On Jul 9, 2010, at 7:55 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
>
>> On 7/8/2010 3:25 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jul 8, 2010, at 8:18 AM, Derby Chang wrote:
Focusing doesn't seem to be an issue here at all, Larry. Nice set. Only
thing
On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
> On 7/8/2010 3:25 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2010, at 8:18 AM, Derby Chang wrote:
>>> Focusing doesn't seem to be an issue here at all, Larry. Nice set. Only
>>> thing I would suggest is crop a little tighter.
>>>
>>> Love that
On 7/8/2010 3:25 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
On Jul 8, 2010, at 8:18 AM, Derby Chang wrote:
Focusing doesn't seem to be an issue here at all, Larry. Nice set. Only thing I
would suggest is crop a little tighter.
Love that guy playing two saxes
What Derby said. Well done. Nice conversions.
Pau
On Jul 8, 2010, at 8:18 AM, Derby Chang wrote:
> Larry Colen wrote:
>> Last night I was working on being more careful about my focusing, and the
>> results seem promising:
>> http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157624445835548/
>>
>> Exposure under the red lights is still a challen
On 2010-07-08 8:06, Derby Chang wrote:
RSE came around at just the right time for me too. Wonderful workflow.
There was one bug they only just squashed before Adobe bought them out -
pics with clipped red channel would oddly go green (which happened often
in my music pics). But for everything el
Larry Colen wrote:
Last night I was working on being more careful about my focusing, and the
results seem promising:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157624445835548/
Exposure under the red lights is still a challenge. The best results at JJ's seem
to be quite a bit under what
Doug Franklin wrote:
On 2010-07-05 21:49, P. J. Alling wrote:
Raw Shooter Professional. The free product was Raw Shooter Essentials,
Adobe bought them out and stopped development just when I decided to buy
the Professional product. It was simple didn't lock you into any
particular way of archiv
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 11:15 PM, Doug Franklin
wrote:
> On 2010-07-05 21:49, P. J. Alling wrote:
>>
>> Raw Shooter Professional. The free product was Raw Shooter Essentials,
>> Adobe bought them out and stopped development just when I decided to buy
>> the Professional product. It was simple didn
On Jul 7, 2010, at 8:32 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
> Reply interspersed...
>
> On 7/6/2010 11:06 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
>> There is some truth to this. If I'm shooting static scenes, in good
>> light, I don't tend to take quite so many frames. If I'm shooting a
>> static scene in challenging lig
Reply interspersed...
On 7/6/2010 11:06 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
There is some truth to this. If I'm shooting static scenes, in good
light, I don't tend to take quite so many frames. If I'm shooting a
static scene in challenging light, I'll bracket the hell out of it in
3 dimensions (ISO, shutter
On 06/07/2010, Boris Liberman wrote:
> Larry, I am thinking two thinks :-).
>
> Think #1: you may be overly trigger happy if you feel like an automaton that
> will rid you of immediate duds will be helpful.
Not that there's anything wrong with such an approach ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v
On Jul 6, 2010, at 12:23 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
> On 7/5/2010 10:09 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>> While I wouldn't want software to rate the artistic merits of a
>> photo, software that would rate and sort photos by various technical
>> criteria (focus, sharpness, exposure, ...) would save me a l
On 7/5/2010 10:09 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
While I wouldn't want software to rate the artistic merits of a
photo, software that would rate and sort photos by various technical
criteria (focus, sharpness, exposure, ...) would save me a lot of
time in post processing.
Larry, I am thinking two thin
William Robb
> Subject: Re: Sorting photos
> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
> Date: Monday, July 5, 2010, 4:17 PM
>
> --
> From: "Larry Colen"
> Subject: Re: Sorting photos
>
>
>
> >>
>
On 2010-07-05 21:49, P. J. Alling wrote:
Raw Shooter Professional. The free product was Raw Shooter Essentials,
Adobe bought them out and stopped development just when I decided to buy
the Professional product. It was simple didn't lock you into any
particular way of archiving and produced extre
That was it. I remember seriously considering buying it at the time.
