A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 7th 14, 02:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On 2014-12-07 00:46:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 16:10:14 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2014-12-06 23:21:34 +0000, PeterN said:

Why do you even bother. Is it that important?


Nope, it is not important at all.


It is sufficiently important to me to cause me to enquire.


....and why would it be important to you as a non-OSX, non-iPhoto, and
non-Aperture user?

I know you have an iPad 3, so iCloud is available to you, and Apple is
going to encourage you to use it more. Perhaps you will, perhaps you
won't.

Apple is going to continue on its path, and all who choose to follow
will adopt whatever shows up in OSX, iOS, and iCloud. Apple will tout
it as the greatest thing since dumping iPhoto & Aperture, Apple
devotees will praise it blindly, and the anti-Apple faction will
condemn it. The same will apply to Adobe software. That is the way of
the World.

That said, this Apple user will continue to use PS + LR in my efforts
to make my images tolerably viewable.


My enquiry has almost nothing to do with anyone's ongoing use of LR or
PS.


Then carry on with however circular you want to make your debate with
nospam. Obviously you missed the point of my response to Peter.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #22  
Old December 7th 14, 02:50 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

A message reference would have been helpful.

the message reference didn't exist when it was posted.

The message to which you referred by writing "see other post for more
details" already existed and that is the message already identified by
the message ID which I see you have unhelpfully snipped.


no it didn't.

both messages were written locally and posted as a batch at the same
time, which means there was no message id when i wrote them or when
they were posted.


OK. I see that. There are three minutes separating the two messages. I
would have thought they were dated and time stamped when they were
posted, not when you put finger to key board.


your news server sucks. both messages were posted within a fraction of
a second of each other. there should not be a 3 minute delay. there
should not even be a 3 *second* delay. at the most, they should differ
by one second, if one was made slightly before the second clicked over.

this is yet another one of your absurd nitpicking rants since you have
absolutely nothing else to argue about.

who the **** cares if there was a message id anyway? unless you have a
****ty news server (which apparently you do, but that's your problem,
not mine), they posts show up together, and as i said, someone would
have either *just* seen the other post or realize they were about to
see it.

Actually, seeing the "other post for more details" is not realy
helpful as the "other post" merely uses different words to say "they
can't coexist".


it's helpful because there's no point in writing the same thing again.


Yet you did.


nope.

But neither is an explanation. It's mere a statement of
fact.


i explained it.

since both were posted at the same time, someone reading the thread
will have either seen the lengthy explanation moments before or they
will realize a more detailed answer is forthcoming in a post they're
about to read.


No explanation.


it had an explanation. it's not my fault you didn't even see it, let
alone understand it.

in other words, a message id is completely unnecessary. you're arguing
just to argue again.


Nope. I'm trying to find out *why* the two won't work together.


explained already.


There is no hint as to an explanation why this should
be the case. Are you able to explain what it is about the situation
which caused you to write, first, "it's either/or" and then "they
can't coexist"?


more bull****. not only did i explain why but you even *quoted* it your
reply, relocated from above to he

what came before, core data and icloud, was fundamentally broken.
apple fixed a lot of the issues but realized it could never work
properly so they said **** it and started over.


That's not an explanation of why. In what way was core data and icloud
fundamentally broken?


yes it is. more details would require an extensive understanding of
core data, which is not going to happen in a post or two, let alone a
book or two.

but basically, core data began life long before there was a cloud
anything, back in the days of nextstep/openstep. it was revised and
released as core data about a decade ago and later made to work with
icloud, except, it didn't do that very well. there were lots of
problems, including data corruption. apple fixed a lot of the issues
but there were some fundamental problems that could not be fixed.

cloud syncing is a very difficult problem to solve and do so correctly
in all situations and without data corruption. dropbox is one of the
better systems, but even that has conflicts that are left for the user
to fix.

as i said, apple said **** it and came up with cloudkit.

it's a bit too soon to know how reliable cloudkit will be, but it can't
be any worse than core data + icloud. another benefit is apple is
dogfooding it so they're more likely to see real world problems and fix
them.
  #23  
Old December 7th 14, 09:48 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On Sat, 06 Dec 2014 20:50:35 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

A message reference would have been helpful.

the message reference didn't exist when it was posted.

