 |
|
| Hobby Forum Index » Models - Railroad » Pictures taken at Woking and Horsham (England) shows... |
|
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Wolf K... |
 Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mike Hughes wrote:
[...]
Quote: Seems that digital photography and post processing are partially
dependent upon personal preferences, although the basic concept is the
same.
They are highly dependent on the monitor. Pictures that look a little
dark on my monitor look OK on my wife's laptop. Colour tone is also
different. Etc. Unfortunately, proper calibration requires hardware as
well as software. I looked for calibration kits about a year and choked
on the prices. ;-(
[...]
wolf k. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| LDosser... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:29 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Bernhard Agthe" <dark2star at (no spam) gmx.net> wrote in message
news:hc47av$ldc$1 at (no spam) daniel-new.mch.sbs.de...
Quote: Hi,
LDosser wrote:
Your Canada results were 'not the best'? They were fine!
Agree!
Most of the time auto mode is good enough and far better than what one
got with sunny 16.
Auto mode will give pretty good results, though when post-processing my
(raw) pictures I practically always correct the color temperature... And
quite often I do some exposure (brightness) adjustment, though that's
quite a bit of "personal style"  The biggest drawback to auto mode is
that it disallows "raw" - so my camera's "full auto" or "scenery" modes
get little use, if any. Mostly I stay in "P" or one of the "Av", "Tv" or
"M" modes, with "M" used least ;-)
As for your selection of software - personally I don't like Photoshop -
I don't own a copy. Had one I got cheap when number one son worked at Adobe
and eventually gave it to number three son who gave it away to someone else.
Right now I use Picassa if I'm in a hurry and Paint Shop Pro 9 because I got
a copy for $10 when the local photo store had a clearance. Did I mention I'm
cheap?
Quote: in part because there's such a hype about it, in part because the referent
in our "photo course" (who also gives photoshop lessons) didn't know how
to use it (ugh) and most importantly, it doesn't run on Linux Most of
my photo processing is the actual raw conversion and I find the free
"RawTherapee" the best tool, especially under Linux For anything more
complicated I use GIMP, as it brings all he functions I need and I don't
see why I should pay more than 80 Euro for something I don't need anyway -
because I mostly use a very small subset of the functions the software
offers. So, it's a bit of learning to handle the alternatives, but then
you need to learn Photoshop, too
I tried GIMP, but found it to be more effort than I wanted to spend. It also
crashed on something simple. Can't recall what, but I'd rather switch than
fight ...
Quote:
But if you personally like it, then go for it
Don't use it ...
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| LDosser... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Wolf K" <wekirch at (no spam) sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4ae5b1a8$0$1607$9a6e19ea at (no spam) news.newshosting.com...
Quote: Mike Hughes wrote:
[...]
Seems that digital photography and post processing are partially
dependent upon personal preferences, although the basic concept is the
same.
They are highly dependent on the monitor. Pictures that look a little dark
on my monitor look OK on my wife's laptop. Colour tone is also different.
Etc. Unfortunately, proper calibration requires hardware as well as
software. I looked for calibration kits about a year and choked on the
prices. ;-(
[...]
wolf k.
The calibration kits are getting a bit less expensive, but they are still
above my choke point. If I were doing a lot of printing, I'd probably get
the calibration kit as the cost would be repaid with savings on ink |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bernhard Agthe... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:30 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hi,
Wolf K wrote:
(Exposure and brightness)
Quote: They are highly dependent on the monitor. Pictures that look a little
dark on my monitor look OK on my wife's laptop. Colour tone is also
different. Etc. Unfortunately, proper calibration requires hardware as
well as software. I looked for calibration kits about a year and choked
on the prices. ;-(
Same problem here. Although there is a little trick: I did a few
test-prints at a shop near my home and I found that the shop's prints
were just a tad on the dark side. So basically I turned down the
brightness of my monitor a bit, now it works great - until the lab
changes their settings :-(
If you print at home, do a test print and check the settings, if
necessary, adjust the printer to match your pictures or adjust your
display to match your printer - at least somewhat... But then I do very
little printing at home, as I feel the inkjet-printed photos just don't
look as good as the stuff I get from my shop... Especially when looking
from the side, some colors tend to "turn" in the home-prints which is
not to my preferences...
Ciao... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:28 am
|
|