|
Whitezombi posted:Anyone running Lightroom 3 on the new MacBook Air? I'm thinking of getting the 11-inch. I bought a 13" Air (with 4GB) specifically for shooting tethered on location and it works great, the SSD makes a big difference. I mostly do editing/processing in Capture One on it, but have used Lightroom and it works fine (I don't keep big catalogs around, just for whatever I'm working on at the moment). I usually do the actual bulk processing on my tower, but exporting a couple of high res images isn't unbearable or anything.
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 05:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
SSD and a powerful CPU help a lot. I noticed a pretty large difference going from a Phenom x4 1st gen to the i5-2500k. My PC used to chug while editing 5d2 files, but the new one can handle them quite well. That being said, the Air does surprisingly well with what it's working on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 05:46
|
|
|
Whitezombi posted:Anyone running Lightroom 3 on the new MacBook Air? I'm thinking of getting the 11-inch. brad industry posted:I bought a 13" Air (with 4GB) specifically for shooting tethered on location and it works great, the SSD makes a big difference. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 10:51 on Feb 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 10:48
|
|
|
Has anyone used Silkypix? It looks like it has basically every function of Lightroom. I only ask because the Fuji x100 comes with a full version and that's the only Raw editor that will be out at launch. Also I... *cough* haven't exactly purchased Lightroom and I have to reinstall it every launch to get it to work. If Silkypix replicates the experience well enough I might just stick with it. Sucks they didn't go with lightroom like the Leica X1.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2011 10:52
|
|
|
brad industry posted:I bought a 13" Air (with 4GB) specifically for shooting tethered on location and it works great, the SSD makes a big difference. I mostly do editing/processing in Capture One on it, but have used Lightroom and it works fine (I don't keep big catalogs around, just for whatever I'm working on at the moment). I usually do the actual bulk processing on my tower, but exporting a couple of high res images isn't unbearable or anything. Pretty much what I want to do. Sounds like the 13" w/4 GB is the way to go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:Am I only the only one who finds this tacky? Like laser backdrop from the early-90s tacky. It's going to look really dated in 10 years. I don't think the backdrop itself is necessarily tacky, it's her placement within it that bothers me. She's too big for the room and appears to be standing inside the floor in perspective. I really like the rim lighting on the model though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 22:20
|
|
|
aliencowboy posted:I don't think the backdrop itself is necessarily tacky, it's her placement within it that bothers me. She's too big for the room and appears to be standing inside the floor in perspective. I mean the whole thing (including the rim lighting.) It just an element that I think will date the photo like laser backdrops and bowl haircuts do in 90s photos.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 07:27
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:bowl haircuts 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
Anyone know of a software for the following: Put camera on tripod Take photo of background Take photo with subject in it. The sofware would be given the two images, and perfectly cut out the subject, based on only pixels that are different between the two images. There has to be some kind of compositing plugin that can do this. Ideas? *edit* it can't really be as easy as photoshop's difference blending mode, can it? Anyone tried this? poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 10:25 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 10:20
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Get the 13+4GB. The resolution/size on the 11 will be a complete pain in LR. Does it want the SSD for the install and scratch disk? My Macbook has a dead optical drive and I was thinking of swapping it out for an SSD, keeping the regular HD in there for storage (although most of my photos are stored on externals). Also, guess I might as well make the jump from 2GB of RAM to 4GB. It's a 2.4gHz Core Duo
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 14:55
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Also I... *cough* haven't exactly purchased Lightroom and I have to reinstall it every launch to get it to work. In any case, I tried the valid SilkyPix that came with my LX3 and it was loving horrible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 15:09
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Does it want the SSD for the install and scratch disk? My Macbook has a dead optical drive and I was thinking of swapping it out for an SSD, keeping the regular HD in there for storage (although most of my photos are stored on externals). Pompous Rhombus posted:Does it want the SSD for the install and scratch disk?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 15:39
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You suck at :files: What was so bad about it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 16:06
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:*edit* it can't really be as easy as photoshop's difference blending mode, can it? Anyone tried this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 21:16
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:What was so bad about it? I got LR and never looked back, but it's not like they take half a year to update their RAW decoder, so you won't be stuck with Silky for too long.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 10:06
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Stability, processing and interface (especially the labels), but that was 2 years ago. Also the setup would just silently crash on one of my machines. Yeah, I was just hoping not to have to buy a LR license if I really like silkypix. Here is a quote from another forum, just wondering what people thing (especially Brad) I don't feel like I'm prevented from getting good color from LR with my camera profile loaded, but I found this post interesting. (even though anyone who thinks Lightroom is junk is probably not all that knowledgable) poopingmymouth posted:
some dude posted:
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 12:21
|
|
|
some dude posted:...money's better spent on the GUI, I guess. I found this to be somewhat humorous. I'm sure he'd prefer to edit his photos using a command prompt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 14:47
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:I found this to be somewhat humorous. I'm sure he'd prefer to edit his photos using a command prompt. I actually think a command prompt would be an interesting addition to something like LR or photoshop. Instead of clicking a slider to fidget with an image, I could type "clarity +5" or "gaussian -radius 5". But I'm a unix nerd so maybe I'm biased.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 15:29
|
|
|
code:
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 18:21
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Yeah, I was just hoping not to have to buy a LR license if I really like silkypix. That quote is some drat fine pixel peeping. They do handle color and profiles differently but I don't think one is superior to the other. A few years and versions ago C1 was superior for processing, but that was because LR had big problems with moire on output that C1 didn't (also C1 was sharper and rendered tones smoother where LR was a little rougher). Neither of those things are an issue anymore though and they were subtle to begin with. If that dude can tell a difference between identical color corrected images because of the processing method... more power to him I guess. IMO poo poo like the level of room light you are working in is going to make more of a difference than Adobe math vs C1 math. The reason pros use C1 is to shoot tethered, no point in sending it to LR to color correct when you can do it right there as they come in. I do prefer being able to use a curve to color correct in C1 but it's not like that affects the color fidelity. quote:Ideas? Yes this is what difference mode rules for. Make an action that differences the images, merge them, select black, invert selection, make new mask based on selection. That should do it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 20:17
|
|
|
I just want to say that an SSD HD with all of your programs on it is absolute sex. I will also add that 128gb is barely enough for an average number of programs (assuming it is your main computer) and having to upload photos directly to an external platter is annoying as gently caress. Moral of the story, make sure you keep enough free space on your SSD to upload an entire memory card's worth of photos so you can edit then export to the external.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 22:27
|
|
|
spf3million posted:I just want to say that an SSD HD with all of your programs on it is absolute sex. I will also add that 128gb is barely enough for an average number of programs (assuming it is your main computer) and having to upload photos directly to an external platter is annoying as gently caress. Moral of the story, make sure you keep enough free space on your SSD to upload an entire memory card's worth of photos so you can edit then export to the external. Has anyone tried a Hybrid disk? I'm thinking of getting one for my Macbook - 500gb of platter space, and 4gb of automatically selected SSD data. As I already have 4gb of RAM it seems a little pointless though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 22:40
|
|
|
quote:I will also add that 128gb is barely enough for an average number of programs (assuming it is your main computer) and having to upload photos directly to an external platter is annoying as gently caress. Moral of the story, make sure you keep enough free space on your SSD to upload an entire memory card's worth of photos so you can edit then export to the external. I dunno, I have half the Creative Suite, every capture/digital tech tool you can think of, Apple's office suite, and whatever the latest OS X is and the grand total is 27GB. You would have to be shooting a lot of frames with a medium format back before it became a problem (which you can't do on an Air anyways because there's no Firewire). Seems fine as long as you don't have a 100gb iTunes library on it. I would never recommend anyone keep anything but working files on any laptop anyways, they are too easy to get broken/lost/stolen/etc. If it's your only computer put your archive of images on a two drive enclosure, mirror the drives, and leave it safe at home. If you need to have access to any image ever at any time but don't want to lug around drives, put it on cloud storage. But yeah the SSD makes a crazy difference. My Air feels more responsive than my quad core tower with 8gb of RAM.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 23:06
|
|
|
I've got a 120gb SSD on my new computer and when it booted PS CS5 in "one-thousand on-" I wet myself a little. Still do every time, actually.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 07:28
