Livick on digital, Mike Arst's photographs

"reprints" of selected articles from Usenet and other forums
-default
Posts: 1916
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 1:53 am

Postby -default » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:44 am

Thanks Mike Arst for the pointer to this interesting article:
http://www.livick.com/method/treadmill/pg1.htm

BTW - check out Mike's recent images from Sweden, and be sure to leave comments.
http://www.pbase.com/mikearst/image/85801127/medium

mikemeister_admin
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:29 pm

Postby mikemeister_admin » Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:46 pm

The article is right on, I also think that there are too many options on digital cameras that we will never use. Software programs on your computer are the same.
  Barry

-default
Posts: 1916
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 1:53 am

Postby -default » Sat Sep 29, 2007 7:51 pm

I have to agree - OTOH the complexity keeps going up, driven by the market.  As an example closer to home, the number of features in Curvemeister is increasing at a steady rate.  I guess the key is to make it possible to ignore the features that are not necessary.

mikemeister_admin
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:29 pm

Postby mikemeister_admin » Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:13 pm

Wait, gentlemen, not so fast!  As Mike has recently gone "against raw" I'd like to point out that if you shoot raw files, many of that somewhat-confused photographer's gripes about "complexity" simply disappear.  With raw files (which is properly spelled "raw" and not "RAW," since it's not a particular file format or an abbreviation for an extension, but the plain word "raw") we can just forget about these things when we're shooting:

-- No "quality" settings
-- No "size" settings
-- No "white balance" settings

Are there more things we can forget about when shooting raw?  Maybe, but I've forgotten them . . .

Also, "more complexity" means "more possibilities" -- and that you or Joe or Peter or I have no particular need of "feature X" in a camera or an application doesn't mean it's not useful to a lot of other folks, and their needs count no less than yours or Joe's or Peter's or mine. 

mikemeister_admin
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:29 pm

Postby mikemeister_admin » Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:21 pm

Oh yeah, and these also we can happily forget when shooting raw:

-- No "sharpening" settings
-- No "picture control" (saturation/contrast) settings

Frankly, it would stress me out a lot if I were to shoot nothing but JPEGs, with all those hard-wired settings to worry about and getting right! And I've now figured out what that upper-caps "RAW" term is an abbreviation of: "Relax And Work." :-)

RonBoyd
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:23 am

Postby RonBoyd » Sun Aug 03, 2008 12:48 pm


(which is properly spelled "raw" and not "RAW," since it's not a particular file format or an abbreviation for an extension, but the plain word "raw")


As in "uncooked"?... like the thought?... Or is that half-baked?

mikemeister_admin
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:29 pm

Postby mikemeister_admin » Sun Aug 03, 2008 9:34 pm

Right on. Uncooked ain't half-baked!


Return to “Articles from other forums”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests