Photo Editing 2017 - An Opinion

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:


There are members of my camera clubs that I call "cat and squirrel
photographers". They take excellent shots of certain subjects, but
they don't have the imagination to see a photograph in something
off-beat or not normally subject matter.

Actually, "cat and flower photographers" describes them better. So
many photographers go for the trite and ordinary instead of looking
for what could be interesting.

perhaps they find that to be interesting and not at all ordinary. they
get to decide that, not you.

On 1/23/2017 12:44 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-01-23 16:19:43 +0000, Neil said:

On 1/23/2017 10:54 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-01-23 15:19:27 +0000, Neil said:

On 1/23/2017 10:06 AM, Savageduck wrote:
This is an interesting take on the state of post processing/photo
editing in 2017 from Matt Kloskowski.

https://mattk.com/state-post-processing-photo-editing-2017/

Following his directions, I had to stop reading after his
disclaimer. ;-)

You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized
that it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was
introduced. So, I don't use them at all.

It is a bit more than that considering where some software has gone and
that many of the RAW processors do much the same thing. Today digital
photographers have a much wider software choice when it comes to
processing and editing their digital images. The trick is simplifying
the workflow so as not to create a quagmire to be bogged down with. I
have been as guilty of this as the next guy, but I have been controlling
myself to simplify my workflow and only use specific plugins if I have
something in mind for a particular image.

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

--
best regards,

Neil

In article , Neil
wrote:

You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized
that it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was
introduced. So, I don't use them at all.

It is a bit more than that considering where some software has gone and
that many of the RAW processors do much the same thing. Today digital
photographers have a much wider software choice when it comes to
processing and editing their digital images. The trick is simplifying
the workflow so as not to create a quagmire to be bogged down with. I
have been as guilty of this as the next guy, but I have been controlling
myself to simplify my workflow and only use specific plugins if I have
something in mind for a particular image.

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized
that it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was
introduced. So, I don't use them at all.

It is a bit more than that considering where some software has gone and
that many of the RAW processors do much the same thing. Today digital
photographers have a much wider software choice when it comes to
processing and editing their digital images. The trick is simplifying
the workflow so as not to create a quagmire to be bogged down with. I
have been as guilty of this as the next guy, but I have been controlling
myself to simplify my workflow and only use specific plugins if I have
something in mind for a particular image.

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

Love that comment! nospam is always telling people "you don't get to
decide!", but he has no reservations about telling someone else how to
do their processing and what they need. What a hypocrite.

i *never* tell anyone how to do their processing, nor have i done so
here.

stop lying and twisting.

On 1/23/2017 2:24 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Neil
wrote:

You should take his disclaimer with a pinch of salt and continue
reading, it is, as I said an interesting opinion. Particularly coming
from an individual who has made a career of promoting post
processing/photo editing software and various plugins.

Well, I did start reading beyond his disclaimer, and soon realized
that it was an article abut the use of plug-ins. So, he was right, the
article isn't intended for folks like me who have been editing images
digitally for at least a decade before the first plug-in was
introduced. So, I don't use them at all.

It is a bit more than that considering where some software has gone and
that many of the RAW processors do much the same thing. Today digital
photographers have a much wider software choice when it comes to
processing and editing their digital images. The trick is simplifying
the workflow so as not to create a quagmire to be bogged down with. I
have been as guilty of this as the next guy, but I have been controlling
myself to simplify my workflow and only use specific plugins if I have
something in mind for a particular image.

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

When I need such a thing, I write it.


--
best regards,

Neil

In article , Neil
wrote:

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

When I need such a thing, I write it.

that's more work than using existing solutions but suit yourself.

On 1/23/2017 3:30 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Neil
wrote:

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

When I need such a thing, I write it.

that's more work than using existing solutions but suit yourself.

You haven't a clue as to what is required to automate my workflow. Your
erroneous presumption that some generic app is going to be better at
doing that than one that addresses its specific requirements is absurd.
Next you'll be insisting, once again, that airplanes don't have brakes.

--
best regards,

Neil

In article , Neil
wrote:

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

When I need such a thing, I write it.

that's more work than using existing solutions but suit yourself.

You haven't a clue as to what is required to automate my workflow.

since you haven't described your workflow, how could i?

all i said was that you should investigate automation plug-ins.

if you explain your workflow, then people (not just me) can give you
suggestions how to improve it.

or you can live in a cave doing it the hard way. your choice.

Your
erroneous presumption that some generic app is going to be better at
doing that than one that addresses its specific requirements is absurd.

i never said anything about using a generic app. you made that up.

i was specifically referring to automating whatever it is you do, which
you refuse to describe, likely because it's so primitive and you'd be
embarrassed to say.

one thing is clear, however, that you lied about not using plug-ins,
given that you admitted that you write your own.

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:28:59 -0500, Tony Cooper
wrote:

--- snip ---

Yup! Having an eye for the photo opportunity is key.

There are members of my camera clubs that I call "cat and squirrel
photographers". They take excellent shots of certain subjects, but
they don't have the imagination to see a photograph in something
off-beat or not normally subject matter.

Actually, "cat and flower photographers" describes them better. So
many photographers go for the trite and ordinary instead of looking
for what could be interesting.

There is also a standard seascape which seems to be very popular at
the moment. Rocks in the foreground, an island or a rock on the
horizon, sunrise/sunset, fizzed up sky and long exposure to blur the
sea. The first fifty or so of these can look quite good.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 1/23/2017 4:11 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Neil
wrote:

Many plugins are very useful, but some such as On1 Photo RAW are making
an attempt to take on the entire RAW workflow and have yet, in my
opinion, to get the bugs wringed out.

I understand, but have never found plug-ins to be useful enough to
bother with, partly because my work with graphics and images requires
enough time-consuming attention that they offer little or no economic
advantage. I don't need to save seconds or even minutes out of a process
that takes hours or days to complete.

then you're looking at the wrong sort of plug-ins. you need something
to automate your workflow rather than twiddle bits.

When I need such a thing, I write it.

that's more work than using existing solutions but suit yourself.

You haven't a clue as to what is required to automate my workflow.

since you haven't described your workflow, how could i?

One excellent reason why you should have kept quiet.

all i said was that you should investigate automation plug-ins.

And, the effort spent doing that would not be more than what is needed
to write my own apps? How do you know that?

if you explain your workflow, then people (not just me) can give you
suggestions how to improve it.

When and if I need such help, I know where to get it. I guarantee that
it won't be from the likes of you.

or you can live in a cave doing it the hard way. your choice.

With your admitted lack of knowledge about what is required, how did you
arrive at the conclusion that I'm doing it "the hard way"?

Your
erroneous presumption that some generic app is going to be better at
doing that than one that addresses its specific requirements is absurd.

i never said anything about using a generic app. you made that up.

Any app that would be generally available is generic, by definition.

i was specifically referring to automating whatever it is you do, which
you refuse to describe, likely because it's so primitive and you'd be
embarrassed to say.

You just can't resist making such ignorant comments, can you?

one thing is clear, however, that you lied about not using plug-ins,
given that you admitted that you write your own.

I don't write plug-ins, nor did I say so. I answered your comment
suggesting "...something to automate your workflow...", which would not
be a plug-in. I do write apps, and it's solely your problem that you
don't know the difference.

--
best regards,

Neil