Anything wrong with using ACR for ORF conversions? You can get ACR as
part of PhotoShop Elements for under $80 if you look around. Since I'm
no longer doing portraits and swapping heads, etc. I do the majority of
my work these days in ACR.
Cbuck Norcutt
On 1/27/2012 7:53 AM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> Other than that, how'd you like Aftershot, Chuck?
>
> Has anyone compared an Aftershot raw conversion of an ORF at 100% with
> one done in Studio?
>
> I still might buy Sagelight, as I think it is fine for Canaan raw
> conversions, but I still have to convert ORFs with Studio. It's no
> surprise that things like this work well for Canaan just because of
> their penetration. One of my gripes with reviews of the E cameras is
> that they usually use a third-party SW for raw conversion, and why
> shouldn't they when it works just fine for C cameras? I keep forgetting
> the fact, only to rediscover it when I "go to strangers."
>
> Joel W.
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012, at 07:37 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> I haven't read anything yet about using AfterShot Pro but, based on your
>> query, I took about 5 minutes to play with it to convert a raw image,
>> adjust exposure and color and then convert to B&W. I didn't discover
>> (yet) how to convert to B&W while controlling the color (similar to how
>> you would use color filters in B&W photography) but I have no doubt it
>> exists.
>>
>> It looks to me like everything you are likely to require for a very long
>> time is in your $20 acquisition. Pay attention to the tabs at the left
>> side of the screen to navigate the files and the tabs at the right side
>> of the screen for editing the images starting with exposure and color
>> info. You can probably do a great deal with nothing more than what's on
>> the startup screen for finding files and editing exposure and color info.
>>
>> ps: I have no idea what it did with my corrections to a single image.
>> I suppose it created some sort of sidecar file describing the changes
>> but haven't checked that. I just closed the application without doing
>> any deliberate save and expected a question about whether I wanted to
>> cancel the changes I had made but that didn't happen. I guess I need to
>> read the destructions.
>>
>> I found one thing I definitely didn't like. On the file navigation
>> dialoge if you have long, descriptive file names (as I do) and multiple
>> subdirectory trees there appears to be no provision to scroll the list
>> of file names back and forth within their own window. To read the full
>> directory or file names it's necessary to enlarge the width of the
>> window thus squeezing the available window space for the image. I sure
>> hope there's a way around that as it would be a pain to continually
>> resize that window.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> On 1/27/2012 2:28 AM, J. Timothy Dean wrote:
>>> __________
>>>
>>> At the outset of this message reply... I must admit that I am definitely
>>> still a * RAW * (pun intended) 'Newbie' with respect to working with and
>>> editing Digital Imaging Files (as I just picked up Corel After Shot Pro for
>>> $20). BTW... Thank-you to all of the 'respective' OM List Members' for
>>> bringing this Software 'deal' (After Shot Pro) to my attention. :-)
>>> __
>>>
>>> For the last 30 years or so... I have been an avid B&W Darkroom User ('on
>>> and off'). But as it is just no longer in the cards for me (so to speak)
>>> to print my own images in the darkroom any longer... I now find myself
>>> being dragged (somewhat unwillingly still)... Into the 21st Century.
>>> LOL.
>>>
>>> Where are you Sir Fred Picker... To help save me from the onslaught of
>>> 'Digital Demons'?...
>>> (Yes... I am sadly aware that Fred unfortunately has now passed away...).
>>> :-(
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________
>>>
>>> "The point is simple.
>>>
>>> It doesn't take two and one-half days to make one print... Because the
>>> photographer didn’t know what he was doing.
>>>
>>> It takes two and one-half days... Because the photographer knew ***
>>> Exactly *** (italics added) what he was doing and was tirelessly determined
>>> to repeat the statement -- As clearly and beautifully as its original
>>> appearance (in his minds’ eye).”
>>> ~~ Fred Picker ~~
>>>
>>> ________________
>>>
>>>
>>> FYI... Amongst the many camera systems that I own... I still shoot with
>>> my three (3) OM-4T(i) Bodies (LUV that 'Spot Metering') and 'bevy' of OM
>>> legacy lenses. After searching 'high and low' for quite a few years... I
>>> finally managed to pick up 'Truly MINT' (LN) versions of both the Macro
>>> 90mm F/2.0 (thanks Ed for allowing me to wrestle it out of your 'strong
>>> clutches') and the 100mm F/2.0.
>>> (They do make a 'Nice Pair' -- Don't you think?)...
>>>
>>> All that is missing now is the 250mm F/2.0... LOL. BIG BIG Smile!!!
>>>
>>> (As I am blind in one eye... My 'personal vision' of the world around me
>>> has always been starting at the very least with a Short Telephoto FOV and
>>> 'on up'). Wide Angle lenses (even a 35mm... let alone a 28, 24, 21 and 18
>>> etc -- You get the idea) ... Just * Don't * work for me...
>>> __
>>>
>>> Like many, I think that I would kill (or at the very least give up an arm
>>> and a leg) for th"BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU" Part 1, Chapter 1, pg. 3e
>>> opportunity of obtaining a Mint Copy (Fat Chance -- Eh!) of the Olympus **OM
>>> Zuiko AUTO-T 250mm F/2.0 ED-IF Lens... As this IMNSHO is arguably without
>>> a doubt the finest OM lens that Olympus ever built!!!
>>>
>>> Mr. Dawid Loubser... Are you out there?????????? Can you still hear
>>> me??????????
>>>
>>> You may be some 8400 Miles away from me... BUT Like they say... "You can
>>> run but you can't hide!".
>>>
>>> BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU
>>> ~~ George Orwell ~~ (Nineteen Eighty-Four).
>>>
>>> Hahahaha!!!
>>> LOL.
>>> Smile.
>>> __
>>>
>>>
>>> I would of also liked to have picked up Sagelight (as it looks like it has
>>> some interesting potential and the 'User Interface' looks very nice)...
>>> But as I am running a Mac and would still need to purchase a new Windows
>>> Emulator for it (such as VMware Fusion 4?)... This is still on my 'wish
>>> list'.
>>> __
>>>
>>> It should be noted... Although I had CS5 on my Mac (thanks!... you know
>>> who you are)... That I found that the 'learning curve' was just too steep
>>> for me (at least at the present time). :-(
>>>
>>> I really don't want to be on my computer 16 hours a day (Day 'in'... Day
>>> 'out')... just trying to get 'up to speed' with a piece of software like
>>> CS5 (which perhaps takes a couple of years to get really conversant with).
>>> I would really much rather be photographing...
>>>
>>> I am more than sure of course... That all of you list members understand
>>> all of this. :-)
>>> __
>>>
>>> Therefore... Does anybody have any suggestions for a good software photo
>>> package for me to use on my Mac (PSE, Apple Aperture ???).
>>>
>>> It should be noted that I do not work with large catalogs... But rather
>>> prefer to work on only one (1) single image at a time (just as I would
>>> 'craft' an image when I was in the darkroom).
>>>
>>> Also, as I only still shoot B&W film (Film RULES IMHO! *^&%^$~!=*)... This
>>> could perhaps alter your suggestions... (as I might want to think 'down
>>> the line' about adding some good B&W 'Plug-Ins' or additional advanced
>>> 'Sharpening Tools' -- As it is still film that we are talking about
>>> here)...
>>> __
>>>
>>> I would be looking for something that is fairly powerful (with an excellent
>>> set of Tools)... But ALSO an as easy to use and understand interface (if
>>> at all possible).
>>> I have previously tried using some of the free Photo Editing Software out
>>> there (like GIMP)... But immediately found it to be 'too limiting'.
>>> ARRRGH!!! ^~+_-*#@&!
>>>
>>> Also... I would like to be able to work on a file... While still being
>>> able to view the original file at the same time (Is this possible)? I find
>>> it frustrating having to 'toggle' back in forth between files (to compare
>>> the editing changes that have been applied). I am of course sure that all
>>> of you guys and gal (i.e. 'the one and only inimitable' Candace) understand
>>> all of this. :-)
>>>
>>> Thank-you in advance for any comments and suggestions that you may have for
>>> me. Like they say... "They will *** All *** be greatly appreciated!"
>>> __
>>>
>>> In conclusion once again... I would like to thank-you Chuck for taking
>>> the time to share your thoughts (and most certainly very 'Tried and True'
>>> Professional expertise -- Smile)... With respect to how you organize *
>>> your * different photographic image files.
>>>
>>> Although in the overall scheme of things this would seem rather basic... I
>>> can already see the importance of being very well organized with respect to
>>> your folders and the naming conventions that one should choose to use for
>>> them.
>>>
>>> Thank-you!
>>> __
>>>
>>> -Tim.
>>> ______
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Although I don't shoot both raw and JPEGs at the same time I do
>>>>> separate
>>>>> them into different folders like Moose does.
>>>
>>>>> When I shoot anything (raw from the Canon or Minolta, JPEG from the
>>>>> Samsung) it goes into the primary folder which is named something like:
>>>
>>>>> 2012-01-26 - Emerson Point Preserve
>>>>> This primary folder contains whatever came straight out of the camera.
>>>>> Assuming I've even worked on them at all this folder will always have
>>>>> at
>>>>> least one sub-folder titled:
>>>
>>>>> Converted
>>>>> The Converted folder contains the results of exposure and other
>>>>> corrections... anything that can be performed in ACR whether raw or
>>>>> JPEG
>>>>> including undimensioned crops for straightening.
>>>
>>>>> It most likely will also have a sub-folder named:
>>>>> Discards
>>>>> Things I probably won't use but was unwilling to delete (immediately)
>>>>> Outright deletions are usually limited to those things like bad focus,
>>>>> motion blur, blown highlights, etc. Things that can't be salvaged.
>>>
>>>>> The Converted folder may ultimately have a sub-folder named Crops. The
>>>>> Crops folder contains non-dimensioned crops but most (panos excepted)
>>>>> will likely be cropped to a specific aspect ratio. The Crops folder
>>>>> may
>>>>> have a sub-folder named Prints. The Prints folder contains dimensioned
>>>>> and sharpened versions from the Crops folder which are specifically for
>>>>> printing.
>>>
>>> __________
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|