If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote: The OP seems to be well aware that a more functional OS is eventually going to allow him to produce better results...] except he said he didn't want to switch to a more functional os. There ain't none, sonny. nonsense. windows and certainly mac os x are far more functional because of the vastly wider selection of apps, as well as the more advanced internals (mostly os x on that one). some of those mac and windows apps are extremely capable, such as photoshop and lightroom, as well as aperture, dxo and numerous others. another plus is compatibility with mobile devices and having images automatically sync, and in some cases, carry over the edits done on the mobile device. linux only wishes it could do that. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , sid
wrote: The OP seems to be well aware that a more functional OS is eventually going to allow him to produce better results...] I am curious how you come up with this. To me, it's like saying a better developing pan will lead to better photographs when working with film. the advantage of a more functional operating system is the availability of more functional apps which can produce better results. His OS of choice does not at all improve or hinder his ability to take good photographs. In your opinion his OS may limit his ability to post process his photos but in others opinion it does not. There is little point in having the whole photoshop vs gimp discussion here again is there? it's not a matter of opinion. linux has the fewest number of apps available, which means it is the most limited. better apps can also greatly increase productivity, which means fewer hassles in producing the results, leaving more time to concentrate on photography itself rather than the processing. There are any number of good programs available for his OS allowing him all those advantages too, why do think that's not the case? that number is tiny compared to what's available for mac and windows systems. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: Also be aware that with Linux if you become proficient at writing shell scripts there is just no end of ways to improve productivity. The ImageMagick tools are fabulous for editing. And there are many ways a shell script can speed up your workflow. For example, I preview my images, as JPEGs, with a very customized version of XV which can sort them into various directories. The JPEG images I don't want to convert with UFRAW go into one special directory, and then a shell script moves the RAW files to the same directories where the JPEG is now at. Then I run UFRAW and it never loads a file I don't want to process. Plus when I want to run the batch on all of them, I use a script that does odd things like automatically setting wavelet noise reduction depending on the ISO it was shot at, and it determines how many CPU cores are available and proceeds to keep each CPU busy with a different process (which with as many as 12 cores can make a huge difference in how fast a few hundred RAW files can be converted to TIFF files). if that isn't proof that linux users do things in the most difficult and most convoluted way possible, i don't know what is. Well put. (Except that Linux users can make things even more difficult and convoluted when they really warm up). To a Linux user the above inanity is a badge of honour. no kidding. they think it is somehow a good thing. meanwhile, mac/win users can do the same in almost no time, without needing to write and debug a script. drag lightroom to the apps folder and start processing. once they do that, they can go out and do something more interesting in all the time they have left over from not needing to hack up and then debug a solution. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , ray carter
wrote: I have proudly used Linux exclusively for over a decade - I've yet to find anything important to me that I can't do with it and in the process, I've saved thousands of dollars. then you are completely unaware of what other operating systems can do. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , sid
wrote: [...] most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying attention to improving your photography. ...and having to think about how to maneuver around the arcane mechanics of an OS to process digital images rather than the mechanics of the style and subjects of our photography is an impediment & distraction. What "archane mechanics" do you suppose one has to maneuver inorder to process images. Clicking an icon is way easier with osx I take it? certainly easier than writing and debugging a script to process images, such as what floyd suggests. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: I have proudly used Linux exclusively for over a decade - I've yet to find anything important to me that I can't do with it and in the process, I've saved thousands of dollars. Meanwhile in the professional world of graphics design, including photographic editing, the "creatives" choice remains OS X coupled to application suites from Adobe and others. Linux "market share" for desktop continues its decline as OS X rises (Macs being more affordable than ever has a lot to do with that...). In desktop use, as of 2013 OS X stands at about 6.5% (up from a few percent at the start of the intel switch) and Linux has declined to 1.6% from a high of around 2.5% or so. that's overall market share. mac market share for graphics professionals or photographers is much higher than overall share. nearly every ad agency, for example, uses macs. roughly *half* of adobe's sales are for the mac. Linux remains a strong choice for servers, embedded systems and so on - but it's pretty lame for desktop since the major productivity apps are not produced for it (bandaids like WINE are a PITA). There are narrow cases like thin clients for data entry and the like. it's great for servers, but not necessarily the best choice there either. not looking at all of the options is always a bad idea. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , ray carter
wrote: I will say this, you should be seeing a difference, a big difference in the image quality between files produced by your G2 and your 600D. If not, the problem might lie in some peculiarity in your photographic technique, but most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying attention to improving your photography. There is much more that goes into the selection of an OS, at least for most of us, than the impact of one application. I have proudly used Linux exclusively for over a decade - I've yet to find anything important to me that I can't do with it and in the process, I've saved thousands of dollars. Meanwhile in the professional world of graphics design, including photographic editing, the "creatives" choice remains OS X coupled to application suites from Adobe and others. Many of us are not "professionals" in "graphics design" - quite frankly, I don't have the same requirements, so it does not matter much what they use. you don't have to be a professional or graphics designer to use good tools. anyone can use them. the point is that people who do this every day, where productivity is important, do not choose ****ty tools. you can use the very same high quality tools as they do, or you can choose the ****ty tools. why someone would intentionally choose the latter i don't know but some people do. Linux "market share" for desktop continues its decline as OS X rises (Macs being more affordable than ever has a lot to do with that...). In desktop use, as of 2013 OS X stands at about 6.5% (up from a few percent at the start of the intel switch) and Linux has declined to 1.6% from a high of around 2.5% or so. PROBLEM: There have never been reliable numbers for that. How, for instance, would one even pretend to know how many desktop machines have Linux installed? who needs to pretend? linux market share on the desktop is tiny and shrinking. whether it's 1.6% or 2.5% or even 6% doesn't matter. it's tiny. BTW: Linux is probably the most used OS on the planet. All those Android platforms run a Linux kernel and Java VM. android may have linux at its core, but it's not running linux apps and therefore is not counted as a linux system. linux geeks like to include it because that's the only way they can pretend that linux is more common that it actually is. android is running android apps, written to the android api, running in the dalvik and now art virtual machine. android users don't know nor care there's linux under the hood. they didn't buy it because it has linux, they bought it because they wanted a particular phone. google could replace linux with something else and nobody would know because the apps run out of the vm. many consumer devices run linux and don't even have apps, such as watches and thermostats. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: BTW: Linux is probably the most used OS on the planet. All those Android platforms run a Linux kernel and Java VM. Which is beside the point - the numbers provided are for desktop environments. There are also stats for smartphones: iOS: 55.9% (belying your claim above) Android: 30.6% and the others. (Same source as the first stat). (Don't forget that while sales of smartphones has been tipping away from Apple, there are about 700M iPhones out there, the vast majority still in use.) a lot of android phones are glorified feature phones that have android. they aren't smartphones. there are even refrigerators that run android. nobody is going to do photo processing on a feature phone and certainly not a refrigerator. even the low end android smartphones can't run the likes of photoshop touch, iphoto, etc. a stat from yesterday was that 80% of black friday purchases made on a mobile device were done on ios. in other words, ios users actually use their phones, rather than just brag that there's linux in it, somewhere. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D
In article , sid
wrote: To process photography on a Linux machine requires more awareness and expertise of the OS v. OS X or even the Redmond abomination. That, as you like to say, is horse****. Clicking an icon is exactly the same no matter what OS you have chosen to use. there's a *lot* more to processing images than clicking an icon. if it were only that simple. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
converting 35 mm slides to digital images | LeighWillaston | Digital Photography | 30 | June 18th 07 10:46 AM |
Converting 35mm Slides to Digital Images | Jim[_9_] | Digital Photography | 0 | June 2nd 07 02:18 PM |
Are you converting your RAW images to DNG? | JC Dill | Digital Photography | 140 | November 10th 06 04:07 PM |
QuickTake 150 images - Converting on PC | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 5 | April 21st 06 03:00 PM |
Tool for converting 12-bit TIFF images to 16-bit TIFF-images? | Peter Frank | Digital Photography | 23 | December 13th 04 02:41 AM |