GeorgiJuraj

Joined on Mar 20, 2016

Comments

Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Tim Gallo: Now all we need is a proper photoshop ios app....

is affinity photo for ipad not proper enough?
(I do not own it, this is a seriously meant question)

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2021 at 15:07 UTC
In reply to:

Greg62: Would a person get better results by doing scans with no corrections at all, then using Photoshop to make changes to color, sharpness, etc? Would Photoshop be better at this than SilverFast or Vue Scan, etc?
I've been putting off scanning tons of old family negs because of my confusion regarding this question.

speaking for myself this is the way to go. scanning flat and editing elsewhere. you do not have to learn another software and you do not have to rescan when changing parameters afterwards.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2021 at 14:53 UTC
In reply to:

Scott Eaton: The above crops from Silverfast show siginificant sharpness improvement over the Epson and Vuescan samples. It's not subtle...it's significant. Not sure what changed, the editor here needs to address it. Grain in film scans should be razor sharp, not soft and difficult to resolve. It's akin to shooting a camera scene test chart and having the AF be slightly out of focus. Once you achieve the highest rez scan you then resort to grain reduction because you've given your software the best data to play with. Next, color negative film, even if over exposed doesn't challenge scanners in terms of dmax or dnsity range. No need for multipass sampling. For high density slides such as Kodak Ektachrome or classic B&W films this can present some possible improvement.

from my experience the difefrence is only due to software sharpening applied (as noted in the review). scan without sharpening and without grain reduction, you can do it better in the pos AND you can change parameters without need for re-scan.
as for the grain sharpness: go get scanner with better (real) resolution, afaik no flatbed scanner is really good enough for that.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2021 at 14:50 UTC
In reply to:

Amnon G: What about film scanning services and standalone scanners? Is a home scanner with film capabilities the best approach for dozens of films?

it depends. do you have films in rolls? perfecta pro 10 M cann scan a roll at a time. well, it takes a bit, but you do not have to interfere. do you have single frames? than good luck with the very same scanner ;)

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2021 at 14:45 UTC
In reply to:

Weyskipper: I am really confused by the conclusion of the review. My sense is that there are three things that are critical for scanning:
- Best Image quality
- Excellent negative colour conversion
- Great dust removal

If I read this review correctly, SilverScan is the one that do these three things the best. But it is rated as last.

Am I missing something?

I used SilverScan an VueScan. Using my hardware, my films and my color attitude I felt it was easier to achieve postcard-like colors with SilverScan and easier to get less saturated and contrasty pictures with VueScan, the second better suited for further processing. The sharpness diferrence in the review is IMO owed to the settings of the scanner, I found it to be limited by the hardware only. Same for infrared based dust removal from my personal experience, I saw no such differencies like the review displays. Go test both with your films and hardware, your findings may differ.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2021 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

halfaman: I have used the three of them and I also prefer Vuescan. Silverfast has lot of options and catchy features but with limited real value. The onyl drawback of Vuescan for me is mentioned, dust removal is very conservative even at maximum intensity and leaves some traces of dust.

The real beneift of multi-exposure is with dense shadows areas of slides, for negatives it only reduces some scanning noise.

the efficiency of multi-exposure might depend on the hardware used. While it gave me a visible advantage with old nikon super coolscan 500 ed, I see barely a difference with perfecta pro 10m.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2021 at 14:35 UTC
In reply to:

algusev: Vuescan is really good product. And I support the author of the article concerning interface and speed. Vuescan is the bett er than silverfast here. The best way to remove dust is to clean scanner surface and rescan. But use Vuescan only when you have to use old scanner on modern PC. The support is very ugly. Look here and Google for opinions in other sites: https://hamrick-software.pissedconsumer.com/review.html

I had 3 issues opened with Ed, all three answered well and in a timely manner.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2021 at 14:32 UTC
In reply to:

KjellRS: It's a mix between impressive and "16-18 hour days? Here in Europe their bosses would be in jail." No matter how they must say they like on camera I don't think they'd mind having at least one more guy. Probably two.

here in Europe they are on their own, beeing their own bosses.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2020 at 17:53 UTC

Thanks. Give me my flash back, please.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2020 at 20:13 UTC as 50th comment
On article Phase One Capture One 20 software review (418 comments in total)
In reply to:

D_Surrey: I love editing in COP but the catalogue is so slow on windows, even with a high end PC. It's fine if you only have a few images but if you're using it to manage all your photos and need to find something it can take ages to rebuild the index or whatever it's doing when you select the top of the catalogue tree. It's ok on my MBP as far as I've noticed though.

