Since Lightroom uses ACR for converting raw files are you aware that ACR
offers dust spot repair? If you load a bunch of images into ACR (I
usually do about a dozen at a time) and do a spot repair on the first
image you can select that as part of a "synchronize" operation on the
rest of the images. I don't do it that way unless it appears in the sky
which is usually the only place the spots are visible.
Chuck Norcutt
On 4/9/2012 11:20 AM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012, at 09:06 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
>>> BTW I know exactly where the sensor crud is and what it's doing. Have to
>>> spot almost every photo, and do, so if you think you're seeing sensor
>>> dust traces -- not likely.
>>
>> It's amazing you you can see when quickly zipping through images. It's
>> really rough trying to find them in a single image, but they show up
>> in a series.
>
> I shouldn't have been so knee-jerk in my response because I could (and
> did) miss a spot in at least one case. If I went back, I would probably
> find more since I don't look for them in busy backgrounds (where fixing
> them is not always easy or successful). I thought I would find it
> really annoying to spot digital images, but as I am almost totally using
> film lenses with the body and I always had to go looking for dust spots
> in film scans, it seems completely natural to me. A mkII would be nice
> for the sensor cleaning feature, but I think the experience of using the
> camera and lenses would be more like working with the E-3 and an
> adapter. Better in a way, but I'm not looking for that. This old body
> is working well for me. Slows me down in a good way.
>
> There is something wrong with the Rainbow Imaging adapter that I leave
> attached to the 90/2. When I mount that lens and adapter, the light
> next to the jog dial blinks occasionally for nothing (like the camera is
> writing to the CF card, which it isn't). There is no problem I have
> noticed in any other operation of the camera, but I don't like that.
> Fortunately, the Big_IS adapter works perfectly. Easy to use as a 2-4
> screen (or at least a 1-4) with focus confirm to boot. Feels like
> stealing sometimes (in the Robin Hood sense).
>
> In some ways, I prefer the E410 to the E-3. The E-3 has many
> advantages, the main one being the articulating LCD, but the capture of
> the E410 seems just as good to me and sometimes actually better. This
> became clearer to me when I switched to Lightroom to process RAW images.
> I bring this up in this context because I have been thinking about the
> usefulness of having LV on a mkII. But LV without an articulating
> screen is not happening for me. If the 410 had an articulating screen,
> I believe I would get rid of the E-3.
>
> Joel W.
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|