|
|
|
Hey how bout them photoshops... Seriously though, is there any way to set some default values for Save for Web & Devices so it doesn't sit there for 5 mins trying to render everything at 100%? Ideally it would just default to 1% or so and then just let me enter some values from there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 23:30
|
|
|
Zegnar posted:Has anyone tried a Hybrid disk? I'm thinking of getting one for my Macbook - 500gb of platter space, and 4gb of automatically selected SSD data.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 23:50
|
|
|
Evilkiksass posted:Hey how bout them photoshops...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 00:03
|
|
|
Guys I've messed up my lightroom. It used to have all the dates down the left that I could pick from. Now it's just my entire catalogue. What should I do?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 00:10
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:Not quite sure what you mean by the percents, but you should be resizing to whatever output size you want before going to the Save for Web prompt. Photoshop will actually complain if you try and use it on a image that is too big. Doing it this way I've never had the Save for Web feature lag at all and my machine is pretty weak. Seriously? So I have to take my entire high res project file, resize it to my output size, output it, then put it back every single time I want to export a jpeg? This is even worse then my method.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
Evilkiksass posted:Hey how bout them photoshops... As soon as the bar stars, hit "esc" and it won't render it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 00:56
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:As soon as the bar stars, hit "esc" and it won't render it. I hate you, but thank you, this is a workable solution.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 01:04
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:1. There's 0 blue in the picture. Thanks mate! This is what I managed to smash out similar to this.  I want to go back and shoot the exact same scene except later in the afternoon to avoid the highlights in the sky and with no recent rainfall which results in the shiny street as it is wet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 04:04
|
|
|
I'm using PSE 9 and stumbled upon something annoying: I want to crop my photos to an aspect ration of 15:10 but the crop tool seems inadequate for this: PSE offers various aspect ratios but none match the format I want. I also have the option to manually enter the number of x and y pixels (or inches) I want. BUT if I do that PSE automatically resizes the picture after the crop to these numbers. I think this is highly annoying. All I want is to crop a lot of photos from point & shoot cameras to 15:10 without automatic resizing (as in: enter aspect ratio and then enlarge a rectangle with that aspect ratio like in Picasa). Am I missing something? Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 13:45
|
|
|
lllllllllllllllllll posted:I'm using PSE 9 and stumbled upon something annoying: I want to crop my photos to an aspect ration of 15:10 but the crop tool seems inadequate for this: You want canvas size, not image size.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 17:34
|
|
|
You can also set the crop tool in terms of print dimensions, such as 15in x 10in. That way you can crop to a specific aspect ratio without resizing the image pixels.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
Evilkiksass posted:Seriously? So I have to take my entire high res project file, resize it to my output size, output it, then put it back every single time I want to export a jpeg? This is even worse then my method.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:How is that worse? Saving for web is generally the last thing you do and resizing only takes a second. Not only that but the save for web will have to resize your photo anyway which will take just as long (if not longer). The whole point of having the render is to see how much you can compress the image without it being noticeable. If you aren't watching the render then how do you know you've chosen the optimum amount to compression? By resizing before going in you can actually see the final result and it renders instantly. If I'm resizing. I hit ctrl+a to select all, ctrl+shift+c to copy merged, ctrl+alt+n for a new canvas (it will auto size to what's in the clipboard), ctrl+v for paste, flatten, then resize using the option that is best for reduction, sharpen to taste, then save for web. That's why I like lightroom so much more most of the time. :-)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2011 11:36
|
|
|
How do I get colors like this out of my Nikon D80 with the least amount of post possible? Edit, maybe by "least post" I actually mean in one exposure? Is it possible? I've only ever taken product images, and recently the Dorkroom is making me want to explore photographic art more and more. RizieN fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Feb 7, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2011 15:07
|
|
|
Graduated neutral density (sky), Saturation and a bit of sharpening.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2011 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Has anyone heard of or tried Portrait Professional? http://www.portraitprofessional.com/ I assisted a guy over the weekend who uses it in combination with Photoshop. He says it gives him a good easy starting image. It's pretty cheap, haven't tried the demo yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2011 17:34
|
|