CO20 fully failed to work with huge catalogs for me as well.
My search after DAM to work together with C1 ist the last obstacle to abandon LR for me (it does not mean that LR was a bad piece of software, it is a great one for many purposes).

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2020 at 21:03 UTC
On article Phase One Capture One 20 software review (418 comments in total)
In reply to:

NoTicket: For everybody in this comments section that seems surprised that Capture One is slower than Lightroom Classic nowadays, here are some of the critical updates that Adobe has made since you switched to Capture One:

1. Full multi threading for preview generation.
2. Full multi threading for export.
3. GPU rendering of the UI.
4. Most importantly, last year, full GPU acceleration for edits.

On the most recent LR Classic, applying local adjustments, moving sliders, switching modules, is extremely fast.

I get it, we all hate Adobe or whatever. But the speed arguments that caused people to switch to Capture One are no longer relevant.

in my personal experience Adobe made great improvements in different areas of LR, like import/export/brushes and more.
But there are still many areas left, crying for improvement, most notably but not only culling and switching from preview to development mode. As far as I understand programming, only architectural redesign (under the hood) could make LR´s overall responsiveness as enjoyable as I feel it in C1.
I am happy with LR´s speed, particularly when working with huge catalogs that actually do "kill" C1. But I strongly dislike it´s (lack of) responsiveness.

My CPU may be old but still offers 50% performance comparing to best current ones, GPU is in the 250$ Range, SSD, 40 GB RAM, consequently a heavy Investment in Hardware could only somehow mitigate the lagines of LR.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2020 at 20:54 UTC
On article Phase One Capture One 20 software review (418 comments in total)
In reply to:

Krav Maga: I just recently purchased C1P for Sony after having transitioned from Nikon to Sony; mainly for tethering. I've been using LR for years; on the LR/PS subscription plan. I love it. However, C1P is very nice and now that I've used it for a few weeks, it is growing on me.

I will say that it's not as fast as LR on my machine; just a tiny bit slower. Also, the tethering speed is about the same. One thing, though, that I've noticed is that the tethering connection, for me, is a lot more stable in C1P than it is with LR.

@Krava interesting! I am in the same situation as you are but my performance experience is different. In LR I have to cope with small delays from a fraction of seconds to three seconds when culling or switching from grid view to development. I hate this part of LR, although I learned to love the since the first beta version. Actually, this is one of the few reasons I am about to leave Adobe, those "myriads" of small, disturbing delays daily.
All of it is almost instant with C1 on my machine.
Does your experience differ from mine??

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2020 at 20:35 UTC
On article Phase One Capture One 20 software review (418 comments in total)
In reply to:

colurb: Can't believe there is still no HDR merge or panorama stitching.

If they introduced those two features I would seriously consider switching from LR.

@Reilly: I agree LR does a great job .. with most of the pictures.
But there are cases where the Panorama simply does not stich or where the resulting HDR contains areas of a badly selectected layer, typically showing exceesive noise in spots of dark areas. And then you´ve got stuck.
This is why I still rely on 3´d party tools for both purposes in addition to LR (and would not hesitate to use 3´d Party tools only for both purposes).

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2020 at 20:18 UTC
In reply to:

Thoughts R Us: BTW, let's remember the original post from Canon Rumors that got the whole internet abuzz...because everything in that post has proven to be true so far, but of course more specs are mentioned:

Named the Canon EOS R5
45mp full-frame CMOS sensor
IBIS

5 stops with IBIS alone
7-8 stops of correction when used with in-lens stabilization

12fps mechanical, 20fps electronic
Dual card slots
Scroll wheel added to the back
No touch bar
Liveview/Movie toggle like previous EOS DSLRs
Larger capacity battery, but looks like the LP-E6
8K @ 30fps
4K @ 120fps
4K @ 60fps
Built-in 5GHz WiFi
New battery, but the same shape and compatibility as the EOS 5D Mark IV

So let's take this as our Rosetta Stone. It's proven wickedly accurate so far, as has the Canon Rumors site.

I strongly believe the direction you plot will come and none of the current major camera players will come around, sooner or later. Some uf us, photorapher will love it, some hate it, but we all will be discovering market with real cameras filled with stuff which currently has the fancy name "AI".
Maybe even some new company will overtake the camera leadership, leaving current #1´s behind. Just a queston of time.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2020 at 15:41 UTC
In reply to:

CalleGrafi: I still find it very slow to develop raw photos.
Also I find that I don't get all the details when using shadows and highlight tool compared to other apps.

