Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > pi-casa su casa

Reply
Thread Tools

pi-casa su casa

 
 
norven_munky
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-05-2008
A couple of years ago I bought a dslr and started shooting raw. The change
to raw combined with my time being at a premium after the birth of my son
resulted in a mountain of images to be sorted/deleted etc.

I click the shutter too many times and tend to really procrastinate over
what to delete, which is the pick of the bunch etc. Raw made that process
even more complicated and time consuming.

Up until now I hadn't really found an easy way to quickly assess both the
raws & the jpg's and decide what needed fixing, what needed deleting. etc.
and more importantly it was a pita...I'd end up using a windows slideshow to
decide what to cull but then I'd have to go find the associated raw to
delete as well and it was just a major put off and made photography less fun


Enter picasa. Without knowing too much about it I loaded it, pointed it at
my image directories and let it go. I didn't even know it had raw support
till after I started using it.

It has made managing my photos so much easier.

- I get to see the raw & jpg side by side.
- deciding what to delete is a lot easier.
- I can quickly delete both the raw & jpg without having to go hunting for
the raw.
- I can quickly make edits to the raw that result in a much better result
than the canon jpg
- when I save the edits as a jpg it quarantines the original raw off for me.
- I can quickly decide when an image isn't important enough to require the
raw be kept and quickly delete it.
- the simplified tools might not be as powerful as PS or RSE etc but they do
a remarkably good job.

I'm back in the game!

Tony



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pooua
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-05-2008
On Mar 4, 6:55*pm, "norven_munky" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

That's interesting. I use Google's Picasa Website, but not their
imaging software. I hadn't realized it supported RAW, either.

I usually put all my photos into files sorted by year, then by month.
RAW and JPEG would naturally be next to each other, but I put the RAW
into its own folder, because, for some reason, Irfanview takes 10
seconds to load the RAW on my home computer (oddly, it takes a second--
the same time as for JPEG--on my less-powerful work computer).
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Matt Ion
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-05-2008
Pooua wrote:
> On Mar 4, 6:55 pm, "norven_munky" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> That's interesting. I use Google's Picasa Website, but not their
> imaging software. I hadn't realized it supported RAW, either.
>
> I usually put all my photos into files sorted by year, then by month.
> RAW and JPEG would naturally be next to each other, but I put the RAW
> into its own folder, because, for some reason, Irfanview takes 10
> seconds to load the RAW on my home computer (oddly, it takes a second--
> the same time as for JPEG--on my less-powerful work computer).


IrfanView has an option whether to load the full RAW data, or just read
the embedded JPG. Obviously, the former setting makes images a lot
slower to load.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Malcolm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
In rec.photo.digital Pooua <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Mar 4, 6:55?pm, "norven_munky" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


> That's interesting. I use Google's Picasa Website, but not their
> imaging software. I hadn't realized it supported RAW, either.


> I usually put all my photos into files sorted by year, then by month.
> RAW and JPEG would naturally be next to each other, but I put the RAW
> into its own folder, because, for some reason, Irfanview takes 10
> seconds to load the RAW on my home computer (oddly, it takes a second--
> the same time as for JPEG--on my less-powerful work computer).


Picasa's RAW support, like most of their image editing, is a good
package deal which is often all you need, but lacks the sophisticated
capabilities of Irfanview's RAW support. I only use RAW when the
photographic conditions demand a higher dynamic range or more complex
colour balancing than the camera can easily handle on its own, and
when I do, much of the time Picasa's simple RAW editing is all that's
required to get the extra reach.

