|
89 posted:I appreciate it, you guys FWIW, I don't both doing anything fancy with the individual filenames, just the folders. You've got all the date information in the metadata and it is really easy to search for that in LR and/or Windows. You just need a unique (ish) filename. I only use the software as a) the counter on my DSLR has looped around as I have taken 10,000+ images on it and b) Run 2 Canons or 2 Panasonics or 2 Sonys similtaneously and they generate identical filenames.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
spog posted:FWIW, I don't both doing anything fancy with the individual filenames, just the folders. which does bring up the question "why do they stop at 10,000?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Dren posted:which does bring up the question "why do they stop at 10,000?" Historical reasons. They're like DSC_xxxx, DSCNxxxx, right? 8 characters long. Historic thing, the 8.3 filename. There are systems still in use where 8 characters is the maximum length of a filename - I think AIX...? And old Microsoft stuff. Nowhere you'd put photos. But it seems logical that by default the filenames don't exceed 8 characters in length while those things are still in use somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Well nearly every camera uses FAT of some sort as the memory card file system, and they might not bother to include the needed extensions for FAT to support long file names.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
Also it's just straight up a spec everyone agrees to use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_rule_for_Camera_File_system Having everyone agree lets your cards get along with other cameras after your camera has had its way with it so it's not a bad thing
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
I asked a long time ago about free photo programs, and it still comes up occasionally, so I thought I'd mention this here: I've tried RawTherapee, Digikam, and Lightzone on Windows 7. I've found RawTherapee an enormous pain in the rear end and kind of crash-prone. Digikam is acceptable for doing my film negatives but it's a little buggy and I sometimes have trouble keeping track of what I've done so far. Lightzone is my personal favorite so far for general "make this photo look less poo poo" tasks. The way it represents the changes you've applied to a picture really works for my brain, in a way the other two tools didn't. I also think the Zone Mapper is kind of cool. It doesn't have some things like white balance presets, but you can always select a white point or just tweak the temperature+tint sliders by hand. Of course if you're not a pleb, you'll already have Lightroom, but I've been pleasantly surprised by Lightzone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Darktable is the best of the free in my limited experience, but I've only ever used in on linux. I haven't heard if it's less stable on windows or anything, but it's worth a try. Workflow looks pretty similar to lightroom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
StarkingBarfish posted:Darktable is the best of the free in my limited experience, but I've only ever used in on linux. I haven't heard if it's less stable on windows or anything, but it's worth a try. Workflow looks pretty similar to lightroom. Darktable looks really good but my desktop runs Windows pretty much all the time and I have never really felt like mucking around compiling things for Windows.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
Ah, I didn't see that they don't actually provide a binary for windows. My bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
There not a drat working Windows 8.1 screensaver that will display pictures using the Pan and Zoom effect? Google Screensaver doesn't work anymore on Pan and Zoom for multiple monitors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
That's what you get for using windows 8.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Just get lightroom and be done with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
Darktable is to Lightroom as GIMP is to Photoshop. Sure, Lightroom is often horrible and confusing, but Darktable is much, much worse. If you absolutely have to work on Linux (I was stuck without my Windows desktop for a while), AfterShot Pro is passable, since Corel basically just purchased Bibble and then proceeded to do nothing with it (aside from ruin the noise rendering algorithm when NoiseNinja decided they wanted to be a standalone product and stopped allowing Corel to license their stuff). In other news, how hard is it to switch from Flickr to SmugMug/is there anything the latter is missing? Yahoo! doesn't seem to give a drat about Flickr anymore and it seems half the site is broken nowadays. At most I'm looking at just pulling down all my fullsize JPEGs and doing a batch upload, since I've probably lost half of the RAWs anyway and it's not like I was going to re-edit them anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Do any goons touch up digital photography for $$? My close friend proposed to his girlfriend, and asked me to take some clandestine pictures of his proposal. I had only a few hours to work with, and the nature of the entire situation basically made it impossible to get great pictures with the equipment I had on hand. I'd love to give him 3-4 nice pictures, and I'd be happy to pay for touchups. I figured I'd rather check here before trying a random touchup website.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
lushka16 posted:Do any goons touch up digital photography for $$? I'd be happy to give it a shot for free. I'll PM you my email so you can send the raw files over.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:I'd be happy to give it a shot for free. I'll PM you my email so you can send the raw files over. That's very kind of you!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
I suck at focus. Well at a lot of other things, but mostly focus irritates me. I have a 7yo d90 and my most often used lens is a 24-120mm out of a kit. I most often take pictures of my kids and gently caress me if I can't get them in focus most of the time. Here are two photos taken within 30s of each other.   I've been dicking around with the autofocus modes, but I'm mostly in AF-A. What can I do to suck less?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
AF-S and focus on the eyes. Also kids never sit still, so bump up the shutter speed and maybe try burst mode.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
Back-button AF-on, no AF-on at the shutter, single point AF-C, pre-select the point as you visualize, then bring the camera up and burst with the point on the eyes. Shoot narrower apertures than you think. Frame a bit wider.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 13:27
|
|
|
The PO or someone (probably me) smacked around my Tamron 17-50 and as a result the plastic ring around the front element developed a crack, sometimes causing one side of it to pop out. I took off the decorative cover exposing the screws that hold the ring so actually replacing it shouldn't be a problem, but I wasn't able to find a replacement part. Does anyone know what exactly should I be searching for, or better yet, where can it be bought cheaply?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
Couple of questions, unrelated to each other. * I have a Sandisk Ultra 40mb/sec 32gb card and a Transcend R95/W85 32gb card... if I'm shooting with slot 2 as a backup of slot 1, is it better to put the faster card in slot 1 or does this make zero difference? The only thing I'm thinking of is setting Movie Mode to use Slot 2 by default and put the faster card there. * Due to Lightroom not supporting the D7200 and talk of it not supporting it for ages, I'm probably going to redo my workflow. New camera, new setup. I've got View NX-i and Capture NX-D installed, I know they're not as nice to use as Lightroom but they offer more support for Nikon specific elements in the RAW processing, so it makes sense to use them. Should I then just use Lightroom for any processing afterwards that I can't do easily in that suite / cataloguing, or is there a better tool for that? I like the fact I can easily sync what's on my hard disk to Facebook and Flickr which is neat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Your D7200 in movie recording will never reach peak write speeds - so if you're not shooting bursts of raw photos it really doesn't matter that much. I wonder though, when you're using one card to mirror the other, does this affect your raw buffer or does it write to both cards simultaneously?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
I wasn't sure what the fastest write it would hit at the top movie mode (1080p60 I think) so thanks for answering that. I know video can get big, fast but wasn't sure if it would be faster than the card I had. Yeah, that's something I was curious about to - how exactly does the backup element work, which is essentially why I wondered if it matters which slot I use for which. I'm guessing 'No' but always best to check. The SanDisk card was free with the camera, but it seemed a good idea to buy a faster card generally and it never hurts to have a backup.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
-
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
I couldn't find a specific thread on this kind of thing, but just wondering what peoples opinions on Amazon's photo back up service is like? The one where it's about $11/year for all your photos? Even though I have a US account, it keeps directing me to the UK service which is more of an excuse to try and sell me Prime for like $120, but if the US version is good it might be worthwhile me trying to get that signed up too (I'm in the US fairly often so I could just wait until I'm next over and sign up then). It seems a great deal if it integrates nicely. I used to have CrashPlan because I got it for next-to-nothing but the integration is pretty horrible (Java app/server that always runs and was a pain to uninstall, and caused massive conflicts with OS X Yosemite).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
I just use S3 to keep a backup of my Aperture library. It costs like $1.20/mo or something, it's so small I don't even care. They even have 'Glacier' now for long term storage which is even cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Yeah I think it's either part of s3 or a rebrand? This is the main page I see of it, before it puts me into UK mode and wants to charge me about 50x the price - https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/home e: ah it seems my US account is bound to my UK account. If I sign up and make a new one it looks like it should work fine. 3 month free trial, so can't hurt. EL BROMANCE fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
S3 is for store/retrieve, Glacier is for store and only retrieve in dire circumstances. The pricing reflects this, so choose only what you need.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
I feel dumb for asking this, but with Amazon Prime you get "unlimited photo storage" yet on the cloud drive pricing for amazon.ca I see:quote:1000 GB CDN$ 500 / year I don't see any quantifiers around that unlimited storage, so why would you need to buy extra storage space?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
If you're a Canadian and paying for Amazon Prime you're an idiot. All of the costs, none of the benefits. Not to say that you're an idiot. Just that potentially you may be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
If it's like the UK one, the 1000GB is for any files whereas the Photos are only for that filetype. I've thrown up 1GB of NEFs up without any problem so far (it was pretty quick with it, maxed me out about 15mbit) and now I'm sending up 10gb more. Not used any 'space' (you get 5gb for other stuff as part of it) and it's all come under Photos fine it seems. The only downside I'm seeing is no syncing option, so I'll probably straight upload SD cards after I've shot them so I have the originals offsite.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Pivo posted:If you're a Canadian and paying for Amazon Prime you're an idiot. All of the costs, none of the benefits. Does canadian prime get free streaming like real prime does? That's probably worth it if you don't already use another service.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Does canadian prime get free streaming like real prime does? no
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Well my photo library is ~3TB of RAW files. I'm guessing "unlimited photo storage" is intended for the few hundred dick picks of the typical user and not something like what I need, although as I said I can't find any quantifier that goes along with that offer of unlimited storage. I think I'll stick to the "dump everything on a big hard drive and leave it at a friend's house" plan I'm currently using.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:Well my photo library is ~3TB of RAW files. I'm guessing "unlimited photo storage" is intended for the few hundred dick picks of the typical user and not something like what I need, although as I said I can't find any quantifier that goes along with that offer of unlimited storage. 3TB is going to be a bitch over the Internet unless you've got gigabit symmetric anyway. Yeah, at that point "off-site" is going to have to be a site you control, not the cloud. Unless you've got a fat pipe! That'd be like 80 bucks a month on S3 anyway. Really not geared to that kind of thing. I keep ~40GB on S3, my most important stuff. If you're someone like my father who shoots 12fps and keeps everything, maybe it's not for you. Then again, if it's a business, 80/mo is a drop in the bucket. Pivo fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Does the "unlimited photo storage" include TIFFs? If not, does it include DNGs? (I could convert all my TIFFs to DNG.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Pivo posted:3TB is going to be a bitch over the Internet unless you've got gigabit symmetric anyway. Eh it's not that bad. I've got 15mbit up and I've moved similar amounts before, just have it set to do overnight for a month or two and you're there. A ball ache sure, but once it's up its up and it's not like you'll be adding more than 100gb at a time from then on. TIFF seems fine. You get decent previews off those, I have some ~200mb ones and it's gone up fine. The NEFs have crap previews but you can work them out at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Does the "unlimited photo storage" include TIFFs? If not, does it include DNGs? (I could convert all my TIFFs to DNG.) no, yes i tried it but it didn't like a bunch of my raw files. don't think i'm gonna use it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Pivo posted:no That is awful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
8th-snype posted:That is awful. also "This item does not ship to [your Canadian city]" for loving 99% of the poo poo on Amazon I'm jealous of how useful Amazon is to Americans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 00:09
|
|