The message to which you referred by writing "see other post for more
details" already existed and that is the message already identified by
the message ID which I see you have unhelpfully snipped.

no it didn't.

both messages were written locally and posted as a batch at the same
time, which means there was no message id when i wrote them or when
they were posted.


OK. I see that. There are three minutes separating the two messages. I
would have thought they were dated and time stamped when they were
posted, not when you put finger to key board.


your news server sucks. both messages were posted within a fraction of
a second of each other. there should not be a 3 minute delay. there
should not even be a 3 *second* delay. at the most, they should differ
by one second, if one was made slightly before the second clicked over.


Nothing to do with my news server. The time stamp is applied at your
end.

this is yet another one of your absurd nitpicking rants since you have
absolutely nothing else to argue about.

who the **** cares if there was a message id anyway? unless you have a
****ty news server (which apparently you do, but that's your problem,
not mine), they posts show up together, and as i said, someone would
have either *just* seen the other post or realize they were about to
see it.


Jeez! Why are you frothing at the mouth?

Actually, seeing the "other post for more details" is not realy
helpful as the "other post" merely uses different words to say "they
can't coexist".

it's helpful because there's no point in writing the same thing again.


Yet you did.


nope.

But neither is an explanation. It's mere a statement of
fact.


i explained it.

since both were posted at the same time, someone reading the thread
will have either seen the lengthy explanation moments before or they
will realize a more detailed answer is forthcoming in a post they're
about to read.


No explanation.


it had an explanation. it's not my fault you didn't even see it, let
alone understand it.

in other words, a message id is completely unnecessary. you're arguing
just to argue again.


Nope. I'm trying to find out *why* the two won't work together.


explained already.


!



There is no hint as to an explanation why this should
be the case. Are you able to explain what it is about the situation
which caused you to write, first, "it's either/or" and then "they
can't coexist"?

more bull****. not only did i explain why but you even *quoted* it your
reply, relocated from above to he

what came before, core data and icloud, was fundamentally broken.
apple fixed a lot of the issues but realized it could never work
properly so they said **** it and started over.


That's not an explanation of why. In what way was core data and icloud
fundamentally broken?


yes it is. more details would require an extensive understanding of
core data, which is not going to happen in a post or two, let alone a
book or two.

but basically, core data began life long before there was a cloud
anything, back in the days of nextstep/openstep. it was revised and
released as core data about a decade ago and later made to work with
icloud, except, it didn't do that very well. there were lots of
problems, including data corruption. apple fixed a lot of the issues
but there were some fundamental problems that could not be fixed.

cloud syncing is a very difficult problem to solve and do so correctly
in all situations and without data corruption. dropbox is one of the
better systems, but even that has conflicts that are left for the user
to fix.

as i said, apple said **** it and came up with cloudkit.

it's a bit too soon to know how reliable cloudkit will be, but it can't
be any worse than core data + icloud. another benefit is apple is
dogfooding it so they're more likely to see real world problems and fix
them.


Even that explanation is better than 'it doesn't work'. Thank you.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #24  
Old December 7th 14, 09:50 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 17:36:36 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2014-12-07 00:46:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 16:10:14 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2014-12-06 23:21:34 +0000, PeterN said:

Why do you even bother. Is it that important?

Nope, it is not important at all.


It is sufficiently important to me to cause me to enquire.


...and why would it be important to you as a non-OSX, non-iPhoto, and
non-Aperture user?


In-built curiosity.

I know you have an iPad 3, so iCloud is available to you, and Apple is
going to encourage you to use it more. Perhaps you will, perhaps you
won't.

Apple is going to continue on its path, and all who choose to follow
will adopt whatever shows up in OSX, iOS, and iCloud. Apple will tout
it as the greatest thing since dumping iPhoto & Aperture, Apple
devotees will praise it blindly, and the anti-Apple faction will
condemn it. The same will apply to Adobe software. That is the way of
the World.

That said, this Apple user will continue to use PS + LR in my efforts
to make my images tolerably viewable.


My enquiry has almost nothing to do with anyone's ongoing use of LR or
PS.


Then carry on with however circular you want to make your debate with
nospam. Obviously you missed the point of my response to Peter.


