Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/content/60/9972860/html/smf/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Latest posts of: gusmahler
The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 03, 2020, 03:49:12 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28033 Posts in 5147 Topics by 2903 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2
1  General / Comments about the book / Table of contents of new edition? on: June 10, 2009, 06:29:44 PM
Is the table of contents of the book available on-line? Or perhaps a brief outline of what new materials are in the new book? My local book stores don't have it in stock and I'd like to look it over before I decide to buy it.

Gus M
2  Software Discussions / Choosing Software/Other DAM Applications / Re: What's wrong with iPhoto on: June 10, 2009, 06:22:33 PM
I was reading somewhere that iPhoto no longer copies photos you import into it. True? (I believe it said that you now have the option of having iPhoto merely point to the files) If so, does that make it a better DAM program?

Gus M
3  Software Discussions / Choosing Software/Other DAM Applications / What's wrong with iPhoto on: December 30, 2008, 11:01:40 PM
I've searched here and it seems that people basically blow off iPhoto as a serious DAM program. I know it's not "serious" enough for a pro. And it's probably not good enough for someone with a large number of photos. But I'm wondering exactly what is wrong with the program such that it is not good enough for serious work?

Here's my situation: I'm currently a PC user. However, I'm thinking of moving to the Mac. I'm not a pro photographer, but I'm the unofficial keeper of my family's images. Thus, I have a lot of images. I haven't bothered tallying the total, because it's spread over two hard drives and I don't currently use DAM software. But I'd guess it's around 50-75 GB of images. Currently, I use Bridge and have transitioned to shooting mainly in RAW. Problem is, my wife HATES Bridge. We used to use Photoshop Elements 3 and that's what she's used to. She thinks Bridge is too complicated to actually find images (and she's right about that, at least until I keyword the images).

So I was wondering if she could use iPhoto as her way to find images to send to people and such, while I use Lightroom to do serious cataloging and image manipulation (in conjunction with CS3).

So please delineate the limitations of iPhoto for me. And comment on my proposed usage of iPhoto. (My only experience with iPhoto is playing around with it at the Apple store).

Gus
4  Software Discussions / ImageIngester and ImageVerifier / Re: Bug report--Multiple Camera Ingestion on: October 26, 2008, 09:56:16 AM
Thanks for the quick reply. I had taken photos of the same event on two different cameras. On one camera, they were numbered in thee 1400s, on the other in the 7000s.

I wanted the photos combined in date order and renumbered. I arbitrarily chose 8500 as the starting number. So all the photos were renumbered to, e.g. 20081024_8500.CR2 to 20081024_8633.CR2. I wanted the folder to be named 8500-8633. How would I set that up?
5  Software Discussions / ImageIngester and ImageVerifier / Bug report--Multiple Camera Ingestion on: October 25, 2008, 01:27:48 PM
Using II version 3.2.04 for Windows.

I have two directories from separate cameras that I previously ingested. I am re-ingesting to consecutively number the files in chronological order. I want the files to go in a directory titled by number range. But the result is a folder named with the first and last date of ingestion. (1005-1024).

Number range works fine when ingesting single files.

The log file is at http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dhh285sf_0cw8j5f3q

Gus M
6  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Re: Naming files with Dates on: September 30, 2008, 05:34:58 PM
Dave,

I noticed the same behaviour creeping into the Batch Rename function within Bridge a few months ago.

Quite often I will upload files from a shoot when I get home, and this is often after midnight although has sometimes spanned midnight.  I use ImageIngester to get images from card to computer and this always renames them correctly.  However after my reviewing process, when I delete the images that really are no good I like to rename them so that there are no missing sequence numbers. 

Why not just use Image Ingester to rename/renumber the files after deleting bad files?

Or why bother renaming in the first place. What does it matter if the next image after 20080930_1234.DNG is 20080930_1245.DNG?

Gus
7  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Lightroom 2 and importing DNGs on: September 30, 2008, 11:03:39 AM
I've downloaded the trial of Lightroom 2 and have noticed that it's handling of DNG files is very slow.

I don't currently have a DAM program, so have been using Bridge CS3. When I import RAW files, I convert them using the standalone DNG converter, with the setting to create a full-sized preview.

But when I import those files into Lightroom 2, it wants to create previews again. Why? I thought the whole point of creating full-sized previews with the DNG converter is that other program can use the previews instead of generating them itself. The problem is that my computer slows to a crawl while it's generating the previews.

So does this mean that I should convert in Lightroom? I guess that would be a good solution in the future, but it's not a good solution for my legacy RAW files.

Gus
8  Software Discussions / ImageIngester and ImageVerifier / Possible bug? on: July 21, 2008, 02:50:42 PM
Not sure if this is a bug, or if this is the way it's supposed to happen.

Using the latest version of II v.3, on a computer with XP. My card reader is drive H:

When I select H:\ as the source. It always fails on me. I have to set it to the subdirectory with the photos (H:\DCIM) for it to work. It's not that big a deal, but I thought I should point this out.

