 Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,488
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,488 |
Hey guys, it's Ray! Hi Ray! Did they kick you off the golf course or something? 
bibere usque ad hilaritatem
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
Probably threw out his back with too much relaxing. I hear that happens to the differently-aged.
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,331
axiomite
|
|
axiomite
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,331 |
Quote:
Now that the proper resting place for Alex's balls has been settled, I will add that I use Photoshop Elements and find it to be excellent.
Very funny, very funny. 
Hello Ray my friend.
Jack
"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." - G. K. Chesterton
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,444 Likes: 16
connoisseur
|
|
OP
connoisseur
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,444 Likes: 16 |
Well all balls deserve a good resting place, regardless of age or frequency of use……. I happened to be wandering through Wal-Mart yesterday and they had Elements 5 with a $60 price tag on it. Not being able to pass up a good deal, I bought it. For the past few days I’ve been playing around with Adobe Light Room 1.1 (trial download), and I think I’m going to stick with it for my Raw file editing. It’s super easy to use and fast. I prefer Bibble’s approach to how you transfer files and its batching process, but this LR appears to have everything I need for general picture adjustment, a great library module, great printing module and even a module for web specific picture editing (that I haven’t played with yet). I doubt I’ll need to do much more with any pictures in Elements after I get through with them in LR. $300 is pretty expensive though… I also prefer Noise Ninja that Bibble uses over LR’s noise reduction, but I suppose I can always buy that program and plug it into LR (maybe). I have also just realized that I need a new printer. I printed out some 8X10’s and they look horrible. Oh well, I want to print some 16 X 20 / 32 prints anyway. And then there’s the new lens(es) I want. Man this new hobby of mine is as expensive as A/V. I think I’m completely screwed now.
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
16x20 prints are going to cost you as much as the A1400...
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,077 Likes: 7
Founder, Axiom Upgrade Club shareholder in the making
|
|
Founder, Axiom Upgrade Club shareholder in the making
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,077 Likes: 7 |
I don't even have a printer for home anymore. I figure if I want something printed, it'll be something important and I'll have it printed professionally, as opposed to printing out random and pointless stuff just because I have a printer at home. I've only had a couple of things printed in the last several years, so I suppose I'm saving money so far.
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,854
connoisseur
|
|
connoisseur
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,854 |
Sorry - been travelling. Hi guys 
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,444 Likes: 16
connoisseur
|
|
OP
connoisseur
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,444 Likes: 16 |
I ended up buying Photoshop Lightroom and Elements and have been playing around with Raw files in LR quite a bit. According to my DSLR for dummies book, the author recommends converting Raw files to a Tiff format, as they have the least amount of compression.
Well I did some tweaks to about fifty shots in LR, then exported them as Tiff, uncompressed. My 10.2 meg Raw files turned into 57.1 meg Tiff files. Is this right?? At this rate and as many pictures that I’m taking, I’m going to need a lot more memory real quick. I was expecting the file size to go down, not be 5X larger….. .
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 715
aficionado
|
|
aficionado
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 715 |
I would recommend exporting them to jpeg. I'm not sure why they chose tiff. Did it mention setting a max (in pixels or cm or inches) to the photo?
I use Lightroom (very happy with it) on my PC and MAC both. I fix my mistakes (shoot in raw) then export to jpeg. The jpegs are still largish (3-5MBs) that look pretty good (if I say so myself). If you want I can send you a link of the pictures I have taken.
james
"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." C Hitchens
|
|
|
Re: What’s your favorite photo editing software?
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 44
buff
|
|
buff
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 44 |
Quote:
According to my DSLR for dummies book, the author recommends converting Raw files to a Tiff format, as they have the least amount of compression.
My 10.2 meg Raw files turned into 57.1 meg Tiff files. Is this right?? I was expecting the file size to go down, not be 5X larger….. .
You answered your question with the first part of this statement. TIFF is an uncompressed file format, so the highest quality, but it results in very large files. The reason they are larger than the RAW files is that they have been processed (just think about all the extra data that is generated while your computer chews on the RAW file when you hit 'process').
JPEG is more than fine for all but the most critical of images. I prefer to save things that I have put significant time editing as .PSD (photoshop format) or .TIFF, as they will have no compression. I then save them as .JPG when needed. One thing of note, JPG will recompress the file each time you save... so if you open a file, save it a thousand times, then open it again there will be a decrease in quality (kinda like making serial copies of music). So the 'best' solution is a non-compressed file system (.TIFF), but for most things it really doesn't matter.
For most things, a JPG lvl12 is more than enough. The industry print standards are 300dpi saved as a .TIFF, but I've done side by side prints from JPG and TIFF and there is no noticable difference at 12x18.
Quote:
At this rate and as many pictures that I’m taking, I’m going to need a lot more memory real quick.
Honestly, storage is cheap compared to the cost of retaking many images (oh yeah, don't forget to have back-ups). Not all files need to be converted to .TIFF just for the sake of it. Keep the RAW files and process the ones you need. If you are just doing a batch processing that doesn't take much time you may just want to make a JPG and reprocess the RAW file if you ever need a non-compressed version (the nice thing about LR, etc. is they can save the settings you used to process an image to apply later).
When you start getting into serious layers, etc. you can get some really large files very quickly. I have a single image file (.PSD) that's up around 500MB... I don't even want to think about how large that would be if I converted it to a layered .TIFF file.
-Todd...
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,477
Members15,617
| |
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
|
0 members (),
920
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