It was not relevant to my query to nospam.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #25  
Old December 7th 14, 05:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 741
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On 12/6/2014 8:26 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-12-07 00:23:43 +0000, PeterN said:

On 12/6/2014 7:10 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-12-06 23:21:34 +0000, PeterN said:

Why do you even bother. Is it that important?

Nope, it is not important at all.

Apple is going to continue on its path, and all who choose to follow
will adopt whatever shows up in OSX, iOS, and iCloud. Apple will tout it
as the greatest thing since dumping iPhoto & Aperture, Apple devotees
will praise it blindly, and the anti-Apple faction will condemn it. The
same will apply to Adobe software. That is the way of the World.

That said, this Apple user will continue to use PS + LR in my efforts to
make my images tolerably viewable.



This PC user will continue to use PS, and am still learning LR.


Keep going.
I suggest that you use it as a portal to PS and the other plug-ins such
as the NIK & OnOne stuff. If you import & retain your original NEFs, or
convert to DNG, use the LR image editing tools instead of ACR. Just
remember you can go to PS whenever you choose, and the Camera RAW filter
is still available in PS.
The working copy with layers can be saved back to LR and reopened in PS
from LR whenever you choose. Then from LR you can export as a JPEG for
sharing without having a JPEG taking up space in LR.

I am taking advantage of my 20GB of Creative Cloud storage fpr having
collections on my desktop and in LR Mobile (Free) on both my iPhone &
iPad. Then as you have seen, I can share any of those collections I
choose to by providing the Adobe CC link.

When I share via Dropbox, I have a preset in the LR Export dialog, where
I resize (to my parameters), convert to JPEG, and export to an
appropriate Dropbox "Public" folder.
So in the Export dialog I can go to a preset, or I can right click and
by-pass the export dialog by invoking the preset.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_1066.jpg
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_1067.jpg

I find for online viewing limiting the max vertical dimension to 940 pix
is optimal.

Which lets me share this JPEG, without having a JPEG in LR.
https://db.tt/cRVwu23V






BTW have you tried Topaz Impressions? I have stopped using Painter.


Nope. That isn't really my sort of thing. ;-)
I am not a great fan of the some of the Topaz stuff, and I have more
than enough to work with with NIK, OnOne, and my current tinkering with
the Mac only Intensify Pro & Tonality Pro.
http://macphun.com/getstarted/intensify/features?_ga=1.21482427.1226465012.1412871464

http://macphun.com/getstarted/tonality?_ga=1.130468367.1226465012.1412871464


If you ha e Kelby One, you can see Eddie Tapp's course on blending modes.
http://kelbyone.com/course/tapp_blending2/





https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/C26-peternewm-C1-Approaching%20Strom.jpg


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/C26-peternewm-C1-Montauk%20Sunset.jpg


As
usual constructive comments welcome.


As I said, not really my sort of thing, but OK for what it is.


Horses for courses.



--
PeterN
  #26  
Old December 7th 14, 05:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 741
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On 12/6/2014 8:36 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-12-07 00:46:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 16:10:14 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2014-12-06 23:21:34 +0000, PeterN said:

Why do you even bother. Is it that important?

Nope, it is not important at all.


It is sufficiently important to me to cause me to enquire.


...and why would it be important to you as a non-OSX, non-iPhoto, and
non-Aperture user?

I know you have an iPad 3, so iCloud is available to you, and Apple is
going to encourage you to use it more. Perhaps you will, perhaps you won't.

Apple is going to continue on its path, and all who choose to follow
will adopt whatever shows up in OSX, iOS, and iCloud. Apple will tout
it as the greatest thing since dumping iPhoto & Aperture, Apple
devotees will praise it blindly, and the anti-Apple faction will
condemn it. The same will apply to Adobe software. That is the way of
the World.

That said, this Apple user will continue to use PS + LR in my efforts
to make my images tolerably viewable.


My enquiry has almost nothing to do with anyone's ongoing use of LR or
PS.


Then carry on with however circular you want to make your debate with
nospam. Obviously you missed the point of my response to Peter.


And of my comment, to which you responded.


