Digicam is a much better Digital Asset Manager (DAM) than Lightroom, however Lightroom does some half arsed raw developing for people who don't know how to use Photoshop. I say this as a semi-professional photographer/artist who uses Photoshop and Lightroom almost daily. I tried to use GIMP, but things like actions, and some advanced editing techniques were just too hard or less efficient in GIMP.
There is a spectrum of usability, from simple portable consumption through to desktop computing power. Where you decide to compromise depends on your wants and needs. For some, the portability of a tablet outweighs the lack of power. For me, I do not normally need the crazy power of a desktop, but I do need more than what a surface does, let alone a tablet...
One of the things I really like as a relatively new OSX user is the trackpad. I never use a mouse with my Macbook anymore. I do find my linux boxes still need a mouse, but I find the simple gestures and well designed trackpad mean I never need to bring a mouse in my bag...
If this is your normal use case, a $200 laptop running some form of Linux would probably be much more cost effective, or maybe use your relatives computer to set up said router....
Exactly. If I am at home where I would normally plug in an ethernet cable, I plug in a thunderbolt hub which gives me an ethernet port, several extra USB ports, an HDMI port and more thunderbolt ports. I plug in one wire and everything is connected. When I am not at home, normally I would use WiFi, so do not need an ethernet port. On the rare occasion I do I can use an adaptor....
The animation, I can live with. I have some desktop effects on my KDE box.
I am not sure where the blue you talk about lives. I guess a lot of icons have some blue in them, but whatever.
I don't like the flat design either, but every OS seems to have jumped on that bandwagon. Buttons should look like buttons, or at least indicate somehow that they are clickable, rather than the hunt and peck guessing game we have now.
I will say though, that OSX is the best OS that runs pro level photography and design programs...
Indeed, I used to look forward to mod points to fling at comments, now I may glance at Slashdot when I am bored, but it is no longer "news for nerds", it is more like "Random articles that may or may not have something to do with technology or US politics or the Internet, or something else polarizing so we can attract troll-fests"
There are still a few gems in the comments, but the mine is getting pretty empty....
Facebook|Google|every other social site allows|encourages tagging images with people and location information. Guess what, these tags add even more information to images. In other words, photographs are intended to communicate information. If you don't want that information communicated, DON'T POST.
What do you mean by this? I don't know of any other format professionals use for final delivery (outside of personal archives).
TIF for most print jobs, occasionally even PSD. JPG is used a lot I admit, especially for quick submissions or web work, but there are way more amateurs using jpg then pros....
I guess I was thinking more as a creator. Mary-joe takes a photograph, tries to upload it, and gets frustrated when Facebook or whatever cannot display it. I guess it also depends on the DRM implementation. Large companies like Google or Facebook will be able to process and show jpg's regardless of DRM, while average users will only be able to view them (with the attached ads, sorry I must be cynical this morning....)
You have proven my point. Many people will not download a new program just to see some pictures on the inter webs. If they cannot see it they will move on. If they really want to see it, they will find out how to defeat the DRM. Either way, content producers lose with DRM built into jpg. Movies and music are a different case as people have more desire to see/hear the latest pop fodder, and so are willing to go through the DRM hoops. At least for the most part. Piracy is still rampant, and the music and film industries do not hold the power they once had....
I tried using GIMP as a photoshop replacement for a while, and while GIMP fell short in a lot of areas it gave many more choices for PNG such as compression level and gamma. In all honesty though, I usually save in PSD (and my printer can read psd files) and use an export module on Lightroom to send jpg's to my website. PNG's are technically superior to jpg in a number of ways, but not worth the hassle...
How many of the general public will immediately implement a viewer that incorporates DRM? and of that subset how many will also install the plugin that defeats the DRM? The other night I wanted to watch a TV show on a streaming service I pay for (shomi, Canadian version of Netflix) but there was an issue on my TV, so I went to watch it on my Linux computer, but I did not have the right program installed. so I went to watch it on my son's Windows machine and was told I was accessing it from too many streams.... In the hour it took to figure this all out, I could have downloaded it from a torrent site.... DRM is not in the best interest of your audience. Some people will give up and go elsewhere....
sorry, my coffee had not kicked in, you are right. Jpg's are smaller and do give more options on compression levels. I do like that PNG is overall more versatile, except in the implementation used in Photoshop....
And that is the problem. Many people will not be able to open it. By implementing DRM you will limit your audience. Of course that is your right as a content producer, but be aware that by limiting your audience you are reducing your income....
you do know that JPEG is only 8-bit right? convert the image to 8-bit first if you want to compare size. I do agree that JPEG is more widely accepted though. PNG is still thought of as a graphics only format, probably because of the optional alpha channel.
Slashdot Mirror
Digicam is a much better Digital Asset Manager (DAM) than Lightroom, however Lightroom does some half arsed raw developing for people who don't know how to use Photoshop.
I say this as a semi-professional photographer/artist who uses Photoshop and Lightroom almost daily.
I tried to use GIMP, but things like actions, and some advanced editing techniques were just too hard or less efficient in GIMP.
so much for the matrix...
agreed
comparison by a windows fan
There is a spectrum of usability, from simple portable consumption through to desktop computing power. Where you decide to compromise depends on your wants and needs. For some, the portability of a tablet outweighs the lack of power. For me, I do not normally need the crazy power of a desktop, but I do need more than what a surface does, let alone a tablet...
One of the things I really like as a relatively new OSX user is the trackpad. I never use a mouse with my Macbook anymore. I do find my linux boxes still need a mouse, but I find the simple gestures and well designed trackpad mean I never need to bring a mouse in my bag...
If this is your normal use case, a $200 laptop running some form of Linux would probably be much more cost effective, or maybe use your relatives computer to set up said router....
If you never bring you Macbook pro anywhere, why not just get an iMac? better screen, better processor, more ports....
Exactly. If I am at home where I would normally plug in an ethernet cable, I plug in a thunderbolt hub which gives me an ethernet port, several extra USB ports, an HDMI port and more thunderbolt ports. I plug in one wire and everything is connected.
When I am not at home, normally I would use WiFi, so do not need an ethernet port. On the rare occasion I do I can use an adaptor....
THIS ^^^
It is now more important to look trendy than to work well.
I agree there are a lot of issues with macs.
The animation, I can live with. I have some desktop effects on my KDE box.
I am not sure where the blue you talk about lives. I guess a lot of icons have some blue in them, but whatever.
I don't like the flat design either, but every OS seems to have jumped on that bandwagon. Buttons should look like buttons, or at least indicate somehow that they are clickable, rather than the hunt and peck guessing game we have now.
I will say though, that OSX is the best OS that runs pro level photography and design programs...
or underwear as pants...
People who do not keep backups WILL be tortured in the next several years, unless they are extremely lucky...
Indeed, I used to look forward to mod points to fling at comments, now I may glance at Slashdot when I am bored, but it is no longer "news for nerds", it is more like "Random articles that may or may not have something to do with technology or US politics or the Internet, or something else polarizing so we can attract troll-fests"
There are still a few gems in the comments, but the mine is getting pretty empty....
Facebook|Google|every other social site allows|encourages tagging images with people and location information. Guess what, these tags add even more information to images.
In other words, photographs are intended to communicate information. If you don't want that information communicated, DON'T POST.
What do you mean by this? I don't know of any other format professionals use for final delivery (outside of personal archives).
TIF for most print jobs, occasionally even PSD.
JPG is used a lot I admit, especially for quick submissions or web work, but there are way more amateurs using jpg then pros....
DRM has been optional for professional creators. Jpg is an amateur format and said amateurs may check the DRM box unaware of the consequences.
On second thought, bring on DRM in jpg, that way I won't have to look through all the crappy photos.....
I guess I was thinking more as a creator. Mary-joe takes a photograph, tries to upload it, and gets frustrated when Facebook or whatever cannot display it.
I guess it also depends on the DRM implementation. Large companies like Google or Facebook will be able to process and show jpg's regardless of DRM, while average users will only be able to view them (with the attached ads, sorry I must be cynical this morning....)
You have proven my point. Many people will not download a new program just to see some pictures on the inter webs. If they cannot see it they will move on.
If they really want to see it, they will find out how to defeat the DRM. Either way, content producers lose with DRM built into jpg.
Movies and music are a different case as people have more desire to see/hear the latest pop fodder, and so are willing to go through the DRM hoops. At least for the most part. Piracy is still rampant, and the music and film industries do not hold the power they once had....
I tried using GIMP as a photoshop replacement for a while, and while GIMP fell short in a lot of areas it gave many more choices for PNG such as compression level and gamma.
In all honesty though, I usually save in PSD (and my printer can read psd files) and use an export module on Lightroom to send jpg's to my website. PNG's are technically superior to jpg in a number of ways, but not worth the hassle...
How many of the general public will immediately implement a viewer that incorporates DRM? and of that subset how many will also install the plugin that defeats the DRM?
The other night I wanted to watch a TV show on a streaming service I pay for (shomi, Canadian version of Netflix) but there was an issue on my TV, so I went to watch it on my Linux computer, but I did not have the right program installed. so I went to watch it on my son's Windows machine and was told I was accessing it from too many streams....
In the hour it took to figure this all out, I could have downloaded it from a torrent site....
DRM is not in the best interest of your audience. Some people will give up and go elsewhere....
sorry, my coffee had not kicked in, you are right. Jpg's are smaller and do give more options on compression levels.
I do like that PNG is overall more versatile, except in the implementation used in Photoshop....
Hulu? What's that?
and aren't we trying to kill Flash?
And that is the problem. Many people will not be able to open it. By implementing DRM you will limit your audience. Of course that is your right as a content producer, but be aware that by limiting your audience you are reducing your income....
you do know that JPEG is only 8-bit right? convert the image to 8-bit first if you want to compare size.
I do agree that JPEG is more widely accepted though. PNG is still thought of as a graphics only format, probably because of the optional alpha channel.