Processing Program
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: curanzia versicherung, berufsunfähigkeits versicherung, berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung für selbständige, berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung preis, versicherung vergleich,
Next: Why only 4.6MP?
From: nospam on 23 Feb 2010 17:06 In article <a5509$4b84506f$546accd9$32434(a)cache50.multikabel.net>, Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote: > >> There, I DO NOT say that GIMP doesn't have books, support forums and/or > >> tutorials ("etc." ?) AT ALL. > > > > that's nothing more than semantic games. > > No way. it's exactly that. > > when someone says 'there is no > > xyz' or 'nobody uses abc' they don't mean exactly zero they mean close > > enough to zero to be considered zero. it's lost in the noise. > > Which has NOTHING to do with your lies. i'm not lying.
From: Robert Spanjaard on 23 Feb 2010 17:12 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:32:21 -0500, John A. wrote: >>Doesn't Windows have some kind of escape character to use spaces (and >>other special characters) in filenames? > > Not that I can see. What happens when you put double quotes around the executable? Something like this: "C:\Program Files\DigiKam\DigiKam.exe" [filename] That's the only other solution I can think of. If that doesn't work, you can still switch to a KDE-based Linux distro. :-) -- Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
From: tony cooper on 23 Feb 2010 17:28 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:39:26 -0500, Alan Lichtenstein <arl(a)erols.com> wrote: >nospam wrote: > >> In article <4b843709$0$22523$607ed4bc(a)cv.net>, Alan Lichtenstein >> <arl(a)erols.com> wrote: >> >> >>>You would not recommend, lightroom or aperture? They're a bit more >>>expensive, but is it worth the difference at this point? >> >> >> that depends what you need to do. lightroom & aperture combine asset >> management with most of the adjustments people need to do, as well as >> generate web sites, books, etc. while photoshop can do pretty much any >> image editing you could ever want, but not so much on the other >> features. > >I would prefer a better asset management program than what I have. I >also understand that both of these programs have a rudimentary ability >to deal with HDR, which intrigues me, despite the fact that my learning >curve at this time does not permit me take advantage of that. Perhaps >someday. I have Photoshop CS4 (the full version of Photoshop), Lightroom, and Elements. I have Elements because my daughter uses Elements, and I often send her tutorials - with screen shots - on how to do more things in Elements. I shoot in RAW, upload my photographs in Bridge (part of CS4), and do all of my editing in CS4. I then import all image files that I want to keep into Lightroom and keyword them for organization and retrieval. I also back-up all files on an external hard drive and make monthly copies on disks. I could do my editing in Lightroom, but I started with Elements when it first came out, moved to Photoshop in an early version, and have upgraded along the line to the current CS4 version. I'm so used to editing in Photoshop that I just never get around to learning the editing functions in Lightroom. I do have two books on Lightroom, though, that I'll eventually get around to working through. If, by "asset management", you mean a system that allows you to tag or keyword images by subject, then Elements has that system in the "Organizer" module. Lightroom has a much better system for this, but you really don't need this unless you are working with a library of over a thousand or more images. With only a few hundred photos, you can "asset manage" with a file folder system. Without question, the best way to start out is with Adobe's Elements. It's simple to use, has enough bells and whistles that you can progress to fairly complex editing, and provides a basic tag and retrieval system. It can be purchased for between $50 and $80. There are scads of tutorials on-line and Adobe has an on-line forum for questions and answers. I have no idea about the HDR bit. The only decent HDR stuff I've seen was done by people with extensive experience in an editing program. Most of it is over-done and gruesome. I've tried Gimp, just to see what it does, but I had the advantage of being an experienced Photoshop user and could figure things out from that knowledge. I would never recommend a newbie start with Gimp. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Chris H on 23 Feb 2010 17:30 In message <7fa31$4b842cbc$546accd9$28672(a)cache70.multikabel.net>, Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> writes >On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:59:26 +0000, Chris H wrote: > >>>Speaking about religious... >>>Look at the way you respond to people advising GIMP. >>> >>>Alan, skip the religious rants and give GIMP a try, >> >> I did... hence my opinion >> >>>considering the amount >>>of people advising it. >> >> Compared to the number suggesting Photoshop Elements.... > >If you insist on a pissing contest: two people suggest PSE (you and John), >four people suggest GIMP (Better Info, ray, Bruce and Ofnuts). I'd suggest >GIMP too, so that's five. As opposed to every pro and most of the serious amatures... they all use Photoshop. Apart from half a dozen people here I don't know any one using GIMP but hundreds using photoshop. Apart from here with a few no where have I seen any one ask a question about GIMP... Photoshop on the other hand... >Now take your religion somewhere else. I wish you would GIMP is used by a few people where as the vast majority, including 99% of the pros will use photoshop. For those who don't need the full capability (which is most no pros you can use Elements. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Chris H on 23 Feb 2010 17:31
In message <hm1c6l$2g0$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> writes >nospam wrote: >> In article <7fa31$4b842cbc$546accd9$28672(a)cache70.multikabel.net>, >> Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote: >> >>> If you insist on a pissing contest: two people suggest PSE (you and >>>John), four people suggest GIMP (Better Info, ray, Bruce and >>>Ofnuts). I'd suggest GIMP too, so that's five. >> here's another one for photoshop elements. > >And only one suggesting da Gimp is a real person. The rest are >anonymous handles, some of which shift daily. My handle is real and has been for the last 20 years on the net. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |