Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10]
 91 
 on: July 29, 2014, 07:01:20 PM 
Started by Bob Rockefeller - Last post by jjj
That's a relief...I'll see what I may have done wrong (PEBCAK?)
An all too common ailment.  Cheesy

Quote
That my camera (5D3) doesn't offer GPS tagging (without paying extra) really chaps my hide...this should be standard on all cameras!
I try and remember to take a photo with my phone. So when I import my images to LR, it adds pics on same day to same folder [or at least one next to it if phone pics are imported at a different time and I've already labelled folder with a description]. I simply add the DSLR pics to the location indicated in the map module by the phone or sync the metadata.

 92 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:57:25 PM 
Started by dreed - Last post by jjj
In both cases I find good quality footbeds (I use "Superfeet") help a lot. I have some arthritis in both big toes and I notice the difference.
I use Sorbothane double strike insoles in all my shoes and usually I won't buy shoes they won't fit in as they make so much difference. Your feet simply don't ache/tire like they do with shoes without them in. Work well in my biking shoes too.
Though I have some Merrell 'barefoot' shoes [not with individual toes] with barely anything between you and the floor - which are comfy in a different way.

 93 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:57:08 PM 
Started by Bob Rockefeller - Last post by ppmax2
Thanks for the reply jjj--much appreciated.

Regarding the debacle:
Products get discontinued all the time. Apple is (was, now that Jobs is gone?) notorious for their secrecy. Perhaps that's changing...perhaps not. While this may open a debate about stated vs. unstated intentions, I believe Apple's move shows they are *more* committed to photography rather than less, since they are integrating "the library" into the very fabric of their local (computer) and cloud-based ecosystems. We'll see where this lands....but in the end we may just be swapping one "black box" for another "black box" (containers where getting data in is easy...but getting data out not so easy...the ultimate lock-in).

What this event has taught me is that while I value my images, there is even more "value" locked up in the library: all the metadata that we add to our images, etc, to make them searchable, findable, etc. So while I am comfortable with the possibility of switching to Lr, C1, or even RawTherapee for rendering images, I have not yet found a solution for migrating my library elsewhere and not losing some of the value I have added (painstakingly, for over 15 years of digital images). And I've got more than just images in my Aperture library...video, PDFs, a few sound files too...it sounds like Media One is the only "multimedia" DAM alternative.

Regarding:
Quote
The problem that people who rely on meta data organising tend to not mention is that metadata organising involves a lot of hard work up front. The reason I use both folders and metadata is they complement each other nicely, where one is weak the other is strong. My other bug bear with finding stuff via metadata is all the false positives I end up with - in several different programmes this is an issue.
For example earlier on I searched for music by GusGus in iTunes, now when typing in Gus I also got unsurprisingly music by 'Angus + Julia Stone' and another 200 tracks where there was no seeming link to 'gus'. GusGus got just GusGus but if they spelt their name gus gus then I would get all the other 200 extraneous titles as well. This is a very specific example, but it happens a lot when I search for things using metadata by text. Verry annoying.

Great example (GusGus). It is true that adding metadata is hard work....but I feel it is critical work to maintain a large volume of images. The auto face recognition features in Aperture are pretty good...but they simple can't work for images where people are turned away from the camera after some degree. That my camera (5D3) doesn't offer GPS tagging (without paying extra) really chaps my hide...this should be standard on all cameras!

Quote
For example earlier on I searched for music by GusGus in iTunes, now when typing in Gus I also got unsurprisingly music by 'Angus

This is true if your metadata searches are based upon an input string and are "unconstrained" to any particular field...they will find anything that contains that string; it is not the case if your metadata searches are based upon the array of values you have already assigned and the search is constrained to specific fields. For example, I have keywords and "Places" assigned to images. I can create a Smart Folder that looks for Place = "San" (which will show images for San Francisco, San Jose, San Onofre, etc). However it will not return images tagged with "Hassan" because that's a name rather than a place. I generally don't create smart albums using "unconstrained" keyword searches, but your point still stands.

Quote
That is not what should happen. If you alter an image then each copy whether Master or Virtual in other places should also change. I just tweaked a bee image in it's folder, made two VCs and tweaked them and the version in the smart collection also changed to match - as expected. I did a dumb collection too added them there and no matter in which of the three locations I altered the images the changes were seen in the other two places.

That's a relief...I'll see what I may have done wrong (PEBCAK?)

thx
PP

 94 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:47:05 PM 
Started by JV - Last post by JV
Why does everyone presume that if a new P1 camera will be introduced at Photokina, it will be an MF camera? ...with MFDB sales shrinking and being under more threat the more the time, it looks more sensible for a FF (mirrorless or DSLR) model to be among their plans... It should give a major boost to their prime source of income anyway... their Capture One software! ...remember that Sony "likes" relationships with more "specialised" makers (Nikon, Pentax, Zeiss... now P1, Hassy).  Roll Eyes

 Someone mentioned the possibility of Fuji using a ...Sony sensor before, the one thing that will never happen... "Fuji using other than theirs"... that is a joke right?  Shocked

Not that it matters to me but I didn't think it was very clear where Fuji currently gets its sensors from, some say Sony, others say Toshiba, or a combination of both…

Regarding the Phase One camera, a new body is a significant investment which IMO will not necessarily result in a significant increase in sales for Phase One, therefore it might not be at the top of the priority list...


 95 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:42:08 PM 
Started by Colorado David - Last post by Colorado David
Thanks Ellis.

 96 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:33:50 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by BernardLanguillier
Sony has already worked with Phase One on the design of its 44x33mm 50MP CMOS sensor.

Do we know for a fact that they worked together on this design? What would Sony have needed from Phaseone that they didn't know already?

My guess remains that the 50mp "MF" sensor is being produced only because Pentax committed to a large purchase for the 645Z, which made the part available for smaller players such as Phaseone and Hassy.

Cheers,
Bernard

 97 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:33:32 PM 
Started by Martin Archer-Shee - Last post by jjj
The modal switch is not just between the Library and Develop modules. If you're making a book in Aperture, you can make adjustments to the image by changing tabs, not going back to a module.
Never claimed that other modules weren't modules. I said the difference between modules and tabs is overstated. If I'm in LR's book module and press D I can tweak an image, alternatively I can click on the Dev name at top which I also thought of as being like tabs without the skeuomorphic tab design. The main advantage is the lack of clutter and reduction in clicking compared to Aperture.

Quote
And Lightroom's acceptance advantage probably has more to do with the fact that it's cross-platform than any perceived ease of use.
Actually no. A survey of pro photographers some years back who used Apple computers showed a huge uptake in LR and not much interest in LR and that was before Apple lost interest in the programme.

 98 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:32:11 PM 
Started by RSL - Last post by Farmer
Can you get an internet connection on your laptop via your phone or similar and then test (i.e. bypass your regular ISP)?

 99 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:29:45 PM 
Started by BernardLanguillier - Last post by BernardLanguillier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACgwr2Nj_GQ

Cheers,
Bernard

 100 
 on: July 29, 2014, 06:19:33 PM 
Started by Bob Rockefeller - Last post by jjj
Not trying to start a flame war--just an honest question:
>> This as the Aperture debacle has demonstrated is a useful starting point as it is a universal way of organising your images being recognised by different OSs and programmes - it is completely software agnostic.

What debacle are you referring to?
Aperture was marketed very specifically as a Pro App. That means it is a tool that as a Pro you rely on and expect to keep being updated and maintained. Apple's long silence re Aperture was pretty bad, but then simply saying they are dropping development of a programme which professionals based their workflow on with no easy way to move onto an alternative professional solution is pretty messy. No pro in their right mind should commit to a workflow relying on Apple products because this is not an unusual occurrence with Apple. Particularly as pros are a very small part of their business which is mainly phones these days.

Quote
I consider myself to be pretty organized and also interested in abstraction, should the need ever arise to switch applications. My Aperture photo workflow / organization goes like this:
* Import from camera to a designated "temp" import folder. Immediately run a rename script on the CR2s so that each file is named year-month-day_hour-minute-second[-sequenceNum].c2
* After renaming, I import to Aperture (my library is referenced)
* Immediately after import, I keyword, assign places, faces, and other metadata (which to be clear are stored in the Aperture library, but may be exported to XMP). I then delete the photos I don't want and empty the trash, which moves the original images to the "real" trash
* I then move all originals from the temp import folder to the appropriate "year" folder on my drive. I have a series of folders 1997 - 2014 (and counting)
* Aperture knows where these files were moved, because the link to the file is done by the filesystem node ID, which is independent of physical path
* If I ever need to relocate the originals, I use the appropriate command "Relocate Originals" or some such
* I create Smart Albums to create sets of images that contain all the images that meet certain criteria: keywords, adjustments, lens or camera type, etc...
The part I bolded, LR does for you when you import saving you the effort, but does it to individual dates. Which if importing a stack of images from say your phone that were taken over the last few weeks can be quite faffy if you do it manually.

Quote
I honestly don't see the need to have "direct access" to the original files as given in Lr. The layer of abstraction that Aperture provides is sufficient to ensure clarity (where the file resides, where to move it to if desired), but beyond that the "abstraction" serves to eliminate confusion (as evidenced by this thread), and lets you focus on the metadata "value" that you add: who the picture is of, what place it was taken, etc.
The problem that people who rely on meta data organising tend to not mention is that metadata organising involves a lot of hard work up front. The reason I use both folders and metadata is they complement each other nicely, where one is weak the other is strong. My other bug bear with finding stuff via metadata is all the false positives I end up with - in several different programmes this is an issue.
For example earlier on I searched for music by GusGus in iTunes, now when typing in Gus I also got unsurprisingly music by 'Angus + Julia Stone' and another 200 tracks where there was no seeming link to 'gus'. GusGus got just GusGus but if they spelt their name gus gus then I would get all the other 200 extraneous titles as well. This is a very specific example, but it happens a lot when I search for things using metadata by text. Verry annoying.


Quote
The thing I don't really like about Lr is how alternates of the "original" are treated. For example I have a picture of a fish that shows up in several different smart albums. In Aperture, if I edit the picture of the fish, all "references" to the fish photo reflect the changes I made to the original. OTOH, in Lr my experience has been that each reference to the fish photo may have it's own adjustments...which means I may have several different treatments of the fish photo, each in it's own container. I don't want this.

In Aperture, if I wanted different treatments of the fish I would make a new Version, and then include that Version in the fish in the album of my choice. In Lr Virtual Copies offer the same functionality. In both cases these alternates are explicitly created.

In Lr is there a way to prevent the creation of different alternates as described above?
That is not what should happen. If you alter an image then each copy whether Master or Virtual in other places should also change. I just tweaked a bee image in it's folder, made two VCs and tweaked them and the version in the smart collection also changed to match - as expected. I did a dumb collection too added them there and no matter in which of the three locations I altered the images the changes were seen in the other two places.

Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Ad
Ad
Ad