July 31, 2014, 10:57:24 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - 3kramd5

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 22
166
please explain what do you mean with this:

But it's not reasonable to expect those algorithms to differ by more than a minor amount, and Nikon cameras are notorious for royally screwing up white balance in exactly the way the original poster has discovered. I'd go so far as to suggest that the cameras are unacceptable as shipped, though the problems should vanish in an ICC managed workflow.

It's a pretty straightforward statement. Even though they use different algorithms, they should come up with relatively close results. In this case, the camera may be defective, but using the process he suggested at but didn't explain in detail, it wouldn't matter.

167
This
???

Sorry, I was curtly agreeing with neuroanatomist's post. I was incredulous at that notion that someone standing in lit a room with something can't see what it looks like (i.e. that he wouldn't know which camera is  right).

I missed that it was video
make a real WB against a qp-card

Does it make sense that setting an identical Kelvin color temperature on different bodies would give different results?

I think it would be reasonable to expect slightly different color handling between camera makes, if not even models within the same make. If these snaps of the rear LCD are representative of the actual output video, however, I'd have to assume something is wrong with this D7100.

168
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 21, 2013, 11:30:54 PM »
It's in the lens corrections panel under Basic

169
Ankorwatt's point probably was: you can see that they are different, but without a reference how do you know which one is correct?

Well, I don't know about you - but when I'm looking at two images with obviously different WB, and I have the original physical object/scene which was imaged as a reference, which the OP clearly does, I have no trouble telling which WB is correct and which is wrong.
This

170
Software & Accessories / Re: What site do you use to host your photos?
« on: April 20, 2013, 09:48:26 AM »
Smugmug

171
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 18, 2013, 08:26:54 AM »
This thing is really going to need some killer features & performance improvements to get me to "upgrade" my macbook away from 10.6 in order to use it.  My GF's machine has Lion on it & I tear my hair out every time I try to use that thing.

Can anyone running the beta please check & see if they've added a new process version (e.g. "2013 (current)")?

Thanks :-)

The beta uses the same PV as 4.0 (2012).

172
Software & Accessories / Re: Looks like we'll actually get it soon!
« on: April 17, 2013, 04:26:08 PM »
I wonder how it compares to dedicated de-convolving software (topaz, etc).

173
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 17, 2013, 08:30:11 AM »
What do you think? Was the retouching noticeable?

Maybe a little, but only because I know where to look.

174
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 16, 2013, 04:19:17 PM »
It's slow going due to general buggy-ness

My experience when trying it is quite the opposite: LR5 feels like turbo-charged, as if the build a wait loop into LR4 to make people wish for an upgrade :-> ... this and some new features like the heal/clone brush are enough to upgrade, let's hope the RC phase doesn't take the better of a year's time.

Out of curiosity: OSX or Windows? I've thus far only used it on Windows 7. May load it up on my Mountain Lion machine this evening.

It does feel peppier than 4, and I'll note that I always work each photoshoot in its own fresh catalog, so there's no "few hundred versus tens-of-thousands" effect at play.

What I meant was: getting through the entire set is slow going, because I have to restart LR every couple of frames. Most common failure has been the adjustment brush. It repeatedly stopped working, i.e. I'd select the tool but when I clicked to place it it merely zoomed in an out. Restarting the software remedied it. Other times it crashed outright.

Ouch, that sounds quite buggy. If I keep hearing this, I might wait for the next beta or RC before trying it out.

I'll blow away my preferences file. Maybe something is wonky due to it (it had all my customizations from LR4).

175
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 16, 2013, 02:09:34 PM »
It's slow going due to general buggy-ness

My experience when trying it is quite the opposite: LR5 feels like turbo-charged, as if the build a wait loop into LR4 to make people wish for an upgrade :-> ... this and some new features like the heal/clone brush are enough to upgrade, let's hope the RC phase doesn't take the better of a year's time.

Out of curiosity: OSX or Windows? I've thus far only used it on Windows 7. May load it up on my Mountain Lion machine this evening.

It does feel peppier than 4, and I'll note that I always work each photoshoot in its own fresh catalog, so there's no "few hundred versus tens-of-thousands" effect at play.

What I meant was: getting through the entire set is slow going, because I have to restart LR every couple of frames. Most common failure has been the adjustment brush. It repeatedly stopped working, i.e. I'd select the tool but when I clicked to place it it merely zoomed in an out. Restarting the software remedied it. Other times it crashed outright.


176
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 16, 2013, 08:35:15 AM »
I used the beta on a photoshoot last night. It's slow going due to general buggy-ness, but when the brush tools work they work well. I like, and will upgrade when the time comes.

The offline editing feature is probably very compelling for some (particularly those with only one harddrive, i.e. laptop users).

177
Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 5 Beta available for download!!
« on: April 16, 2013, 08:33:15 AM »
I used the beta on a photoshoot last night. It's slow going due to general buggy-ness, but when the brush tools work they work well. I like, and will upgrade when the time comes.

I'm hard pressed to see the big step change that warrants a full version number. 

The offline editing feature is huge. It opens up a world of new storage solutions.

178
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MK II Error - Pink Frame
« on: April 15, 2013, 09:43:14 AM »
Weird... it being the previous frame makes it seem like it's trying multiple exposures a'la the mk3. Wonder if they put the wrong firmware on when they refurbed it.

179
Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?
« on: April 11, 2013, 06:17:02 PM »
Doesn't matter as long as the median is 100.

180
I am aware that SSD will significantly increase the start up times and read/write times but I have a specific question regarding the the performance of Adobe CS6, Lightroom 4.4, Final Cut Pro etc, with an SSD:
I currently have a Mac Book Pro Mid 2010 (OSX 10.8.3) with 16 GB DDR 3 RAM, 750GB HDD, 2.9 GHz intel Core i7 processor, and all of the above programs work perfectly, I have no issue at all, but what I want to know is will upgrading to an SSD will have a significant performance improvement after those programs have been launched?

It is a little like a DSLR, there are many components that make it better.

I am no fan of anything "Apple" and I recommend the high end Lenovo or Dell machines for heavy image, engineering apps and HD video etc.

That aside, it will give you a boost upgrading to an SSD if all the components are correctly in place and aligned. The CPU plays a major part, the video card again is extremely important, your RAM and the type of RAM etc. Plus a lot of people forget the bus, if you connect an SSD to a SATA 2 bus then performance will be limited. I think 3 (GB/s) is the latest (not sure though), so no matter what the SSD claims is the read/write speed if your laptop cannot handle those speeds you just won't get them

My laptop currently has two SSDs in it and could have four, but for me the main advantage with SSD (apart from the speed) is how quiet they are. Really makes a difference to your day if you work somewhere very quiet.

So would I recommend an SSD, definitely. Do I recommend upgrading a current laptop from a 750GB spin drive with all the headaches that that entails? That is the major question imho. Personally, I probably would wait until you want to upgrade your entire laptop. But if you are comfortable technically moving from a 750GB spin to a SSD then why not.
Thanks for your reply ... unfortunately it does not answer my question. My question is very specific, i.e. "will upgrading to an SSD have a significant performance improvement specifically for CS6, LR 4.4 & Final Cut Pro, after they have been launched?
I also use a Dell Alienware Mx14 (2012 version Core i7) which has a dedicated graphic card, yet the MacBook Pro outperforms but my question, about SSD replacment, remains the same for either systems.

It will help with program start up but after the program starts for the most part everything is in your RAM.  So for the most part no additional help after start up.  Write should be faster so that may be the only noticeable increase.
Thanks for replying to my specific question ... appreciate that.
Regards

Except, say you import a handful of 5Dmk3 raws into photoshop. That alone will likely exceed your memory, and you'll be pushed into virtual memory. Having a faster drive setup (be it 6GB/s SATA3 drives with or without striped or mirrored arrays) will be better than having a slower drive setup (say SATA2 spinning drives).

SSDs are great for boot drives and program installs.  For data storage, it can still be expensive and you must be religious about backing up. (A good idea whether using standard HDD or SSD)

Anecdotal, I've had a much higher percentage of spinning drives fail than SS. There are far fewer failure modes with SSD.

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 22