Processing Program
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: curanzia versicherung, berufsunfähigkeits versicherung, berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung für selbständige, berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung preis, versicherung vergleich,
Next: Why only 4.6MP?
From: Robert Spanjaard on 23 Feb 2010 13:49 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:53:00 +0000, Chris H wrote: >>Any of the freeware image editors, GIMP (considered the free equal to >>PhotoSlop in the right hands) > > Only by those who are delusional... before you as I have used GIMP it is > on this PC. > >>If you eventually want to step up to the oft (wrongly) praised >>PhotoSlop, > > OK so all the worlds leading photographers and graphics designers are > wrong? > > Snipped the rest of the religious rant....... Speaking about religious... Look at the way you respond to people advising GIMP. Alan, skip the religious rants and give GIMP a try, considering the amount of people advising it. You'll never lose more than a bit of your time. -- Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
From: ray on 23 Feb 2010 13:54 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:49:54 +0000, Chris H wrote: > In message <7uiaudFb4lU2(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> > writes >>On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:52:34 -0500, Alan Lichtenstein wrote: >> >>> I'm a neophyte as far as digital photography is concerned, however, >>> after having purchased my dSLR three years ago and finally deciding >>> that I ought to learn how to use it, realized that photography can be >>> very rewarding and interesting. Keeping in mind that I am still a >>> neophyte, I am considering purchasing a processing program. The >>> majority of salespeople in the camera store that I deal with, knowing >>> that I am a neophyte, recommended either Lightroom or Aperature. Are >>> there any recommendations that may help me? >> >>Why? I'd suggest you start with ufraw and GIMP ( > > Why? Neither do what Aperture or Lightroom do. Both do a lot of what > GIMP and Photoshop do but they are a very good catalogue program. I > rarely need Photoshop these days except for art photos. > > In any event Photoshop Elements is a much better option than Gimp and > yes, I have used GIMP.It is on this PC. Photoshop Elements is given > away with many things these days and does not cost much if you have to > pay for it. > > As the vast majority of people use photoshop (and about 99.99% of pro's) > So why go with something different that does less? At my local Camera > club they all use Photoshop. If you ask for help with GIMP you won't > get it. Well, for starters, OP is not a pro. I didn't say he would not need ps or something else at some point. It ridiculous to throw money at a problem before you know what the problem is - I would have thought you'd have learned that from Congress by now. Start with what's available for free, go with it to learn what else (if anything) you need.
From: Chris H on 23 Feb 2010 13:59 In message <4d867$4b842350$546accd9$4524(a)cache80.multikabel.net>, Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> writes >On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:53:00 +0000, Chris H wrote: > >>>Any of the freeware image editors, GIMP (considered the free equal to >>>PhotoSlop in the right hands) >> >> Only by those who are delusional... before you as I have used GIMP it is >> on this PC. >> >>>If you eventually want to step up to the oft (wrongly) praised >>>PhotoSlop, >> >> OK so all the worlds leading photographers and graphics designers are >> wrong? >> >> Snipped the rest of the religious rant....... > >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.... -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Chris H on 23 Feb 2010 14:01 In message <7uimivFb4lU4(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> writes >On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:49:54 +0000, Chris H wrote: > >> In message <7uiaudFb4lU2(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> >> writes >>>On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:52:34 -0500, Alan Lichtenstein wrote: >>> >>>> I'm a neophyte as far as digital photography is concerned, however, >>>> after having purchased my dSLR three years ago and finally deciding >>>> that I ought to learn how to use it, realized that photography can be >>>> very rewarding and interesting. Keeping in mind that I am still a >>>> neophyte, I am considering purchasing a processing program. The >>>> majority of salespeople in the camera store that I deal with, knowing >>>> that I am a neophyte, recommended either Lightroom or Aperature. Are >>>> there any recommendations that may help me? >>> >>>Why? I'd suggest you start with ufraw and GIMP ( >> >> Why? Neither do what Aperture or Lightroom do. Both do a lot of what >> GIMP and Photoshop do but they are a very good catalogue program. I >> rarely need Photoshop these days except for art photos. >> >> In any event Photoshop Elements is a much better option than Gimp and >> yes, I have used GIMP.It is on this PC. Photoshop Elements is given >> away with many things these days and does not cost much if you have to >> pay for it. >> >> As the vast majority of people use photoshop (and about 99.99% of pro's) >> So why go with something different that does less? At my local Camera >> club they all use Photoshop. If you ask for help with GIMP you won't >> get it. > >Well, for starters, OP is not a pro. Neither are most of the Photoshop users. But unlike GIMP professionals do use Photoshop > I didn't say he would not need ps or >something else at some point. It ridiculous to throw money at a problem >before you know what the problem is I agree which is why I suggested elements which is usually free >- I would have thought you'd have >learned that from Congress by now What is Congress? -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Chris H on 23 Feb 2010 14:04
In message <hm15j9$lku$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Paul Furman <paul- @-edgehill.net> writes >Chris H wrote: >> In message<8t08o5d3d59qvldioibk7ae1jcgkhue5nn(a)4ax.com>, Bruce >> <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> writes >>> On 23 Feb 2010 15:35:41 GMT, ray<ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:52:34 -0500, Alan Lichtenstein wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm a neophyte as far as digital photography is concerned, however, >>>>> after having purchased my dSLR three years ago and finally deciding that >>>>> I ought to learn how to use it, realized that photography can be very >>>>> rewarding and interesting. Keeping in mind that I am still a neophyte, >>>>> I am considering purchasing a processing program. The majority of >>>>> salespeople in the camera store that I deal with, knowing that I am a >>>>> neophyte, recommended either Lightroom or Aperature. Are there any >>>>> recommendations that may help me? >>>> >>>> Why? I'd suggest you start with ufraw and GIMP (which are available as >>>> free downloads). Find out what they will do. Learn basic manipulation >>>> techniques. Put out money if, at some later date, you need or want to do >>>> more than they conveniently do. >>> >>> >>> That's excellent advice. Far too many people spend $$$ on Photoshop >>> CS3 or CS4 and end up with a hugely complex piece of software that >>> they don't need. GIMP is a powerful package and a great way to learn >>> post-processing. >>> >>> When the OP is ready to consider purchasing a commercial package, I >>> would recommend Photoshop Elements over the CS versions. Elements has >>> everything a keen photographer needs without the very high price and >>> needless complication of Creative Suite. >> >> I would agree completely the full photshop is overkill for many and >> Elements is all you need... however if you don't want to edit the >> picture, just sort out the colours and tones etc and cropping then both >> Aperture and Light room will do that, > >But they are expensive Not really >and not exactly super easy to use. I think they are. >aperture but I use lightroom and it's purpose is fast workflow for >large numbers of pics that need to be adjusted & cropped to match in a >high pace pro environment. True but most amateurs end up with lots of pictures these days > Fine art prints & geeky tinkering is better done in photoshop >(elements is fine). Agreed. You can't do it in Lightroom >HDR and pano stitching are better done in dedicated programs. No idea. Not tried it yet. >Gimp is sort of awkward & technical. And a lousy interface. >The OP might also look into their camera manufacturer's software. Good idea. Probably he will find elements on the same CD :-) -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |