I think that was multiple splitting the thread maybe... sorry'bou'tha'!
Cheers
Ecke
> On Oct 8, 2009, at 16:14 , Ken Waller wrote:
> Hope you all don't mind if I re-insert the 3 responses that W. Robb and I
> wrote yesterday (Wednesday) that somehow were summarily overlooked. :-)
--
PDML Pentax-
On Oct 8, 2009, at 16:14 , Ken Waller wrote:
Hope you all don't mind if I re-insert the 3 responses that W. Robb
and I wrote yesterday (Wednesday) that somehow were summarily
overlooked. :-)
- Original Message - From: "William Robb"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digi
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
- Original Message -
From: "Ken Waller"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization th
- Original Message -
From: "Ken Waller"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right
in
the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing
time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'
Ken Waller wrote:
>>I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
>>the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing
>>time.
>
> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
>>>
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing
time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing
time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'
Mark Roberts wrote:
Ken Waller wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'm on the fence about that.
Don't worry, I'll picket up from here.
Don't you g
Ken Waller wrote:
>From: "William Robb"
>> From: "eckinator"
>>
>>>I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
>>>the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>>
>> Why is everyone so damned busy processing post
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
- Original Message -
From: "eckinator"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that
Scott Loveless wrote:
On 10/7/09, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: The BS of
Digital Photography
Bruce Walker wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realiz
Bruce Walker wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'm on the fence about that.
-bmw
I knew someone wou
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
New Hobby?
--
The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with eith
2009/10/8 William Robb :
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>>>
>>> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
- Original Message -
From: "eckinator"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'
2009/10/8 William Robb :
>> I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
>> the
>>
>> camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>
> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
>>>
- Original Message -
From: "eckinator"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'
dml.net] On Behalf Of Bob
> W
> Sent: Thursday, 8 October 2009 5:09 PM
> To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
> Subject: RE: The BS of Digital Photography
>
>> Bit late on this thread, but here goes anyway; I've been
>> thinking lately about going back
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>>>
>>> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
>>
>> I'm on the fence about that.
>
>
2009/10/8 Subash :
>>> I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
>>>
>>> camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>>
>> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
>
> I'm on the fence about that.
>>>
2009/10/8 Subash :
>>> I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
>>>
>>> camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>>
>> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
>
> I'm on the fence about that.
>>>
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:57 PM, eckinator wrote:
>> I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
>>
>> camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>
> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'm on the f
> I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
>
> camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
>>>
>>> I'm on the fence about that.
>>
>> Don't worry, I'll picket u
entax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: The BS of Digital Photography
> Bit late on this thread, but here goes anyway; I've been
> thinking lately about going back to film (more accurately,
> B&W, doing my own developing and printing)
[...]
> because my wife complains
>
Bruce Walker wrote:
> paul stenquist wrote:
> >
> > On Oct 7, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/7/09, William Robb wrote:
> >>>
> >>> - Original Message ----- From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: R
> Bit late on this thread, but here goes anyway; I've been
> thinking lately about going back to film (more accurately,
> B&W, doing my own developing and printing)
[...]
> because my wife complains
> that she waits a long time to see prints of our DSLR-taken
> family snapshots, that is if I ev
On Oct 7, 2009, at 21:33 , William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Ken Waller" Subject: Re: The BS
of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in
the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is e
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 10:54 PM, John Coyle wrote:
On another tack, some others in this thread have reported a worrying lack of
consistency in exposures using the latest Pentax DSLRs - this seems strange
given that the first one Pentax made, the *ist-D, is the one I still use and
am very happy wi
- Original Message -
From: "Ken Waller"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
Bruce Walker wrote:
mike
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Walker"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloa
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Franklin"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
David J Brooks wrote:
I try and get it right in camera as well. I can have the nicest
looking histo gram on the planet, but when i open
ld or
sixteen-year-old grandchildren!
John in Brisbane
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Tom
C
Sent: Tuesday, 6 October 2009 5:08 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: The BS of Digital Photography
I just ordered a K-7 against
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:03 PM, Doug Franklin
wrote:
> Bob W wrote:
>
>> I shoot raw, so I do have to post-process, but because I'm colour-blind I
>> keep the post-processing down to contrast adjustments, mainly just trying
>> to
>> get a decent tone curve, and some cropping and horizon levelling
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Walker"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
paul stenquist wrote:
On Oct 7, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
On 10/7/09,
paul stenquist wrote:
On Oct 7, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
On 10/7/09, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: The BS of
Digital Photography
Bruce Walker wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly c
On Oct 7, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
On 10/7/09, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: The
BS of
Digital Photography
Bruce Walker wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realizati
In a message dated 10/7/2009 10:29:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
kwal...@peoplepc.com writes:
Coming from 35 years or so of slide film only exposures, my approach is
similar - the more you get right in the camera the less time you spend on
the computer.