--
PeterN
  #27  
Old December 7th 14, 06:08 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

A message reference would have been helpful.

the message reference didn't exist when it was posted.

The message to which you referred by writing "see other post for more
details" already existed and that is the message already identified by
the message ID which I see you have unhelpfully snipped.

no it didn't.

both messages were written locally and posted as a batch at the same
time, which means there was no message id when i wrote them or when
they were posted.

OK. I see that. There are three minutes separating the two messages. I
would have thought they were dated and time stamped when they were
posted, not when you put finger to key board.


your news server sucks. both messages were posted within a fraction of
a second of each other. there should not be a 3 minute delay. there
should not even be a 3 *second* delay. at the most, they should differ
by one second, if one was made slightly before the second clicked over.


Nothing to do with my news server. The time stamp is applied at your
end.


it's not at my end.

both messages were posted within a fraction of a second of each other.

this is yet another one of your absurd nitpicking rants since you have
absolutely nothing else to argue about.

who the **** cares if there was a message id anyway? unless you have a
****ty news server (which apparently you do, but that's your problem,
not mine), they posts show up together, and as i said, someone would
have either *just* seen the other post or realize they were about to
see it.


Jeez! Why are you frothing at the mouth?


because you're arguing about something *completely* irrelevant.

the time stamp makes absolutely no difference whatsoever? what matters
is the *contents*, which you are completely ignoring so that you can
babble.
  #28  
Old December 7th 14, 07:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On 2014-12-07 16:52:36 +0000, PeterN said:

On 12/6/2014 8:26 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-12-07 00:23:43 +0000, PeterN said:
On 12/6/2014 7:10 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-12-06 23:21:34 +0000, PeterN said:

Why do you even bother. Is it that important?

Nope, it is not important at all.

Apple is going to continue on its path, and all who choose to follow
will adopt whatever shows up in OSX, iOS, and iCloud. Apple will tout it
as the greatest thing since dumping iPhoto & Aperture, Apple devotees
will praise it blindly, and the anti-Apple faction will condemn it. The
same will apply to Adobe software. That is the way of the World.

That said, this Apple user will continue to use PS + LR in my efforts to
make my images tolerably viewable.

This PC user will continue to use PS, and am still learning LR.


Keep going.
I suggest that you use it as a portal to PS and the other plug-ins such
as the NIK & OnOne stuff. If you import & retain your original NEFs, or
convert to DNG, use the LR image editing tools instead of ACR. Just
remember you can go to PS whenever you choose, and the Camera RAW filter
is still available in PS.
The working copy with layers can be saved back to LR and reopened in PS
from LR whenever you choose. Then from LR you can export as a JPEG for
sharing without having a JPEG taking up space in LR.

I am taking advantage of my 20GB of Creative Cloud storage fpr having
collections on my desktop and in LR Mobile (Free) on both my iPhone &
iPad. Then as you have seen, I can share any of those collections I
choose to by providing the Adobe CC link.

When I share via Dropbox, I have a preset in the LR Export dialog, where
I resize (to my parameters), convert to JPEG, and export to an
appropriate Dropbox "Public" folder.
So in the Export dialog I can go to a preset, or I can right click and
by-pass the export dialog by invoking the preset.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_1066.jpg
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_1067.jpg

I find for online viewing limiting the max vertical dimension to 940 pix
is optimal.

Which lets me share this JPEG, without having a JPEG in LR.
https://db.tt/cRVwu23V


BTW have you tried Topaz Impressions? I have stopped using Painter.


Nope. That isn't really my sort of thing. ;-)
I am not a great fan of the some of the Topaz stuff, and I have more
than enough to work with with NIK, OnOne, and my current tinkering with
the Mac only Intensify Pro & Tonality Pro.
http://macphun.com/getstarted/intensify/features?_ga=1.21482427.1226465012.1412871464


http://macphun.com/getstarted/tonality?_ga=1.130468367.1226465012.1412871464

If

you ha e Kelby One, you can see Eddie Tapp's course on blending modes.
http://kelbyone.com/course/tapp_blending2/


I subscribe to Kelby/NAAP/Photoshop User and regularly check on
tutorials & exercises. Photoshop & Lightroom are a continuing education
project for me.

What exactly were you getting at with blending modes, and the demo
being given with CS3?

