Processing Program

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Alan Lichtenstein, Feb 23, 2010.

  1. Alan Lichtenstein

    NameHere Guest

    Because we all already know that you're nothing but a pretend-photographer
    role-playing troll who doesn't even own a camera much less used either
    program. That's why.
     
    NameHere, Feb 24, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  2. I'm pretty much with the Duck on this. Mac for 20 years plus;
    GraphicConverter is a fabulous program for the price, but PSE is easier
    to use, as is PS, for me at least.
    And I am a Lightroom early adopter.
     
    John McWilliams, Feb 25, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  3. Alan Lichtenstein

    LOL! Guest

    Aww... c'mon. Show us your one attempt at producing really bad HDR images
    again with one of the far less capable programs that you and all your other
    snapshooter cretins online always trollishly suggest to others. We could
    use the laugh again. But don't upload the one you tried to fix after we had
    all pointed out the tilted mountains, trees, and clouds, or the pink
    granite mountains and pink clouds lit by noon light. Where you corrected
    only half of all that was wrong with it. We didn't even get into the
    terrible tone-mapping job you did. It was difficult enough explaining your
    moronic basic-editing beginner's mistake that you couldn't even correct
    properly after it was explained to you. Upload your original attempt before
    anyone showed you what you did horribly wrong. I think everyone should be
    able to see what kind of "HDR Expert" you really are so everyone can better
    assess you lame-assed snapshooter of a troll's advice.

    LOL!
     
    LOL!, Feb 25, 2010
  4. Alan Lichtenstein

    LOL! Guest

    Hey, "Sloppyfuck the Snapshooter DSLR-Troll", here's one for you that's
    done right. My first experiment with focus and exposure bracketing HDR
    techniques. The amanita caps were so moist and shiny that any of them
    sitting in the small shaft of intense sunlight breaking through the dense
    trees were all blown out to nothing but bright yellows and whites, just
    like the small spot of highlight that I left on them for a more natural
    look. All their intense orange-red colors totally wiped out when trying to
    also expose for those in the deep shadows too.

    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4009/4385701017_f368fb512f_o.jpg

    For those of you not familiar with the real-world, (you know, all 99.999%
    of you useless basement-living and now totally-psychotic trolls), yes those
    mushroom-cap colors are exactly that intense in real life, if not even more
    so. I was hiking about 30 meters from them when the one in the shaft of
    sunlight caught the corner of my eye through some dense foliage. Later
    finding 5-meter rings of them nearby even deeper in the shadows. Affording
    some spectacular shots. Some of the caps being well over 20cm in diameter,
    in all stages of development.

    This HDR test of mine is about the only HDR image I've ever seen that is
    believable. And it is only possible by NOT using that piece of shit
    Photomatix crap that everyone stupidly and ignorantly recommends. All just
    because that piece of shit software was originally spammed to the groups by
    an equally stupid and ignorant pretend-photographer TROLL, which you
    mindless jerks then all parroted without reason. This is what happens from
    you idiots not having one bit of any real photography and image editing
    experience in useless lives while you continue to perpetuate your ignorance
    to those just as equally ignorant.

    Learn anything yet?

    LOL!!!!
     
    LOL!, Feb 25, 2010
  5. Alan Lichtenstein

    John A. Guest

    That wouldn't apply, then, anyway.
    I'm on Windows here, so I can't help on that issue.
    No 16-bit yet, but they're working on 32-bit floating-point by way of
    their GEGL project.
     
    John A., Feb 25, 2010
  6. Alan Lichtenstein

    SMS Guest

    Your best bet for now is Photoshop Elements. As others have pointed out,
    you can often get it at no charge because it is bundled with various
    hardware, but even buying it it's less than $85 for the Mac version (the
    PC version is less, often available for $50).

    For about $80 you can purchase Photoline for Mac
    ("http://www.pl32.com/"). It lacks some features of Photoshop (though it
    also has some features that are lacking in Photoshop), and the user
    interface is not wonderful, but it's cheap and powerful. With each new
    version more of the user interface issues that users have complained
    about are corrected. Some of the documentation is lacking, especially in
    terms of the English, as the authors are German. My favorite line in the
    release notes for 15.50 is where they explain that: "The Histogram
    Correction dialog is now arranged clearlier." It may not be the best
    program for a beginner in terms of usability, but it's not terribly hard
    to figure out how to do things either.

    OTOH, Photoshop is part of an integrated system with far more third
    party support, much of which extends to Elements. One big plus is that
    if you ever need any assistance doing something esoteric on Photoshop,
    or Elements it's easy to find answers. Not so easy on Photoline, where
    often you'll find you can do the same task that you can do in Photoshop,
    but that it's non-intuitive, and since it's a relatively unknown program
    outside Germany or the EU, help in English is especially hard to come by.
     
    SMS, Feb 25, 2010
  7. Alan Lichtenstein

    ray Guest

    I don't recall exactly when it was implemented, but GIMP does indeed
    support 16 bits per color. The last time I checked, it was not selected
    by default.
     
    ray, Feb 25, 2010
  8. The only intitive interface in the world is the human nipple
    --- and a full third of the babies have to *learn* that interface!

    The best a *program* can do is to conform to common assumptions
    about how things work --- and even there it's learned reactions
    and asssumptions and they differ from person to person.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition_(philosophy)
    disagrees with that description, as do I.

    You describe not an intuitive interface to a program, you describe
    a mind reading program. Actually, the latter may be easier to
    accomplish than the former: humans are creatures of habit, and
    it's often not too hard to extract the most likely action(s) by
    observing past behaviour and using statistics or neuronal networks.
    It could, if you wanted it to. But would a software that's correct
    in 80% of the time what you want to do outweight one where you'd
    have to tell it to undo and please do what you want in 20% of the
    time --- i.e. causing you to have to stop, consider the current
    state, and act upon that state instead of always using the long
    learned actions which are already in muscle memory?

    Imagine writing a posting and every 5th word you need to go back
    and correct the word because the program guessed wrong ...

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 25, 2010
  9. Alan Lichtenstein

    Cal Rollins Guest

    Let us all know where to show up for your Wikigraduation, where you get
    your Wikidiploma from your Wikiprofessors. Your whole education authored by
    moronic people who write wikipages all day and night in an attempt to prove
    to themselves and their mothers upstairs that they really aren't losers.
    After having spewed their ignorance upon many wikipages they then find a
    purpose in life in guarding and defending that their ignorance and their
    ignorance alone remains on their wikipages 24/7/52. Cross-referenced of
    course with wikipages displaying the same ignorance where they obtained
    their own Wikidiplomas.

    Sometimes when bored I'll refer everyone to a wikipage right after I have
    edited it with some outlandish nonsense, even more silly than what that
    page originally contained, just to see how stupid they all are. The
    wikipage-author will change it back to their spewed stupidity within a day
    anyway, unless they have died in their basement. An entertainment of
    double-duty.

    Do people always hold their forefinger and thumb in this shape "L" and wave
    to you in that manner? If not, they should all be doing just that. Perhaps
    one of them will take pity on you and tell you what it means someday.
     
    Cal Rollins, Feb 25, 2010
  10. Alan Lichtenstein

    J. Caldwell Guest

    I guess that's why everyone was using PhotoSlop for the last decade with
    its 16-bit platform, only changed to a 32-bit math platform in CS4. They
    could have all been running it on Windows 3.1 all these years and they
    wouldn't have noticed any difference, other than it would have ran faster.

    Boy are you ever ignorant to what's really happening, aren't you.
     
    J. Caldwell, Feb 25, 2010
  11. Alan Lichtenstein

    Guest Guest

    yes, you are
     
    Guest, Feb 25, 2010
  12. Alan Lichtenstein

    ray Guest

    Haven't tried ufraw recently, have you?
     
    ray, Feb 26, 2010
  13. Alan Lichtenstein

    tony cooper Guest

    Never. Why should I? I shoot RAW and upload into either Lightroom or
    Bridge converting my NEF file to a .dng.
     
    tony cooper, Feb 26, 2010
  14. Alan Lichtenstein

    Guest Guest

    Haven't tried ufraw recently, have you?[/QUOTE]

    when did ufraw get mind reading functionality?
     
    Guest, Feb 26, 2010
  15. Alan Lichtenstein

    ray Guest

    when did ufraw get mind reading functionality?[/QUOTE]

    Long time ago. It does default exposure correction when you read the file
    - and yes it's quite simple to reset if you don't like it.
     
    ray, Feb 26, 2010
  16. Alan Lichtenstein

    ray Guest

    Well, I don't know - possibly because it has features you were
    complaining about not having - like default corrections applied when you
    read the file in.
     
    ray, Feb 26, 2010
  17. Alan Lichtenstein

    Guest Guest

    Long time ago. It does default exposure correction when you read the file
    - and yes it's quite simple to reset if you don't like it.[/QUOTE]

    that's not mind reading, and that's exactly the same in just about
    every raw converter (and is usually not ideal).
     
    Guest, Feb 26, 2010
  18. Alan Lichtenstein

    Guest Guest

    Well, I don't know - possibly because it has features you were
    complaining about not having - like default corrections applied when you
    read the file in.[/QUOTE]

    you obviously haven't used lightroom, since it does exactly that.
     
    Guest, Feb 26, 2010
  19. Alan Lichtenstein

    Guest Guest

    if only it could feel pain. and lots of it.
     
    Guest, Feb 26, 2010
  20. Alan Lichtenstein

    tony cooper Guest

    Where do you get the idea that I'm complaining? I don't want the
    program making the decisions. All those things I've listed above...I
    choose how to do. If UFRAW makes those decisions for me, I wouldn't
    want it.
     
    tony cooper, Feb 26, 2010
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.