|
Wasn't sure what thread to post this in, but NEW WACOM INTUOS5 TABLETS are available !~ http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/29/wacom-intuos5-hands-on/ quote:It's a couple of months since we spotted paperwork for a mysterious "PTK-450" device at the FCC and now Wacom has finally revealed the gadget that goes with the label. The Intuos5 tablet is available to purchase immediately in Small (4 x 6 inches), Medium (6 x 8) and Large (13 x 8) sizes, priced at £200, £330 and £430 respectively. We're still waiting on confirmation of US pricing, but it'll no doubt be less than what a straight currency conversion suggests (i.e. somewhere below $320, $525 and $680). There's actually a fourth variant to add to the trio, but it's not an XL -- Wacom is hoping to up-sell you to a Cintiq 21UX or Cintiq 24HD if you want something bigger. Instead, the fourth tablet is a version of the Medium that comes without touch sensitivity, bringing the price down to £270 if you're able to live with pen-only input. Opting for this particular model will remove one of the biggest upgrades in this three-year product cycle: the ability of the Intuos5 to sense up to 16 finger-touches simultaneously, rather than just the nib of the pen. But there have been other revisions since the Intuos4 aside from touch, and you only have to read on to discover what those are. Important bits bolded I'm pretty psyched because I'm going to upgrade my crappy tablet and probably get a medium sized one. Definitely going to hold out for some more experiences and see if it's worth getting a new one or a cheaper 4.
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
I saw this. there's a wacom thread in regular creative but they hadn't posted anything about it when I checked earlier. I'm quite tempted by the touch less medium, the UK prices are ridiculous though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
Nicely done video of a pretty good photographer. http://vimeo.com/32183834
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 03:25
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend a decent freeware app that can apply a graphical watermark to images in batches? I manage a free weekly 5K fun run and we put our watermarked photos online for the runners to view after each event. I'm fine as I can just use Lightroom, but we've got other events around the country and I'd like the run managers to be able to watermark their photos as well. VVV - we don't sell the photos, they're just put up on Facebook/Flickr. We just like having the watermark on there for promotional purposes 
psylent fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Mar 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 04:11
|
|
|
What do you use to host/display the photos? Smugmug can automatically add watermarks, I assume similar services can do the same.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 04:21
|
|
|
I'm really sick of touch "art" with regards to my iPad and I can't imagine I'd want to use touch in any way, shape, or form on the desktop so I am really happy to hear about the cheaper medium touchless tablet. I can finally get rid of my tiny old Intuos2. The drawing surface on that thing is so scratched to hell and back that it's hard to actually draw on it these days. Though I'm going to be honest with you. In all seriousness I am still thinking of just saving and buying a Cintiq. I got a chance to use one and the lack of a disconnect between hand/eye was amazing. Seeing exactly what you're manipulating was a dream come true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 05:29
|
|
|
psylent posted:Can anyone recommend a decent freeware app that can apply a graphical watermark to images in batches? I think Imagemagick can do it. Once you provide the watermark and the script to your run managers it should be really easy for them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 17:59
|
|
|
Evilkiksass posted:I think Imagemagick can do it. Once you provide the watermark and the script to your run managers it should be really easy for them. It is nice in that it has a command line interface so batch processing is super easy, but in my experience it takes a bunch of fiddling to get all the arguments set just how you want them.. it has a habit of dicking around with color tables and doing a terrible job with jpeg compression. Lossless image formats work a lot better.. but will require you to use yet another batch tool to convert them for web use.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
xzzy posted:It is nice in that it has a command line interface so batch processing is super easy, but in my experience it takes a bunch of fiddling to get all the arguments set just how you want them.. it has a habit of dicking around with color tables and doing a terrible job with jpeg compression. Lossless image formats work a lot better.. but will require you to use yet another batch tool to convert them for web use. Yes, and ImageMagick has a handy "convert" tool provided to do that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 18:10
|
|
|
Well, that was my point. I've always hated the way convert handles jpegs. It does an rear end job with gif too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 18:21
|
|
|
Being completely  to most anything related to post-processing, what exactly are tablets like those Wacoms used for in photo editing anyways?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Being completely using them for retouching, more natural to dab at something with a pen rather than a mouse
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 19:06
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:using them for retouching, more natural to dab at something with a pen rather than a mouse Also pressure sensitivity makes things come out looking a bit more natural.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 19:13
|
|
|
Found this page via TOP, love love love these photos. http://thephotographypost.com/blogs/post/rachel/jump-with-philippe-837/ Some minor nudity in one in case you are at work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 19:41
|
|
|
Once you use a tablet for photo editing, trying to use a mouse again is probably one of the most frustrating experiences. Trying to clone out dust spots and scratches with a mouse now makes an already tedious task unbearable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 19:45
|
|
|
Neat, didn't know that
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Found this page via TOP, love love love these photos. Things white people love: Jumping.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 22:26
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:Things white people love: Jumping. And pulling their pants up to their chest. Or at least Weegee does.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 23:29
|
|
|
HPL posted:And pulling their pants up to their chest. Or at least Weegee does. You leave Weegee alone. That man could wear his socks on his head, and it wouldn't matter. An evil genius, he was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Found this page via TOP, love love love these photos. Holy Grap these are amazing. I'm blown away by the Nixon picture. Fantastic, thanks for providing the link.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 01:48
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Found this page via TOP, love love love these photos. Is that a large format TLR in the self-portrait? Or a comically large prop camera?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 02:41
|
|
|
Photographing jumping must have been a thing in the 50's.. does that time period maybe mark a time when film and/or lenses got fast enough to freeze action like that? Because I was in a used book store a couple weeks ago, and they had a photography book from the 50's. It was basically a compilation of several photographers of the era and covered a lot of subjects.. on this topic, it had several nudes of girls jumping around in the desert. I probably should have bought it because it had some neat stuff, but I don't make a habit of collecting books because they're so drat heavy and I move around a lot. So I let it go. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 02:44
|
|
|
PushingKingston posted:Once you use a tablet for photo editing, trying to use a mouse again is probably one of the most frustrating experiences. Trying to clone out dust spots and scratches with a mouse now makes an already tedious task unbearable. I take a mouse over my intuos 2 any day. Maybe it's just the old technology- gotta testdrive an intuos 5.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 02:56
|
|
|
Just bought a small Intuos5. I'll let you know how I like it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
Yeah I don't know, I think some people take to tablets better than others. I use mine a lot but I don't actually *like* it. There's a certain disconnect between hand->eye that makes drawing with it really awkward. But like I said, that was all gone when I test drove a cintiq because there's a direct connection between your hand and the thing you're editing. Thinking it over, I doubt I'll invest in another tablet any time soon. Just save up for a Cintiq.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 03:47
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Is that a large format TLR in the self-portrait? Or a comically large prop camera? Halsman designed a 4x5 tlr back in the 40s.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 08:29
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Found this page via TOP, love love love these photos.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
I know. I saw that and I was like: "That seems awfully out of character".
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
what's the best kind of paper surface for black and white digital prints? Lustre, matte, or glossy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 01:43
|
|
|
Suicide Watch posted:what's the best kind of paper surface for black and white digital prints? Lustre, matte, or glossy? )
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
We've been evaluating cameras in the worst way possible. I have now learned the correct way. https://vimeo.com/16174399 - skip to 0:47
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 04:39
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:We've been evaluating cameras in the worst way possible. I have now learned the correct way. I bet commission based sales guys would love him if they knew his dirty secret and what smells would make him buy everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 04:49
|
|
|
Maybe all this time K-Rock was talking about BOUQUET, not BOKEH 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 04:51
|
|
|
Good smell is good camera!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 05:10
|
|
|
Delivered a bunch of photos to a client. Online gallery, small JPG, big JPG for printing. Today I get a reply. "Can we get these in PDF for easy viewing?" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 09:27
|
|
|
DanTheFryingPan posted:Delivered a bunch of photos to a client. Online gallery, small JPG, big JPG for printing. Today I get a reply. Don't be a snob - specialised formats such as JPG and PNG are strictly for the hardcore crowd. Actually, you're lucky they didn't want them in a Word document.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 12:32
|
|
|
truncated aardvar posted:Don't be a snob - specialised formats such as JPG and PNG are strictly for the hardcore crowd. I was once trying to help a coworker print things out to fit on a piece of paper and was using Windows Image Viewer with "fit to page" selected. Another coworker came over and started nagging me about it, saying that I should use Word. His reasoning was that Word is better because it doesn't "make the pixels bad."
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 12:37
|
|
|
I hate everything about PDFs and I don't really understand why businesses love them 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 12:46
|
|
|
A5H posted:I hate everything about PDFs and I don't really understand why businesses love them
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 12:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Cross platform publication. And yet almost no one uses the formatting features that make PDF actually useful, which means a simple HTML page with a couple inline images would be just as effective. The morons that call themselves management where I work do their weekly reports in PDF, and they're literally nothing more than a bulleted list. The top brass actually mandated this because email "looks messy". 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 15:30
|
|