So much has been refined now that we are at PS CC (2014) and many of
the plug-ins have developed quite amazingly. It still boils down to
what you want to do with your images, and how to go about that.


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/C26-peternewm-C1-Approaching%20Strom.jpg


https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/C26-peternewm-C1-Montauk%20Sunset.jpg


As

usual constructive comments welcome.

As I said, not really my sort of thing, but OK for what it is.


Horses for courses.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #29  
Old December 7th 14, 07:55 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 741
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On 12/7/2014 1:21 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-12-07 16:52:36 +0000, PeterN said:


snip

BTW have you tried Topaz Impressions? I have stopped using Painter.

Nope. That isn't really my sort of thing. ;-)
I am not a great fan of the some of the Topaz stuff, and I have more
than enough to work with with NIK, OnOne, and my current tinkering with
the Mac only Intensify Pro & Tonality Pro.
http://macphun.com/getstarted/intensify/features?_ga=1.21482427.1226465012.1412871464


http://macphun.com/getstarted/tonality?_ga=1.130468367.1226465012.1412871464


If

you ha e Kelby One, you can see Eddie Tapp's course on blending modes.
http://kelbyone.com/course/tapp_blending2/


I subscribe to Kelby/NAAP/Photoshop User and regularly check on
tutorials & exercises. Photoshop & Lightroom are a continuing education
project for me.

What exactly were you getting at with blending modes, and the demo being
given with CS3?


When I saw your images, processed with Macphun, they reminded me of what
Eddie shows can be easily accomplished using layers, filters and
blending modes. Just another way of accomplishing a goal. That the
tutorial was for an earlier version, is irrelevant. The same technique
can be used with any later version of PS.


snip

--
PeterN
  #30  
Old December 7th 14, 09:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default The mess that is Photos on iOS and OSX

On Sun, 07 Dec 2014 12:08:13 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

A message reference would have been helpful.

the message reference didn't exist when it was posted.

The message to which you referred by writing "see other post for more
details" already existed and that is the message already identified by
the message ID which I see you have unhelpfully snipped.

no it didn't.

both messages were written locally and posted as a batch at the same
time, which means there was no message id when i wrote them or when
they were posted.

OK. I see that. There are three minutes separating the two messages. I
would have thought they were dated and time stamped when they were
posted, not when you put finger to key board.

your news server sucks. both messages were posted within a fraction of
a second of each other. there should not be a 3 minute delay. there
should not even be a 3 *second* delay. at the most, they should differ
by one second, if one was made slightly before the second clicked over.


Nothing to do with my news server. The time stamp is applied at your
end.


it's not at my end.

both messages were posted within a fraction of a second of each other.


From 1987 http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc850/rfc850.html

"The Date line (formerly "Posted") is the date, in a format that
must be acceptable both to the ARPANET and to the getdate routine,
that the article was originally posted to the network. This date
remains unchanged as the article is propagated throughout the
network."

.... and now
http://www.tcpipguide.com/free/t_Use...lHeaders-2.htm

"Date: The date and time that the message was originally
posted to Usenet. This is usually the
date/time that the user submitted the article to his
or her local NNTP server.

this is yet another one of your absurd nitpicking rants since you have
absolutely nothing else to argue about.

who the **** cares if there was a message id anyway? unless you have a
****ty news server (which apparently you do, but that's your problem,
not mine), they posts show up together, and as i said, someone would
have either *just* seen the other post or realize they were about to
see it.


Jeez! Why are you frothing at the mouth?


because you're arguing about something *completely* irrelevant.


Citing a message ID is arguing?

the time stamp makes absolutely no difference whatsoever? what matters
is the *contents*, which you are completely ignoring so that you can
babble.


The two different times of posting explain why I received your
articles in the reverse order in which you intended to send them.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The current Photo mess on iOS and OSX Sandman Digital Photography 12 December 5th 14 03:37 PM
Don't mess with Homeland Security!! Gary Edstrom Digital Photography 2 February 4th 11 06:20 PM
The format mess SimonLW Digital Photography 7 February 10th 07 06:48 PM
Did ACDSee mess me up? Need some help baker1 Digital Photography 10 January 21st 06 05:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.