--
Chris Malcolm http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

 
Reply With Quote
 
ransley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
On Mar 4, 6:55*pm, "norven_munky" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> A couple of years ago I bought a dslr and started shooting raw. *The change
> to raw combined with my time being at a premium after the birth of my son
> resulted in a mountain of images to be sorted/deleted etc.
>
> I click the shutter too many times and tend to really procrastinate over
> what to delete, which is the pick of the bunch etc. *Raw made that process
> even more complicated and time consuming.
>
> Up until now I hadn't really found an easy way to quickly assess both the
> raws & the jpg's and decide what needed fixing, what needed deleting. etc.
> and more importantly it was a pita...I'd end up using a windows slideshow to
> decide what to cull but then I'd have to go find the associated raw to
> delete as well and it was just a major put off and made photography less fun
>
>
> Enter picasa. *Without knowing too much about it I loaded it, pointed it at
> my image directories and let it go. *I didn't even know it had raw support
> till after I started using it.
>
> It has made managing my photos so much easier.
>
> - I get to see the raw & jpg side by side.
> - deciding what to delete is a lot easier.
> - I can quickly delete both the raw & jpg without having to go hunting for
> the raw.
> - I can quickly make edits to the raw that result in a much better result
> than the canon jpg
> - when I save the edits as a jpg it quarantines the original raw off for me.
> - I can quickly decide when an image isn't important enough to require the
> raw be kept and quickly delete it.
> - the simplified tools might not be as powerful as PS or RSE etc but they do
> a remarkably good job.
>
> I'm back in the game!
>
> Tony


When I used Picassa a year ago any editing I did was not automaticly
recognised by any of my other photo edit programs. Unless they have
changed this you wont be happy when you open your photos in another
program to do finer edits and maybe even printing. I spent days
editing only to find I had to do it all over, going to Picassa support
group was no help as the answer I got last year was it would be alot
of work to save changes that would be recognised by other programs, I
dumped picassa
 
Reply With Quote
 
-=Rob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
Did you know that Picasa can generate a HTML-web site of your (selected)
images ??
Picasa has already some templates on-board.
There are also several downloadable templates form others.
A very qiuck and beautiful one is the SimpleViewer template :

http://www.airtightinteractive.com/s...ct.html#picasa

Take a look for an example of a SimpleViewer template:
http://home.tiscali.nl/weekhout/

Ok, I've changed the background image but that's all.
You can easily change the gallery.xml file, even AFTER you have
generated the HTML:
- change thicknes of the photoborder and its color
- change textcolor
- How many rows and columns of thumbnails and were they are vissible:
left, right, top and bottom
- etc.

And then you can upload all the generated files with FTP-software to
your site !!
It all just takes minutes to do so from starting in Picasa
till the end : your photo-site !

How do we do it :
1) select some photos in Picasa (keep the Ctrl-button pressed !!)
2) Go to the menu-bar : Folder > Export as HTML.....
3) Choose the size of the pictueres to show.
4) Picasa chooses the export-folder, but you can change the path and
foldername
5)Choose a template (try the default ones for now,
but really take a look at SimpleViewer later !!)
6) Picasa automaticly opens your browser to show the slideshow.
7) Go to the HTML-output folder and upload all the file to your home-page

-=Rob

norven_munky schreef:
> A couple of years ago I bought a dslr and started shooting raw. The change
> to raw combined with my time being at a premium after the birth of my son
> resulted in a mountain of images to be sorted/deleted etc.
>
> I click the shutter too many times and tend to really procrastinate over
> what to delete, which is the pick of the bunch etc. Raw made that process
> even more complicated and time consuming.
>
> Up until now I hadn't really found an easy way to quickly assess both the
> raws & the jpg's and decide what needed fixing, what needed deleting. etc.
> and more importantly it was a pita...I'd end up using a windows slideshow to
> decide what to cull but then I'd have to go find the associated raw to
> delete as well and it was just a major put off and made photography less fun
>
>
> Enter picasa. Without knowing too much about it I loaded it, pointed it at
> my image directories and let it go. I didn't even know it had raw support
> till after I started using it.
>
> It has made managing my photos so much easier.
>
> - I get to see the raw & jpg side by side.
> - deciding what to delete is a lot easier.
> - I can quickly delete both the raw & jpg without having to go hunting for
> the raw.
> - I can quickly make edits to the raw that result in a much better result
> than the canon jpg
> - when I save the edits as a jpg it quarantines the original raw off for me.
> - I can quickly decide when an image isn't important enough to require the
> raw be kept and quickly delete it.
> - the simplified tools might not be as powerful as PS or RSE etc but they do
> a remarkably good job.
>
> I'm back in the game!
>
> Tony
>
>
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
-=Rob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
How can you use Picasa's web-site without using Picasa software ?

-=Rob

Pooua schreef:
> On Mar 4, 6:55 pm, "norven_munky" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> That's interesting. I use Google's Picasa Website, but not their
> imaging software. I hadn't realized it supported RAW, either.
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Malcolm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
In rec.photo.digital ransley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> When I used Picassa a year ago any editing I did was not automaticly
> recognised by any of my other photo edit programs.


Of course not, because they're temporary and non-destructive edits
which can all be losslessly undone. All you have to do to get them
noticed by other editors is to save them, which is easily done either
on a single image by CTRL-s, or folder batcher by saving all edits at
once. Whichever you do, because that's the first editing stage which
introduces losses, Picasa helpfully archives an original unedited copy
to which you can always revert with a single keystroke, even if you go
on to do further edits with other editors.

> Unless they have
> changed this you wont be happy when you open your photos in another
> program to do finer edits and maybe even printing. I spent days
> editing only to find I had to do it all over, going to Picassa support
> group was no help as the answer I got last year was it would be alot
> of work to save changes that would be recognised by other programs, I
> dumped picassa


And all because you couldn't be bothered to read the instructions
which explained how easy it was to do manually. In fact I applaud
Picasa's philosophy of not doing this automatically, and therefore
giving you the maximum degree of control over the very important
distinction between lossless editing and lossy editing.

I bet you haven't read your camera's manual either

--
Chris Malcolm (E-Mail Removed) DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

 
Reply With Quote
 
ransley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
On Mar 6, 2:55*pm, Chris Malcolm <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In rec.photo.digital ransley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > When I used Picassa a year ago any editing I did was not automaticly
> > recognised by any of my other photo edit programs.

>
> Of course not, because they're temporary and non-destructive edits
> which can all be losslessly undone. All you have to do to get them
> noticed by other editors is to save them, which is easily done either
> on a single image by CTRL-s, or folder batcher by saving all edits at
> once. Whichever you do, because that's the first editing stage which
> introduces losses, Picasa helpfully archives an original unedited copy
> to which you can always revert with a single keystroke, even if you go
> on to do further edits with other editors.
>
> > Unless they have
> > changed this you wont be happy when you open your photos in another
> > program to do finer edits and maybe even printing. I spent days
> > editing only to find I had to do it all over, going to Picassa support
> > group was no help as the answer I got last year was it would be alot
> > of work to save changes that would be recognised by other programs, I
> > dumped picassa

>
> And all because you couldn't be bothered to read the instructions
> which explained how easy it was to do manually. In fact I applaud
> Picasa's philosophy of not doing this automatically, and therefore
> giving you the maximum degree of control over the very important
> distinction between lossless editing and lossy editing.
>
> I bet you haven't read your camera's manual either
>
> --
> Chris Malcolm * * * *(E-Mail Removed) * * * * * * *DoD #205
> IPAB, *Informatics, *JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]


I dont have to waste time with that extra "save" PRicasso step, which
is a waste of time, for any other program I have, Corel, Adobe, Gimp,
HP Canon, etc, they all interconnunicate. Its simply a waste of time
to do somrthing "Special" because PRicasso is different. So I dumped
free PRicasso since it wastes my time.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Matt Ion
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
ransley wrote:

> I dont have to waste time with that extra "save" PRicasso step, which
> is a waste of time, for any other program I have, Corel, Adobe, Gimp,
> HP Canon, etc, they all interconnunicate. Its simply a waste of time
> to do somrthing "Special" because PRicasso is different. So I dumped
> free PRicasso since it wastes my time.


Wow... that's a lotta animosity for a simple piece of freeware.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Advertisments