Slashdot Mirror
Professional Photographers Using Linux?
thesun asks: "I'm a freelance writer and photographer and I'm wondering what Pro Photographers have done in regards to color matching and scanning under Linux, especially when going from slides to digital. I just can't get anything close to a good image when I scan a slide. They're blurry and the colors are so off that doing anything with my thousands of slides is proving to be prohibitively time-consuming. Are other Pros (or talented amateurs) having similar problems? Are there solutions out there I haven't found? (Sorry, I can't dump thousands into a piece of hardware---I'm looking for a way to make the most of my Epson Perfection 2400 with transparency adapter)."
Sadly, you're mistaken about what it means to be a "professional." You are correct in thinking that a "professional" gets paid for their services. You are incorrect in thinking that all professionals are knowledgeable and know what they're doing in return for the pay they are receiving. I have seen wedding photographers who actually arranged and took worse pictures than even I would take - and I would hardly even consider myself an amateur at this point because not all of my pictures turn out well.
The person that wrote this "Ask Slashdot" may just be in the camp of those who get paid for services they're not qualified to perform. Or they may just be getting started. In any case, they did preface the question by mentioning that they were not willing to pay for the high quality stuff that many professional photographers use, so I don't see why you're so up in arms with their lack of desire to use "real" equipment. Just answer the damn question!
1. Yes, most pros use Photoshop and not the GIMP, and all of us hate the cost of Photoshop. Proof is obvious, anyone hates paying $$$$
2. We use PS because it does what we need, not because we are fenced in to specific Windows formats. Proof is that PS on Macs is used a lot in the graphics industry.
3. Gimp is able to deal with the formats, but does not have the required functionality. Proof is that GIMP does not handle print and printing, CMYK and ICC workflows well.
It seems that if it dealt with point 3, GIMP would instantly garner the support of zillions of photographers out there.
This is not a signature.
Ah yes, the use Google answer. Google is great, but after you've waded through all the websites with pre-alpha software and dead projects it is sometimes nice to just ask for someone who has been there, done that, and got the T-shirt.
The website you point to is actually a good illustration. Just take a look at the first few paragraphs:
2-May-2000
Right, that means that the project website has not been updated for over four years. Inspires confidence, that.
The source file color_manager.c contains the code for the Gimp Color Manager plugin. This plugin can be used to color correct images with ICC color profiles.
Which means that you must be familiar with Gimp plugins, and it looks like there is no manual to help you integrate this in Gimp, or to explain its use. And how likely is it that this will work with modern versions of Gimp? Would you trust your color management to a piece of software in this state? Is it worthwile to even read this website any further, unless you want to modify the software?
At this time the functionaliy is very limited, the plugin e.g. accepts only RGB images. There is more to come ...
(Cough.)
Don't get me wrong, it is very nice that someone has posted this software for all to use, but at some point you must be realistic.
And it looks to me you picked the best of a rather sorry bunch of results from this particular google.
I also agree. As much as people want to mod the parent (as well as the two current replies) down as "off topic" or "troll", the glaring reality is that I'd bet that professional photographers are probably the least represented amongst the Linux installed base.
That said, as much respect as I have for the accomplishments of "The Gimp", you have to understand that on the Mac (and Windows), there are widely supported and understood color management systems (ColorSync, for example) and image formats that Linux currently doesn't offer analogs for.
As much as you hate to admit it, Linux isn't perfect, and photography may be one of the places that Linux doesn't quite make the grade in.
Yet...
bash-3.00$ uname -a
SunOS panda 5.10 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-2
I AM where he is and I have a solution to his problem.
no operating system on the planet is going to fix low end scanning hardware. Hell I even tried a $1200.00 agfa scanner and still had marginal results.
the ONLY solution to scanning slides correctly is the $5200.00 FUJI slide and negative scanner.
I am renting one for $80.00 a day from a local photographer that was willing to rent me his.
I dont care if you have a cluster of Cray supercomputers, a flastbed scanner is going to do a crappy job at scanning slides.
i have no idea why linux is even brought up in this question, it has nothing to do with an operating system and has everything to do with the scanning hardware you are using.
It's like videotaping a wedding, if you use a $500.00 garbage palmcorder you will get a crappy wedding video. use a Canon XL1s or XL2 and you get quality video, shoot in 35mm film at 24fps with $150,000.00 lenses and you get fantastic.
scanning with low end gets you low end images.
Yes, a $1000.00 scanner is LOW END.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.