Most of the pros I know do the same,
On 10/7/09, William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" Subject: Re: The BS of
> Digital Photography
>
>
>
> > Bruce Walker wrote:
> >
> >
> > > mike wilson wrote:
> > >
> > > > Doug Frankli
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
Bruce Walker wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing tim
From: mike wilson
Doug Franklin wrote:
> I quickly came to the realization that if I get it
> right in the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing
> time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
Makes it easier when you're ready to staple the barbed wire to 'em.
Bruce Walker wrote:
>mike wilson wrote:
>> Doug Franklin wrote:
>>
>>> I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
>>> camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
>>
>> Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
>
>I'm on the fence about that.
Don't
mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
I'm on the fence about that.
-bmw
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@p
On 08/10/2009, Tom C wrote:
> With transparencies I could say 'toss' or 'keep' pretty easily. And
> yes when digitized maybe adjustments were made in Photoshop (I didn't
> forget that point). With digital, I have exposure inaccuracy (can't
> believe the meter), lower dynamic range, and the .jpg i
A lot of them are too long straight from the lumber yard.
Paul
On Oct 7, 2009, at 4:51 PM, mike wilson wrote:
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it right in the
camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
Why is everyone so damned busy proc
David J Brooks wrote:
I try and get it right in camera as well. I can have the nicest
looking histo gram on the planet, but when i open it on the computer,
they just need "something".
I assume your system is color calibrated?
I'm not typically shooting "art" as much as I am for "coverage". A
sion that with raw there is no in camera
processing.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message - From: "Tom C"
Subject: The BS of Digital Photography
I just ordered a K-7 against what may may be my better judgement...
I'm optimistic that it will
In a message dated 10/7/2009 11:48:28 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
p...@web-options.com writes:
> I've seen lots of your work, Bob, but could never tell you
> were color blind... I reckon that's a compliment.
Thanks, Boris. I trust the camera to record the colours accurately enough,
and I don
Doug Franklin wrote:
I quickly came to the realization that if I get it
right in the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing
time.
Why is everyone so damned busy processing posts?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
t
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Bob W wrote:
> > I shoot raw, so I do have to post-process, but because I'm
> > colour-blind I keep the post-processing down to contrast
> adjustments,
> > mainly just trying to get a decent tone curve, and some
> cropping and
> > horizon levelling. It's
> > Conversely, being a good post-processor or a good printer does not
> > necessarily make a person a good photographer, as a look at
> any camera
> > club print show will demonstrate.
>
> Don't you just hate the ones that are all three, though?
I hate all the talented people.
--
PDML Pent
djusted to perfection if you
have a pure grey or white area in the shot that is correctly lit.
Paul
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message - From: "Mark Roberts" >
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
Christine Aguila wrote:
Even with
nneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
Christine Aguila wrote:
Even with digital, I still try to get the best photo in-camera
to keep the post-capture processing down. When I started sh
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Doug Franklin
wrote:
> I started that way. I quickly came to the realization that if I get it
> right in the camera, I can save myself boatloads of post processing time.
> So, for purely selfish motivations, I work a lot harder at getting it right
> at capture t
Mark Roberts wrote:
The trick is being able to tell when you're "bringing out a great
image" and when you're "trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's
ear". :)
Mark!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, plea
ann sanfedele wrote:
>Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>>The rare, portfolio-grade, shot will get additional attention in
>>Photoshop.
>>
>I'd say the rare, portfolio-grade shots won't need further attention :-)
I wish that were true, but sometimes it isn't. True, most really great
shots don't need a lot of
the shooting
process, but before where I may have blamed myself, now I find myself
thinking, I can fix that, it was the stupid camera.
Tom
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 6:13 PM, William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message - From: "Tom C"
> Subject: The BS of Digital Photography
Mark Roberts wrote:
Christine Aguila wrote:
Even with digital, I still try to get the best photo in-camera
to keep the post-capture processing down.
This is my approach *exactly*: I try to get the capture as close to
perfect as I can - just like I did with film - with the goal
.
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J.
Alling
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:28 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
Isn't that expanded dynamic range does now, in a general som
Yep.
