the surface.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sent: 28. januar 2007 07:19
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: DNG conversion challenge (was: aliasing/moire)
I've been working
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 02:09:51PM +0100, Tim ?sleby wrote:
So far, I've decided I'll be using Elements as my backend. The only downside
that is significant is the lack of batch processing capabilities.
Elements has batch processing capabilities. They are somewhat limited
(you can't write
-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: DNG conversion challenge (was: aliasing/moire)
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 02:09:51PM +0100, Tim ?sleby wrote:
So far, I've decided I'll be using Elements as my backend. The only
downside
that is significant is the lack of batch processing capabilities.
Elements has
Godfrey, I am almost ;-) ready to admit that LR RAW processing engine is
*far* superior than that of CS2 ;-).
If LR is priced reasonably, it may be just the sweet spot for me ;-).
Boris
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Challenge? no.
Here are two quickie conversions, one in Lightroom and the
I would not judge based on a quickie conversion effort, Boris. I have
a workflow that is well developed for Photoshop CS2 with Camera Raw
that's quite different from how I'm learning to work in Lightroom.
When I work with ACR, for me, I design the output to be edited to a
finish rendering
I doubt that LR is far superior. In this case, I think Godfrey's LR
conversion is slightly more pleasing, but a few tweaks on the ACR
version would make it identical. Both are very good and illustrate
that there was no problem with the original RAW file.
Paul
On Jan 27, 2007, at 11:30 AM,
Have you tried the CS3 beta?
All of the Develop tools in LR have made it into the new ACR in CS3.
CHeers,
Dave
On 1/28/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not judge based on a quickie conversion effort, Boris. I have
a workflow that is well developed for Photoshop CS2 with
I've been working with CS3 a bit more lightly than with Lightroom.
Yes, a lot of the features made it into Camera Raw 4, and Camera Raw
4 will share most processing parameters with Lightroom.
But I prefer the organization of features and interface in Lightroom
vs CS3/Bridge/Camera Raw. And
Peter asked, so here are my efforts:
Straight .dng conversion (3008x2008pix ~510kb):
http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/Images/IMGP0076.jpg
Conversion worked in PS (3008x2008pix ~645kb):
http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/Images/IMGP0076_2.jpg
BW version (3008x2008pix ~660kb):
Challenge? no.
Here are two quickie conversions, one in Lightroom and the other in
ACR with a little bit of CS2 work after the fact.
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/lacus/IMGP0076-LR.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/lacus/IMGP0076-ACR.jpg
G
On Jan 26, 2007, at 7:23 PM, David Savage wrote:
10 matches
Mail list logo
