Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jeffery Small, Apr 5, 2014.

  1. Jeffery Small

    Tony Cooper Guest

    You have absolutely no idea how much time I take on an individual
    So, you weren't very good with Photoshop. It's a program for
    grown-ups, so don't feel badly.

    It's wonderful that you have more time now to make all these posts
    that contribute nothing, contain nothing interesting, and are mostly
    repeating the same old shit. Maybe you should go back to trying to
    learn how to use Photoshop.
    Tony Cooper, Apr 9, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jeffery Small

    Tony Cooper Guest

    But, we have seen some of Floyd's work and we can see his work if we
    go to his website. For me, it's the same as looking at other
    photographer's websites: some images I like very much, and some
    images that don't impress me all that much.

    What I can't see in his photographs, though, is what processing
    technique he used. Not that it interests me because I would not rate
    an image because it was processed with this program or that program.

    If someone asks for suggestions, then - by all means - relate your
    experiences with Lightroom or any other program. Provide samples that
    show the kind of result you can get if they help.

    However, this constant barrage of dick-waving over what program works
    best in post isn't really of interest to anyone. What time or effort
    anyone puts into post is irrelevant to the rest of us. Without seeing
    what came out of the camera, we can't rate how well the post was done,
    and we sure as hell don't care how the person got to that.

    Especially, when the person who is constantly critical of the choice
    of others doesn't have the balls to show his own results.
    Tony Cooper, Apr 9, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jeffery Small

    sid Guest

    nospam wrote:

    That just about sums up your ability to rationally discuss anything.
    sid, Apr 9, 2014
  4. Jeffery Small

    Guest Guest

    because the productivity increase is huge and the amount of time to
    learn something new is small (often negligible).

    why buy a newer and faster computer? your old 486 could do things
    without any apparent difficulty.
    several reasons, none of which change the points i make. whether
    someone can be more productive in lightroom has *nothing* to do with
    how good or bad my photos are.
    Guest, Apr 9, 2014
  5. Jeffery Small

    Guest Guest

    that detail does not matter.

    it's the relative amount not the absolute amount.

    using software that makes someone more productive reduces that amount
    of time in the vast majority of cases no matter how long it takes.
    back to your usual ad hominems.

    i'm *very* good with photoshop, not that it matters. this isn't about

    the key is people can do most things in *less* time using a different
    maybe you should try discussing the topic rather than resorting to
    insults. not that i expect that any time soon.
    Guest, Apr 9, 2014
  6. Jeffery Small

    Guest Guest

    Technology for ³Edge Avoiding Wavelets² is in the improved new
    Sharpen Tool in Photoshop CS5 and its ŒProtect Detail¹ feature ‹
    technology licensed from Yissum Research Development in Jerusalem,

    and for plug-ins, this goes back nearly 20 years, for photoshop 5 (not

    The wavelet-based filter in Vivacity offers quick and effective noise
    reduction that does not destroy detail. Learn more about the new
    Topaz DeNoise.

    and fwiw:
    Neat Image incorporates the most advanced noise reduction algorithms
    in the industry that surpass the quality of all classic noise
    reduction methods and even that of the wavelet-based methods.
    Although the wavelet-based methods were developed relatively
    recently, Neat Image uses an even newer and more efficient approach
    to noise reduction.
    Guest, Apr 9, 2014
  7. Jeffery Small

    Guest Guest

    nobody said anything about spending more money than necessary and often
    times, it will pay for itself anyway.
    Guest, Apr 9, 2014
  8. Jeffery Small

    Guest Guest

    something you do quite often.
    Guest, Apr 9, 2014
  9. Jeffery Small

    sid Guest

    No, just being accurate. Finder is run as part of the UI, it's not part of
    the OS. You are correct in saying "No different than a folder view in
    Unity." though in my case Dolphin in KDE
    Anyone who wants to can find out how with a cursory google search.
    Apparently it can be done and with no detriment to the OS. There are third
    party replacements out there so one does not need the finder supplied by
    Apple. It's crap anyway according to nospam.
    So what is delivered with a new Mac that is particularly with a photographic
    workflow in mind, that isn't delivered with other OS'
    sid, Apr 9, 2014
  10. Jeffery Small

    Guest Guest

    very little of what you've said about macs has been accurate.
    nope. finder is part of the os, ships with the os and isn't anything
    that can be changed.

    if you want to draw a line in the sand (something which is pointless
    but you seem to want to do it anyway), then it would be between the
    darwin kernel and everything above it (cocoa, carbon, foundation, aqua,
    quartz, quicktime and more).
    removing finder is a huge detriment to mac os. it has numerous negative
    side effects, including preventing the user from launching apps and
    potentially making the system non-bootable in some cases. it's not

    the third party finder replacements can't completely replace finder
    even if the user wanted to, plus they are worse than finder is anyway.
    they are normally run alongside finder, with the user just ignoring
    finder most of the time.

    it's no secret i don't like finder but it mostly does what it claims,
    just not particularly well, and with some very stupid bugs.
    mac os x.
    Guest, Apr 9, 2014
  11. Jeffery Small

    PeterN Guest

    Actually, I think Floyd's help has been spot on, and practical. Is he a
    bit wordy, yes. Is he opinionated, yes. But I think his advice is sound
    and well intentioned. When he gives advice, you get advice, not an ego
    PeterN, Apr 10, 2014
  12. Jeffery Small

    Tony Cooper Guest

    How does a hobbyist, and - as far as I can tell, all here are
    hobbyists - use anything that "pays for itself"? It's all out-go to
    Tony Cooper, Apr 10, 2014
  13. Jeffery Small

    Whisky-dave Guest

    Dam it, I'll have to turn the volume up next time I try it ;-)
    Whisky-dave, Apr 10, 2014
  14. Jeffery Small

    sid Guest

    What I said above
    Well my experience of OSX is different to yours. I have 3 close friends and
    2 family members who use macs so I am not unfamiliar with it although I can
    only say I've dabbled a bit and I find it clunky and confusing. That's
    because I'm used to something else, it's not rocket science.

    I am used to using linux, have been for more than 12 years, it's a piece of
    piss to install and set up, it's free and I can run it on any damn hardware
    I please, it's easy to maintain,it's secure, it's smooth and quick in
    operation and I can have any of the fancy desktop gizmos that the mac users
    seem to covet. What's not to like!

    Different to what we are used to does not equate to crap. We'd all be much
    more narked if there was no choice and we were all stuck with windows.
    sid, Apr 10, 2014
  15. Jeffery Small

    sid Guest

    Nothing tangible then?
    sid, Apr 10, 2014
  16. Jeffery Small

    PeterN Guest

    On 4/6/2014 1:53 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    If I don't stop gaining weight, I will need more than a thread extender.
    PeterN, Apr 11, 2014
  17. Jeffery Small

    Sandman Guest

    False logic. Why use new software and install OS upgrades when the old
    version could to things without any apparent difficulty?
    Sandman, Apr 12, 2014
  18. Jeffery Small

    Sandman Guest

    A hobbyist can't earn money on their photography?
    Sandman, Apr 12, 2014
  19. Jeffery Small

    Tony Cooper Guest

    There's "can" again. Of course we "can". Whether or not we "do" is
    another story. And, there are some hobbyists who do earn some money
    from their photography, but far less money than they have invested in
    software. Not enough money to consider the amount paying for a
    software investment.
    Tony Cooper, Apr 12, 2014
  20. Jeffery Small

    Sandman Guest

    Yeah, but your question kind of implied we don't.
    Aren't there, likewise, "some hobbyists" who do earn enough money to pay
    for their software?
    Sandman, Apr 12, 2014
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.