Ended up going with Capture One somewhat later for much the same
reasons (No organizational lockin, VERY good conversions, very good
for bathc processing).
-Adam
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 9:49 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
> Raw Shooter
History of Lightroom development encapsulated here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Photoshop_Lightroom
--
Godfrey
godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the lin
Raw Shooter Professional. The free product was Raw Shooter Essentials,
Adobe bought them out and stopped development just when I decided to buy
the Professional product. It was simple didn't lock you into any
particular way of archiving and produced extremely good conversions, and
promoted a
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 8:09 PM, John Francis wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 04:18:03PM -0500, George Sinos wrote:
>>
>> I've often wondered how much of the lightroom catalog code may be
>> based on the PE organizer code.
>
> Not much, if my memory serves me well.
>
> Lightroom was developed by a
first I've ever heard of a relationship like that, john. And counter
to my direct experience with the development team in 2003-2004.
On Monday, July 5, 2010, John Francis wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 04:18:03PM -0500, George Sinos wrote:
>>
>> I've often wondered how much of the lightroom cat
On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 04:18:03PM -0500, George Sinos wrote:
>
> I've often wondered how much of the lightroom catalog code may be
> based on the PE organizer code.
Not much, if my memory serves me well.
Lightroom was developed by a separate company (Macromedia), and only
got renamed to "Photos
Doug Brewer wrote:
paul stenquist wrote:
On Jul 5, 2010, at 4:51 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Jul 5, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Doug Brewer wrote:
Larry Colen wrote:
I did some family portraits yesterday, and am going through and
sorting them out. After making a pass to throw out all the ones
that a
On 6 July 2010 07:17, William Robb wrote:
>
> --
> From: "Larry Colen"
> Subject: Re: Sorting photos
>
>
>
>>>
>>> Sorry, Larry, but a big part of being a photographer is learning how to
>>>
--
From: "Larry Colen"
Subject: Re: Sorting photos
Sorry, Larry, but a big part of being a photographer is learning how to
edit.
A big part of being a photographer is knowing how to focus and set the
exposure of your camera, how
paul stenquist wrote:
On Jul 5, 2010, at 4:51 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On Jul 5, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Doug Brewer wrote:
Larry Colen wrote:
I did some family portraits yesterday, and am going through and sorting them
out. After making a pass to throw out all the ones that aren't perfectly, or
On Jul 5, 2010, at 3:01 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
>
> On Jul 5, 2010, at 4:51 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 5, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Doug Brewer wrote:
>>
>>> Larry Colen wrote:
I did some family portraits yesterday, and am going through and sorting
them out. After making a p
On Jul 5, 2010, at 4:51 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
> On Jul 5, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Doug Brewer wrote:
>
>> Larry Colen wrote:
>>> I did some family portraits yesterday, and am going through and sorting
>>> them out. After making a pass to throw out all the ones that aren't
>>> perfectly, or eve
The odd thing about Adobe is where they decide to put various features.
The least expensive photo editing/organizing product, Photoshop
Elements 8, has this feature. It does a lot of autotagging of photos
in the library. One of the tags is an "out of focus" tag. There are
several others, "too b
On Jul 5, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Doug Brewer wrote:
> Larry Colen wrote:
>> I did some family portraits yesterday, and am going through and sorting them
>> out. After making a pass to throw out all the ones that aren't perfectly,
>> or even sufficiently in focus I wonder why I could buy a pocket c
Capture One Pro 5 has a focus filter that highlights areas of the
photo that appear to be in focus. So yes, such a thing does exist. It
is however notoriously hard on processing hardware.
-Adam
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> I did some family portraits yesterday, and am goi
Larry Colen wrote:
I did some family portraits yesterday, and am going through and sorting them
out. After making a pass to throw out all the ones that aren't perfectly, or
even sufficiently in focus I wonder why I could buy a pocket camera, with a
dinky embedded processor that'll find people
31 matches
Mail list logo