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
d...@rileyelf.free-online.co.uk
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:54 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: The BS of Digital Photography
Kind of a bit like this?
http
ailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Christine Aguila
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 7:53 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
From: "Tom C"
It seems the almost instant gratification of digital capture and the
speediness of results has
s.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
> Christine Aguila
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 7:53 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
>
>
> From: "Tom C"
Bob W wrote:
> Conversely, being a good post-processor or a good printer does not
> necessarily make a person a good photographer, as a look at any camera club
> print show will demonstrate.
Don't you just hate the ones that are all three, though?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdm
Christine Aguila wrote:
> Even with digital, I still try to get the best photo in-camera
>to keep the post-capture processing down. When I started shooting digital,
>I read somewhere that more than 5 or 10 minutes or so on a standard picture
>should be enough post-processing. I try to follow
oup/cdplayers/
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdsound/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Desjardins, Steve
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:48 AM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: The BS of Digital Photography
I think
dplayers/
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdsound/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Desjardins, Steve
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:48 AM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: The BS of Digital Photography
Mail List
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
From: "Tom C"
>
> It seems the almost instant gratification of digital capture and the
> speediness of results has been eclipsed by the, OMG factor, and 'what
> do I have to do to adjust this image?'. Time sa
Cotty, sir ;-), since I've praised you more than once, this time I
should refrain from yet another compliment into your direction ;-).
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Cotty wrote:
> Bob's lucky - I'm colour-stupid!
--
Boris
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailma
On 7/10/09, Boris Liberman, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I've seen lots of your work, Bob, but could never tell you were color
>blind... I reckon that's a compliment.
Bob's lucky - I'm colour-stupid!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
-- http://
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Bob W wrote:
> I shoot raw, so I do have to post-process, but because I'm colour-blind I
> keep the post-processing down to contrast adjustments, mainly just trying to
> get a decent tone curve, and some cropping and horizon levelling. It's quick
> and easy.
>
> Bo
> If I start to feel I'm just shooting to be shooting, then I stop
> shooting.
Mark!
> -Original Message-
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On
> Behalf Of Christine Aguila
> Sent: 07 October 2009 00:53
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail Lis
> An example: This is a shot I took out of the window shortly
> after taking off from San Francisco.
>
> http://www.jfwaf.com/temp/SF1.jpg
>
> With slides (and, pretty much, even with negative film)
> that's what you'd end up with. But with digital image
> processing it's easy to get thi
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "paul stenquist"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
On Oct 6, 2009, at 4:42 PM, Ken Waller wrote:
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message - From: "
William Robb wrote:
You are now the photolab as well as the photographer.
Yeah, it /shouldn't/ be that difficult to understand, should it?
--
Thanks,
DougF (KG4LMZ)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, ple
William Robb wrote:
I was chastised on the Pentax forums for saying i usually have to post
process just about every shot i want to keep or sell.
He said i don't know what i';m doing if i need to post process.
Must resist.
OK, I'll wear the William Robb hat for a minute:
Some people are
Bob W wrote:
Back in the film days this often-repeated claim used to rile me greatly, and
it still does. 'Good photographers' take good pictures. That's all it takes
to be a good photographer. You certainly don't need to be a good
post-processor to be a good photographer. Henri Cartier-Bresson,
Bob W wrote:
I shoot raw, so I do have to post-process, but because I'm colour-blind I
keep the post-processing down to contrast adjustments, mainly just trying to
get a decent tone curve, and some cropping and horizon levelling. It's quick
and easy.
I shoot RAW+JPG despite the cost in photos
Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
That's exactly what I feel when I try raw and open it on
whatever editing program (that tend to be very slow to
operate BTW). I can change so many things that I get paralyzed.
I started that way. I quickly came to the realization that if I get it
right in the camera, I
In a message dated 10/6/2009 7:06:19 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
jo...@panix.com writes:
> There are few perfect shots; almost anything can be processed in some way
> depending on your tastes. Most problems were much harder to fix with
film . . .
An example: This is a shot I took out of th
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 02:25:54PM -0400, Desjardins, Steve wrote:
> There are few perfect shots; almost anything can be processed in some way
> depending on your tastes. Most problems were much harder to fix with film .
> . .
An example: This is a shot I took out of the window shortly after ta
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 11:18:00PM +0100, Bob W wrote:
> >
> > I'm surprised there isn't a setting to run the histogram from
> > the raw image. Anyone know why that wouldn't be practical?
