS. . .it will be the streamlined DAM solution that it was always supposed to be in the first place with some batch editing and processing thrown in for good measure. If the tools are not intuitive to managing a huge amount of photos then I could frankly do without it being within LR.

LR isn't standalone anymore, it doesn't and won't be that all in one solution that some photographers were trying to make it, it was never meant to be. I think this is the point that people are missing here - Just as C1 never did either.

LR can be seen as an advanced and more functional " Adobe Bridge Cloud" for todays cloud computing environment and it does exactly that, even feels like it in some ways.

Do you really think Adobe are foolish enough to cede the market to Capture One?

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 03:22 UTC
In reply to:

esco: For those that are arguing about how they need to fix LR's speed and that they owe you because you're on a subscription. . . they're still offering you the software you're paying for and it's called LR CC just as they're offering PS CC. LR Classic is now a legacy software.

For those whining about the subscription concept ($120 a yr) Im not sure if buying C1 for $300 is a way of sticking it to the man (adobe) , You're paying more for software that doesn't support all camera brands and many of you still need PS. . .it just doesn't make much sense imo. Using Luminar or Dark Table would make more sense as a sign of protest.

Phase One has no incentive to support their competition's image development as can be illustrated by their lack of Fuji support for the GF. It's a great piece of software but I didn't find it to be significantly faster, it's not as intuitive for my style of workflow and isn't as seamless when vollying back and forth with photoshop.

Because you've never actually owned the software. . .it's an IP that's constantly evolving with licenses sold for the right to use it. . .

And other similar software makers are doing the same thing actually. Capture one will also be forced to evolve because people will want the ability to use it wherever they go. Being limited to desktop isn't much of a value proposition at all when everything around you is headed towards that way of computing.

Is it semantics perhaps that's bothering you? Eventually software no longer becomes supported by the hardware you will be using to stay current and it becomes a huge hassle to try and figure out how you can keep it working. . .

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 01:20 UTC
In reply to:

SarahTerra: I just tried converting to Lightroom CC, you lose your folder structure so unless you have your albums sorted into collections you lose them all...

The new UI does seem better and it is slightly faster....but There is also no history lol....

So Not ready for real work yet...

Check back in 6 months maybe...

The retention of your folder structure or lack therof is a doozy. I've bitten the bullet and decided to just deal with it and re-organize it bit by bit. I don't have confidence for a fast or great solution to this issue.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 19:45 UTC
Total: 34, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »