|
prukinski posted:So, I don't know which one of these looks better anymore and, uh, it'd be good to get an opinion? What do you guys think (bearing in mind that either one will probably get more finessing before I do anything with it)? Bottom one for sure. The top one everything is the same tint and blends together, where as the bottom there is a nice contrast between the land and sky.
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2012 11:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
psylent posted:Can anyone help? http://www.topazlabs.com/remask/
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2012 23:54
|
|
|
Bloody hell, if that works as well as advertised I'll be pretty happy. I might need more of this kind of work done in the future and to be honest, I don't really the time to do it. Does anyone here outsource this kind of work? If so, who do you use?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2012 01:35
|
|
|
I need to get my monitor calibrated and am wondering what calibration tools folks use. I've been looking at the Spyder (not sure which version though) and the X-Rite i1Display 2. Is there much of a difference between the two?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
psylent posted:Bloody hell, if that works as well as advertised I'll be pretty happy. Let me put it this way: http://www.topazlabs.com/trials/index.php?d=remask
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2012 19:33
|
|
|
Lightroom 4 is acting weird here. I can't crop to certain dimensions, because it will always interpret the aspect as vertical (i.e. 10x3 is vertical, as is 3x10). What's worse is that it randomly imports JPEGs rather than RAW files. I shoot exclusively RAW, but every other picture imported will be a JPEG. WTF?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
If it's like LR3, the aspect ratio always starts out matching the orientation of the photo. If you set your ratio, then take a corner of the crop box, make it tiny, then enlarge it in the other direction it should snap into the other orientation. I don't know why they did it like that; it's not intuitive and took me forever to figure out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
Evilkiksass posted:Let me put it this way: http://www.topazlabs.com/trials/index.php?d=remask
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2012 23:00
|
|
|
Adobe Photoshop CS6 is out in public beta form, if you're interested in trying it out. It appears to be good for 60 days. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/photoshopcs6/
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2012 11:49
|
|
|
Do you guys still use third party plugins to upload to Flickr from Lightroom or do you just use the built in export service? I'm trying to figure out which I should be using. In LR3 I still used the plugin (mainly because I forgot the built in service even existed). I just tried the LR4 built in one and it seemed to do the trick. The only downside is that I don't seem to have much control with regards to what EXIF it publishes? Can I still attach something like the Metadata Wrangler plugin to the built in exporter?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 06:39
|
|
|
I use Jeffrey Friedl's Flickr Plugin and find it's got enough options to keep my happy. I am far from a power user, but it may be worth a try to see if it's what you're after. It can't hurt, with a free trial and then a 'pay what you want' registration fee.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 07:44
|
|
|
Danoss posted:I use Jeffrey Friedl's Flickr Plugin and find it's got enough options to keep my happy. I am far from a power user, but it may be worth a try to see if it's what you're after. It can't hurt, with a free trial and then a 'pay what you want' registration fee. Will this give you an option to not download Flickr comments? Because I can't figure out how to turn that off with the LR3 plugin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
Rot posted:Will this give you an option to not download Flickr comments? Because I can't figure out how to turn that off with the LR3 plugin. Um, I think so. I never came across Flickr comments in any form when I was using it in LR3, and I just upgraded to LR4 yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 20:12
|
|
|
Yeah, that particular flickr plugin was what I used all the time, I just didn't know if there was any real advantage to still using it over the built in one. I mean I publish so infrequently that to be honest it was annoying because the "trial" would expire between publishes  So I dunno, I'll use the built in one until I run into some limitation I guess 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 20:17
|
|
|
It may be something they're doing wrong, but I've seen people complain about the LR built-in Flickr publish service deleting their pictures when the pictures aren't in their catalog anymore (because of hard drive crash, file got moved, whatever). I use Jeffrey Friedl's plugin. It's worth a donation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
is there any way to make a line on the outside of a selection? i have a purple shape selected and i'd like to put a white border a few pixels wide around it. it's complex enough that i couldn't replicate it scale it up change the color and put it on the layer behind, which would be my usual workaround if it were just a circle or something e: never mind i forgot that stroke was under blending options Genderfluid fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Mar 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 06:13
|
|
|
How is LR4 working out for everyone? It seemed when it was first released people were having a few issues with it. I'm thinking about picking it up, but wanted to see if I should wait for the first update before switching from LR3.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 03:25
|
|
|
The first update came out today as a release candidate heh
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 03:56
|
|
|
Falco posted:How is LR4 working out for everyone? It seemed when it was first released people were having a few issues with it. I'm thinking about picking it up, but wanted to see if I should wait for the first update before switching from LR3. Everything is better but performance (even slight changes like 1/3rd exposure can take a second to process). Much better controls (color temp adjustment brushes thank lord Adobe) and engine, just sluggish.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 03:59
|
|
|
Falco posted:How is LR4 working out for everyone? It seemed when it was first released people were having a few issues with it. I'm thinking about picking it up, but wanted to see if I should wait for the first update before switching from LR3.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 14:58
|
|
|
Falco posted:How is LR4 working out for everyone? It seemed when it was first released people were having a few issues with it. I'm thinking about picking it up, but wanted to see if I should wait for the first update before switching from LR3. Even if it were a worse performer, I have no regrets in upgrading-- The ability to white balance by painting with a brush is amazingly useful for tricky mixed lighting. As well as all the other new brush adjustments. So good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 18:00
|
|
|
prukinski posted:So, I don't know which one of these looks better anymore and, uh, it'd be good to get an opinion? What do you guys think (bearing in mind that either one will probably get more finessing before I do anything with it)? I wholeheartedly agree with mr. mephistopheles and his opinion on the second picture. I'm actually looking for some critique/pointers on how I handled this picture I took a few days ago:  Descanso-Gardens-30-32 by Abnegātus, on Flickr original:  30-32-unedited by Abnegātus, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2012 22:05
|
|
|
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to get close to this look? Sorry I don't have a bigger version.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
You want to know how to underexpose a photo?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2012 21:28
|
|
|
Thoogsby posted:Does anyone have any suggestions on how to get close to this look? Sorry I don't have a bigger version. To me it looks underexposed and a bit of work done to the curves. Something like highlights dropped down and the shadows pumped up. Maybe even a bit of split toning thrown in for good measure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 00:17
|
|
|
Falco posted:To me it looks underexposed and a bit of work done to the curves. Something like highlights dropped down and the shadows pumped up. Maybe even a bit of split toning thrown in for good measure. Thanks! I realize it's underexposed, but for some reason that doesn't seem to bother me when it works in the photo. Looks like the person was pretty liberal with the clarity slider too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 01:41
|
|
|
In Lightroom 3, is it possible to print a single photo so that it spreads over two A4 portrait pages? I can add two pages, but can't get a photo to stretch over the two of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 11:00
|
|
|
So in Lightroom 4 did Adobe just say 'gently caress it' and made the clarity slider produce output 10 times more ridiculous than it used to be in previous version?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 04:02
|
|
|
neckbeard posted:So in Lightroom 4 did Adobe just say 'gently caress it' and made the clarity slider produce output 10 times more ridiculous than it used to be in previous version?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 05:31
|
|
|
I know someone else has posted about this before, but Instagram just came out for Android this week. Before my friends might have occasionally noticed my photos and complimented me on one. Boy do people ever love Instagram poo poo! "Wow, you're getting so good!" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 17:34
|
|
|
Is there a way to disable Aperture including the file name as a caption when uploading photos to Facebook?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
Eight Is Legend posted:Is there a way to disable Aperture including the file name as a caption when uploading photos to Facebook? This isn't Aperture. It is Facebook doing it. The trick I have found for Lightroom at least is to place information into the Details and Copyright EXIF fields. Then those values are used instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
Eight Is Legend posted:Is there a way to disable Aperture including the file name as a caption when uploading photos to Facebook? You just have to stop giving pictures file names that reflect what you think of the people in them. No more bigfatidiot.jpg. Or do what Evilkiksas suggests-- if you just make a blanket caption for a given event that you import (along with blanket keywords) you will solve this problem and wind up with more detail on your images.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2012 06:12
|
|
|
I'm looking for an OSX specific app that might or might not exist. The app in question should have / would be able to: - Ingest a folder of images and let me assign metadata tags to each one - Incrementally look through the folder on subsequent load and show me images which have NO tags - Have no actual photo editing features whatsoever - Have the ability to show me all available metadata tags so I can quickly and easily pull up a list of images I want to see. Possibly export those somewhere but that's not a necessary feature. I need this for a non-photography reason, but in my mind I can see this being something that photo journalists might use to organize large shoots? Or maybe people who do a lot of stock photography? I suppose if it comes down to it I can use Lightroom, but that seems way overkill for what I need it for, and I'm not sure off the top of my head whether Lightroom can filter by images with no user-added metadata.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2012 23:43
|
|
|
I'm not sure it's all that useful to you but if you're command-line savvy you could probably set up a couple commands to do that via imagemagick, grep, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
Well I'd like to give students the ability to tag their own new images so that's not really what I'm looking for even if it IS a good idea, but someone in the Mac thread recommended Leap which is a $20 app that seems to do exactly what I'm looking for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2012 01:13
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I suppose if it comes down to it I can use Lightroom, but that seems way overkill for what I need it for, and I'm not sure off the top of my head whether Lightroom can filter by images with no user-added metadata.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
why is LR4 so much more CPU intensive than LR3?? this is annoying me... edit: i too am on an i5 with 8GB RAM, had no issues with LR3, but some sliders cause delay/lag to the entire system. Suicide Watch fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Apr 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 07:02
|
|
|
No kidding, LR4 also crashes routinely where LR3 ran fine. The sometimes multi-second delays when moving sliders is also really annoying and makes it feel unstable. This is on a modern i5-2500 desktop, but the exact same issues on my i5-560M laptop, I think it's leaking memory too. Anyone who tried the 4.1 RC know if it's improved performance?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 08:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
I'm running the first release version of LR4 and have edited around 600~ photos and not run into multi second delays or excessive slowdowns. Using the mac build, if it matters (i5, 256gb SSD, 4gb ram)
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 16:15
|
|