Gus
9  Software Discussions / Lightroom / Re: Does LR have an importation and management photos limit? on: July 14, 2008, 12:29:08 PM
ps I don't think anyone has written anything more persuasive than this on the subject of having one catalogue or many Wink


Link doesn't seem to work. This one does, though:

http://www.beardsworth.co.uk/news/index.php?id=P1071

Gus
10  DAM Stuff / Hardware Discussions / Re: The slide & negative to digital picture converter on: July 09, 2008, 07:52:57 PM
I've no idea how it works. But the ad you see is a scam. You can find that at many places and you don't have to order it by a certain time.

Amazon sells it for $99 and always has free shipping. (And a very generous return policy if the product isn't any good).

http://www.amazon.com/VuPoint-FS-C1-VP-Silde-Digital-Converter/dp/B000V7CPJG (be sure to read the lengthy reviews here).

I've been unable to find any serious discussion of the product at any photo site, in 5 minutes of Googling. Since you don't have an August deadline to buy it, I think you should do some serious research before getting it. It seems to fall in the "too good to be true" cateogry."

The benefit of using a service is time. If your scanning more than just a roll of film, you're going to be spending a lot of time scanning and dealing with dust. Time that might be better used by sending the film to someone to do for you.

EDIT: Found more reviews here:
http://forums.techguy.org/digital-photography-imaging/626156-vupoint-solutions-film-scanner.html
11  DAM Stuff / Hardware Discussions / Re: Best configuration for a 2 drive system on: July 08, 2008, 03:02:06 PM
I would switch the drives. Use the bigger drive for data, and the smaller one for the OS and applications. I don't see how one would have 500 GB of applications. My current C: drive, even with some data on it, doesn't fill my 200 GB, while I had to buy an extra data drive to hold additional data.

Gus
12  DAM Stuff / Hardware Discussions / Re: Vista 64-bit or 32-bit? on: July 07, 2008, 04:26:22 PM
Gus,

Another option would be to stay with XP. You could acquire a copy or transfer one you already have to the new machine, allowing you to postpone the 32-64 bit decision until later.

This assumes that XP will do everything you need.

Note that end of life means end of sales, not end of support. With the installed base of XP it is very unlikely that Microsoft will be ending support any time soon (as much as they might like to).


Yeah, I was thinking about that too. Apparently, while you can't buy XP on a new machine anymore, you can still buy it if you're building your own machine, at least until January 31, 2009. Support will last until 2014. By then, I'll probably have a new machine anyway, so I might just stick with XP for the time being.

But I was hoping that Vista 64 would provide some benefits.
13  DAM Stuff / Hardware Discussions / Re: Vista 64-bit or 32-bit? on: July 07, 2008, 04:03:30 PM
I'm still under XP 32-bit and plan to stay that way for at least a few more years.  My hope is that Vista-64 bit will be mature by then with full third party driver and app support.  When I make the move, I'm hoping to kill two birds with one stone (i.e. XP to Vista and 32-bit to 64-bit).  Also, Vista is a resource hog.  I don't look forward to backing it up.  Rule of thumb is wait for Microsoft to announce the release date of thier next O/S before upgrading to the current one ;-).

Dan

The next version of Windows (aka Vienna) is rumored for a 2009-2010 release date (OTOH, Vista was originally scheduled for 2003, but wasn't released until January 2007).

Gus
14  DAM Stuff / Hardware Discussions / Vista 64-bit or 32-bit? on: July 02, 2008, 04:46:02 PM
With XP nearing end of life (consumers can no longer buy XP on new computers as of July 1), it looks like people will be forced to move to Vista. I'll be building/buying a computer sometime this summer/fall, with the current intent that it is solely going to be used as a media computer (video editing and photo editing), though I'll probably also stick my music files on their also so I can listen while I work. No games or other extraneous software, as I'll be using my old computer for those purposes.

With Lightroom 2 supporting 64-bit and CS4 to be available in a 64-bit version, is the time right to go to Vista 64-bit? Or have all the driver issues that were present when Vista 64 first came out still present?

Gus
15  General / General Discussion / Re: Introduction on: July 02, 2008, 10:29:43 AM

      Reading Gus' question and Dan's answer, I got some doubts I suppose is common to everyone who uses only Lightroom and didn't already start to use Iview/Expression Media:

      - Why this concern about Microsoft abandon Expression Media? Why it has been talked lately and which is the possibility of this really happen?

My concern is simple: Everyone knows about Lightroom and Aperture. They are the 500 lb gorillas in this field. While EM is obviously big in these forums, I'd never heard of the program before I found this board. So I would guess that it doesn't sell nearly as well as Lightroom does. Because of Photoshop, I'd guess that Lightroom will always sell better than EM. Eventually, MS is going to have to decide if EM is actually making money. If it is, MS will keep making it and keep supporting it. But if it's not, it wouldn't be a big deal to abandon the market to Adobe and Apple.

So basically, my concern is that Iview was the main product of a company dedicated to this genre. EM is now a niche product of the largest software corporation in the world.

Adobe is a large corporation also, but image processing IS their market. It's much less likely that they will abandon Lightroom.

Is my analysis good? I have no idea.
Pages: [1] 2
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!