But it's great value for money!

thx, how old is this test? I am asking because AP´s RAW engine improved from version one to now.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2019 at 20:41 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Ricoh GR III (651 comments in total)
In reply to:

GeorgiJuraj: I welcome this new camera with pleasure but without ectasy.

I own GR II, use it havily and like it.

1) I am happy Ricoh did not abandon this product line, although it does not create big revenues.

2) happy the III probably addresses the biggest flaw of II: the AF.
Better sensor is welcome as well, but still, the II has been better than Internet talks: DR better than Canon 5D/II and high ISO is OK _IF_ developed in DXO.

3) III is even smaller than II.
A technical masterpiece is it -- but I have never heard anybody complaining about the size of II ??

Consequent loss of unique, dedicated manual controlls AND of Flash: oh, I will miss them all. No, a better sensor is NOT a replacement for flash. Just an example: Flash creates a highlight point in eyes, tonality curve do not.

Ricoh: I am happy with you right know. Just please, do not correct things beeing unique to you and working well for most of your crowd next time.

Juraj, Austria

sure, bute if you dared you would have options either not to use the flash or to shut the stabilization of.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2019 at 22:49 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Ricoh GR III (651 comments in total)
In reply to:

dpthoughts: This concept is obsolete due to today's smartphone technology.

haha! No, it is not. Sure, new phones are rather good and in many situations the results will be very similar. But.. just try!

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2019 at 15:31 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Ricoh GR III (651 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sir 7: No pop-up flash on a compact?!?! MAJOR deal-breaker!

No built-in viewfinder??? Deal-breaker!

A compact with fixed-length lens that only has a slow f2.8 aperture? Deal-breaker!

Battery rated at only 200 shots WITHOUT FLASH?! Deal-breaker!

$800 for such a weak package??? Pppfffttt, lol, no way! As much as i can't stand Sony, I'd take an RX100 V for about the same price (or VI for $1,200) anyday!

Come on, Ricoh... ☹

different purposes create different requirements. Your post means the type of the camery like GR does not fit your requirements. Others are happy it is different from most other cameras and fits their needs.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2019 at 15:28 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Ricoh GR III (651 comments in total)

I welcome this new camera with pleasure but without ectasy.

I own GR II, use it havily and like it.

1) I am happy Ricoh did not abandon this product line, although it does not create big revenues.

2) happy the III probably addresses the biggest flaw of II: the AF.
Better sensor is welcome as well, but still, the II has been better than Internet talks: DR better than Canon 5D/II and high ISO is OK _IF_ developed in DXO.

3) III is even smaller than II.
A technical masterpiece is it -- but I have never heard anybody complaining about the size of II ??

Consequent loss of unique, dedicated manual controlls AND of Flash: oh, I will miss them all. No, a better sensor is NOT a replacement for flash. Just an example: Flash creates a highlight point in eyes, tonality curve do not.

Ricoh: I am happy with you right know. Just please, do not correct things beeing unique to you and working well for most of your crowd next time.

Juraj, Austria

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2019 at 15:24 UTC as 30th comment | 3 replies
On article Photokina 2018: First look at new Ricoh GR III (667 comments in total)
In reply to:

pro photo 2011: According to a Japanese report,

1. Ricoh will keep both the GR III and GR II on the market.

2. The flash was deleted from the GR III because the designer felt the IBIS reduced the need to use flash.

BULIT-IN-FLASH:

seemingly, most GR-II user have either not used the built-in flash at all,
or solely to get more light in the darkness.
Well, for all those the better sensor will replace the flash nicely.

I use the small flash rather often, mostly
to gently lighten the shadows even during the day (hey, it is NOT limited to 1/200 sec like my big SLR!) or to produce tiny highlits in the eyes. Sometimes to freeze a part of otherwise deliberatly blurred scene with exposures at about 1/10 th of second. Albeit the fash is rather weak, I use it typically at 1/16 or 1/32 setting.

I will strongly miss this little wonder-goodie.

I will miss the loss of some very unique and fine mechanical controls on the cam aswell.

Still, I am about to purchase the GR III because of hopefully much improved AF and I am rather happy that Ricoh decided to further develop this niche market produkt.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2018 at 10:31 UTC
Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »