|
I don't think Aperture had many holdouts left (I switched to Lightroom with version 4) but Apple confirmed today that they're not developing Aperture anymore. The new Photos app that's coming in 2015 will replace iPhoto while also being able to import Aperture libraries.
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:15 |
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:I don't think Aperture had many holdouts left (I switched to Lightroom with version 4) but Apple confirmed today that they're not developing Aperture anymore. The new Photos app that's coming in 2015 will replace iPhoto while also being able to import Aperture libraries. Ah balls... I don't particularly love Aperture and I'm not a pro or anything, but I'd kind of settled on it. I guess next computer I get I'll have to jump into Adobe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:I don't think Aperture had many holdouts left (I switched to Lightroom with version 4) but Apple confirmed today that they're not developing Aperture anymore. The new Photos app that's coming in 2015 will replace iPhoto while also being able to import Aperture libraries. I find this sad. I'm a Lightroom user, but I've been 'rooting' for Aperture — I like a lot of the ideas there, and have no real love for Adobe. Apple, however, has never been a trustworthy pro software partner/platform, and this confirms it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
I've got Aperture and Lightroom and I think I used Aperture maybe twice ever. Lightroom seems so much more intuitive to me, especially working with other Adobe software.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
It's a shame. I really liked Aperture, but had a feeling they were going to pull the plug. When was the last time they put out any sort of update to it, other than adding new camera profiles?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 05:51
|
|
|
Anyone who didn't see this one coming a mile out hasn't noticed what happened to anything pro-oriented apple has ever made.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
bisticles posted:It's a shame. I really liked Aperture, but had a feeling they were going to pull the plug. When was the last time they put out any sort of update to it, other than adding new camera profiles? evil_bunnY posted:Anyone who didn't see this one coming a mile out hasn't noticed what happened to anything pro-oriented apple has ever made.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:FCP X is actually really good, but the transition was handled incredibly poorly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
FCP X is good but like people have said, the transition was so poor that I can understand the hate. Changing all the keyboard shortcuts was such a big fuckup, what were they thinking?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
I don't use a Mac but I do use Lightroom, and a few months ago I got annoyed by Adobe's business model (I don't want to subcribe, I want to buy the thing - it's not a newspaper, it's a book). I heard about Aperture through Facebook, an old friend wrote an open letter to Adobe asking for the Heads-Up-Display (HUD) or full-screen editing functiona of Aperture to be implemented in Lightroom. This isn't a feature I would use - GIMP has a kind of HUD mode as its default and I find it annoying - but his letter is reasonable (warning: he's a professional comedian so it's full of jokes, not all of which you may find funny). http://robmitchelson.com/nubert-says/2014/6/28/an-open-letter-to-adobe-in-regards-to-apple-dropping-aperture I replied with links to the programs I found a while ago in my procrastination-y search for LR alternatives. Corel Raw Therapee ACDSee LightZone Darktable I never tried any of them, so I can't say anything about them other than "They exist, and apparently allow most of the functions you currently get from Aperture or Lightroom".
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Your "comedian" friend used a pretty bad example of a lightroom screenshot to make his point since those panels can be hidden or resized.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
LOL Corel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
rio posted:Your "comedian" friend used a pretty bad example of a lightroom screenshot to make his point since those panels can be hidden or resized. Yeah, I noticed that, too. I didn't point that out to him, nor did I talk about another friend, a professional wedding photog, who runs Lightroom on a multi-monitor setup, one screen entirely devoted to just the image, another with most of the tool panels.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 09:20
|
|
|
Or you can just press 'f'. I hate floating toolbars.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 12:00
|
|
|
I learned a hard lesson yesterday about forgetting to switch back to RAW from JPEG when taking HDR exposure bracketed photos. The resulting HDR photos look like dog poo poo. On a related note does anyone know why I sometimes get green halos and green and blue noise-type spots in some HDR photos? Is it ghosting or is it my exposures?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
Does anyone know why I am getting artifacts with HDR photos now? I was taking photos of a bathroom in a house with intense yellow light in the raw photo, and there were tiny pixels of darker yellow in the background, almost like noise, except I haven't seen noise like this before. Noise reduction didn't take care of it, so I found myself using the adjustment brush to lessen it but it didn't really do the job like I wanted it to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
life is killing me posted:Does anyone know why I am getting artifacts with HDR photos now? I was taking photos of a bathroom in a house with intense yellow light in the raw photo, and there were tiny pixels of darker yellow in the background, almost like noise, except I haven't seen noise like this before. Noise reduction didn't take care of it, so I found myself using the adjustment brush to lessen it but it didn't really do the job like I wanted it to. Can you post a sample of the area?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
bisticles posted:Can you post a sample of the area? I will do my best, I tried to post the unedited HDR-merged TIFF file but as you might know, PS exports them at the lowest possible exposure setting so you can see like two vanity lights in it. Also imgur won't take TIFF. I will just dial up the brightness without making it too hard to see, I hope, and post a JPEG. edit: Okay, these should do it. In both you can see my lovely, noob attempt to edit them out as the background looks frosted a little bit. I used the adjustment brush but was a little heavy-handed with dialing down the clarity in LR after PS. In the first, look at the shower and the doorway where the toilet is, and you should be able to still see the noise. In the second, look to the far left where the shower is, it's the most prominent as I didn't edit over that. Basically, I sort of half-assedly edited this noise out because these photos were destined for upload to a real estate website that only allows 640x480 resolution, and as such it wasn't going to be noticed by most people. But I notice it, and I hate it. http://imgur.com/SaOZX9U http://imgur.com/Orjseuy edit2: I used a Sony A380 for the photos, shot in RAW, merged the photos into HDR using PS HDR Pro, initially edited the photos in PS Camera Raw, and then did final editing in LR (perspective correction mainly, it's much better since PS doesn't seem to have an auto perspective correction function?). I sometimes use Photomatix but it turns out photos that are way too surreal. life is killing me fucked around with this message at 15:36 on Jul 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
What is the thing in photoshop where you can edit just the color in an image all by itself?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
A hue adjustment layer. Or you can make a new layer, set it to hue, and paint on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
Something pretty awesome I just started to do for noise reduction is creating a smart object stack of multiple images set to "median" blending mode. Here is a quick example:  100% crop from Sony a6000 at 25,600 ISO. Top is obviously before. This is with a stack of only 3 raw images with zero other noise reduction or processing. Using more images makes it even better. Using a stack of 10 and the noise is reduced down to about ISO 800 for some examples I did. If you've never played with it I recommend you try it out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
I bought How to shoot Everything and the Lightroom 5 book, waiting for em in the mail. Anything else you guys recommend on learning post? I seem to do better with actual textbooks instead of webpages when it comes to tutorials.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
So yeah, went to NYC and took a picture that I want to print. I'm not so good at post processing, especially when it comes to B&W skyline type of shots. Here's what I came up with so far :  I think it needs some darker areas and that I need to straighten it/correct the perspective slightly. I might try to get the bridge to pop up a little bit more. Should I just burn it or is there a better way? Anything else comes to mind? Just noticed. I think there's a halo around the top empire state building because I played with the clouds. Here's the original  to give you an idea of what I had to work with or if anyone wants to play around with it. I do have a higher and a lower exposure (about 1.5 stop) of the same image that I might use if it's worth it. KingColliwog fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
KingColliwog posted:So yeah, went to NYC and took a picture that I want to print. I'm not so good at post processing, especially when it comes to B&W skyline type of shots. I'm not as experienced as like almost every other goon that posts here ITT, but I'll give it a shot. Did you use a tripod? I ask because you could just merge them into an HDR photo. Did you shoot in RAW or JPG? Was it full-frame? Also ALR will do auto perspective correction, and if that doesn't work the way you want it (sometimes won't) you can do it manually with the help of a grid. As for the bridge, try HDR merging if you have the software for it and see what the bridge looks like then. If it's not satisfactory, you might want to zoom in and burn it, I usually use high feathering and low density so I don't gently caress up anything around what I'm trying to lighten or darken.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
One more question : Do the clouds feel over done? life is killing me posted:I'm not as experienced as like almost every other goon that posts here ITT, but I'll give it a shot. Tripods were not allowed, but the way I set up will let me use the other two exposure if I need to. I might have to blend them by hand though since whenever I've used HDR programs I wasn't happy with the results. Do you guys just use photoshop HDR thing? It was RAW and crop-sensor. I'll try your tips for the bridge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
KingColliwog posted:One more question : Do the clouds feel over done? Yeah I guess in a public place frequented by however many people a day, a tripod wouldn't fly. Hadn't thought about that. I have, however, gotten decent results in HDR just hand-held. Photomatix did a pretty good job merging my handheld exposure brackets but it's not that great at de-ghosting. That said I personally mostly use PsCS6 Extended for HDR via HDR Pro. They give a more natural look whereas Photomatix in my limited experience with it thus far really seems like more of a artsy-fartsy type deal in that it by default exports highly-stylized HDR merged photos, and the only way to get it to output more natural-looking photos is by using the batch merger. The good thing about HDR Pro in PsCS6 is that it just does the HDR merge and nothing else, so it doesn't add any tone-mapping or presets to make the photos look like high school kids made them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
Heads up in case anybody is interested - Sony is currently giving away copies of DxO FilmPack 3 if you give them an email address: https://www.dxo.com/intl/sony
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
I'm trying to get better at my dodge & burn. I seem to remember seeing a website once that had a bunch of simple 3d models that would show how lighting should form on a face, to use as reference. Does anyone know what I'm talking about?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 12:43
|
|
|
What's your favorite method for removing date stamps from photos? Including ones that are in front of complicated backgrounds, as opposed to just a lawn or a patch of sky?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
If you can't clone-stamp it or easily crop it out, try to find another picture taken from that same set where that area is in a non-obscured part of the frame and copy/paste it in. Been there, done that... I can't convince my mother to turn that feature off and just trust EXIF data, either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:I don't use a Mac but I do use Lightroom, and a few months ago I got annoyed by Adobe's business model (I don't want to subcribe, I want to buy the thing - it's not a newspaper, it's a book). I don't feel like I'm serious enough to want to buy a copy of Lightroom, and especially not serious enough to subscribe to Lightroom, can anyone offer advice on if any these are any good? They have to be an upgrade from Picasa, right? I was in Pittsburgh earlier this year, and not that Pittsburgh is the most beautiful city in the world, but I tried to take some pictures of what I thought were interesting buildings, but they all just look... flat. I may be too left brain to even fix it but I'd at least like to try without blowing a million dollars (aka $10 a month) on Lightroom.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
I have to have linux for work, so I use Darktable exclusively. Gimp is pretty poo poo, but I find 95% of the stuff I want to do to a RAW I can do in darktable. It took me a while to get used to nondestructive editing and making a workflow, but if you're any experience of lightroom already, darktable should be intuitive. Edit: Rawtherapee is another option. I tried that, Darktable and a couple of others. In the end I liked darktable the most.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 08:58
|
|
|
On the other hand, Lightroom is cheap in photo dollars to buy and is awesome for photo organization as well as post work. I'm not a professional or anything but I couldn't imagine working without it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
just get lightroom it is the best if you don't get it now you'll end up getting it later and wishing you'd gotten it now
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Nthing the "get LR" speak, it's really worth the money. Great piece of software.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
In photography money, lightroom is basically free
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
Yeah, it goes without saying, if i could install it on my machine I probably would. Darktable does a lot of the same things re: catalogs, etc, but there's quite a bit LR does which darktable doesn't do (yet) or doesn't do well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
I just really hate Adobe's subscription-based business model. I think you can just buy only LR, still, while the rest of "Creative Suite" (Photoshop etc.) is subscription-only. Pretty much all software these days is available as a full-function (or like 95% of functions) trial version for free, either as a lightly-crippled form (I've seen video editing software that splatters a big watermark over everything, but otherwise lets you play with it) or for a set time limit (typically 30 days). Being "serious" as a photographer, in my mind, comes down to willing to put at least a token effort into making your pictures look good, and working to make the pictures you take tomorrow better than the pictures you took yesterday; learning and improving, in other words. Post-processing is key to this, again this is just my own opinion, but I've seen plenty of pretty good photos that would be pretty drat good if the photog had just bothered to tweak basic parameters like rotation, white balance, contrast, crop; this takes about 10 seconds in LR once you get used to it (and it's pretty intuitive) so there's no excuse for crappy photos.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:I think you can just buy only LR yep you can
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:15 |
|
|
I assume LR5 is the latest version? Amazon is selling it for $130, or for $120 a year ($100 if you're affiliated with a school) you can get LR plus Photoshop
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:46
|
|