> >
>
> The Leicas apparently do it that way. In any case, when you shoot raw (eg
> dng) on them they igno
On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:25:32 -0400
Graydon wrote:
> I don't know about PEF, but DNGs have a full-size (but wretched for
> compression) JPEG in them, and these can be directly extracted.
>
> draw -e *.dng
PEFs also have a full-size jpeg embedded in them which can be extracted
using exiftools (in
From: "Tom C"
It seems the almost instant gratification of digital capture and the
speediness of results has been eclipsed by the, OMG factor, and 'what
do I have to do to adjust this image?'. Time saved by instant results
is erased by time spent post-capture processing.
Does it seem that wa
> >
> > I was chastised on the Pentax forums for saying i usually
> have to post
> > process just about every shot i want to keep or sell.
> > He said i don't know what i';m doing if i need to post process.
>
> Must resist.
>
> William Robb
>
No you mustn't
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: The BS of Digital Photography
>
Nevertheless, with the advent of digital capture, it seems or feels as
if the process is far more complicated.
Does it seem that way to others as well?
Digital photographers have taken the
- Original Message -
From: "David J Brooks"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
I was chastised on the Pentax forums for saying i usually have to post
process just about every shot i want to keep or sell.
He said i don't know what i';m doing if i
In a message dated 10/6/2009 3:48:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
p...@web-options.com writes:
Back in the film days this often-repeated claim used to rile me greatly,
and
it still does. 'Good photographers' take good pictures. That's all it takes
to be a good photographer. You certainly don't
[...]
>
> Tell that to Ansel Adams. Post processing is just as critical
> to the final photograph as proper film developing and
> printing. Good photographers not only post process their
> work, but they consider the post processing when they shoot
> so that they get the best final product pos
>
> My approach to digital has become "How I learned to stop
> worrying and love jpegs."
>
You can stop worrying and love raw too, if you want. I rarely use any of the
fancy options on my cameras (those that have fancy options). I use them in
much the same way as I used to use simple film cam
>
> I'm surprised there isn't a setting to run the histogram from
> the raw image. Anyone know why that wouldn't be practical?
>
The Leicas apparently do it that way. In any case, when you shoot raw (eg
dng) on them they ignore any jpeg settings you've dialled in.
Bob
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 01:52:41PM -0400, David J Brooks wrote:
>> I was chastised on the Pentax forums for saying i usually have to post
>> process just about every shot i want to keep or sell.
>> He said i don't know what i';m doing if i need
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
Dave
>> I was chastised on the Pentax forums for saying i usually have to post
>> process just about every shot i want to keep or sell.
>> He said i don't know what i';m doing if i need to post process.
>
> Tell that to Ansel Adams. Post processin
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 05:07:36PM -0400, paul stenquist scripsit:
> On Oct 6, 2009, at 4:42 PM, Ken Waller wrote:
[snip]
>> But isn't the histogram on the LCD based on a jpeg from the RAW
>> capture?
>> This tweaking could be misleading when on a RAW capture.
>>
> Yes, but dialing down contrast
On Oct 6, 2009, at 4:42 PM, Ken Waller wrote:
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message - From: "paul stenquist" >
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
On Oct 6, 2009, at 3:07 AM, Tom C wrote:
I just ordered a K-7 against what may may
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "paul stenquist"
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
On Oct 6, 2009, at 3:07 AM, Tom C wrote:
I just ordered a K-7 against what may may be my better judgement...
I'm optimistic that
there is no in camera processing.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: The BS of Digital Photography
I just ordered a K-7 against what may may be my better judgement...
I'm optimistic that it will meet my present needs, t
Amen. Thank you.
- Pat
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Desjardins, Steve wrote:
> I think this is the essence of the problem. Since we can adjust so much, we
> feel the need, even an obligation to do. I've just stopped. I post process
> if the picture is bad, otherwise I leave it as is. J
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 01:52:41PM -0400, David J Brooks wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Bob W wrote:
> >> It seems the almost instant gratification of digital capture
> >> and the speediness of results has been eclipsed by the, OMG
> >> factor, and 'what do I have to do to adjust this im
[mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of David J
Brooks
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 1:53 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: The BS of Digital Photography
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Bob W wrote:
>> It seems the almost instant gratification of digital capture
>
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Bob W wrote:
>> It seems the almost instant gratification of digital capture
>> and the speediness of results has been eclipsed by the, OMG
>> factor, and 'what do I have to do to adjust this image?'.
>> Time saved by instant results is erased by time spent
>> post-
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
