Nathan Wajsman wrote:
> Thanks Moose. Do you actually have a day job, or does someone pay you to
> be so helpful and thorough here on the list? ;-)
>
No, praise whatever god/being works for you, I don't have a day job.
I've been oh so happily semi retired for over seven years. (NO, I didn't
wait for 65 - praise, etc. again.) Having the time for the fun of
getting back into photography with both feet has been great.
I do a little consulting for my former employer, where I was wise/lucky
enough to design some small, but important, computer systems. One of
them is deeply embedded with the top executives of a Fortune 500
company. And I'm the only one who knows it's insides. Yup, even the big
boys sometimes breed skunk works. So my income has been and will be, at
least for a while, enhanced by that, as changes and enhancements are
desired. I start work on another nice little revision project tomorrow.
So far, the only material reward my unbelievably sage and useful
advice/help here ;-) has netted me is a few bottles of lovely brew
from New England. No complaints, though, either about the excellent ale,
its excellent sender or the lack of other spiffs. I do it for my own
purposes. If anyone should feel compelled to donate, I wouldn't turn it
down, and would probably be gleeful at the very idea - this address is a
PayPal address. :-)
Really, if anything you read from me here is worth more than you paid
for it, enjoy! Pass on whatever you have to pass on to someone else. If
we were all passing on what we have to offer more freely (and with fewer
strings and expectations), we'd all be richer in the things that count.....
> I looked at PTLens but I am reluctant to get involved with another piece
> of software. It is not the money, obviously, but I just like my workflow
> simple, and so I do everything in Lightroom.
It's a shame Lightroom doesn't have plug-in capability yet. It's going
to be a while, and will require each one to be especially
written/interfaced for it. PS plug-ins likely won't ever work in Lightroom.
It's simple for a PS user like me. PTLens is just another filter that
can be included in Actions (macros). The several images I did of yours
took less time than you might imagine - open, click on an action, take a
few seconds to see what it did (layers again!), and save. Then grab the
originals and results, drag into JAlbum and bang, web gallery. The
looking at results part was only because I didn't have the focal length
info. Otherwise, one may run it as a batch.
The standalone version of PTLens will intelligently batch process
images, applying the appropriate profile based on lens and focal length
data in the EXIF. On the down side, the stand-alone version doesn't
handle RAW and TIFF images or 16 bits. (I guess the plug-in in effect
inherits those capabilities from PS.) So for you, PTLens batch
processing would be an after Post affair
> I think that Lightroom has some lens calibration tools, will have to check
> them out.
>
I don't know. I tried the Beta,and Lightroom just isn't the tool for me,
so I passed on the $ version. It did some stuff easier or cooler than
PS, but didn't do other stuff I absolutely rely on at all. I seem to be
a layers and masks sort of fellow, among other things.
As far as I could find out, the only thing that comes close to PTLens
for working automatically with profiles, rather than hand work doing the
correction, is DxO, for many more $$. I've even used PTLens with good
results for non-profiled old MF lenses by rying profiles for other lense
of similar focal length til I find one that works. Maybe not perfect,
but better than the alternative. Especially so when working with an
image with no straight lines.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|