pi-casa su casa

In rec.photo.digital ransley wrote:
On Mar 6, 2:55?pm, Chris Malcolm wrote:
In rec.photo.digital ransley 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 :-)

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.

I'm very impressed that you are so busy earning so much money that the
time lost in making one extra keypress per image counts for so
much. I'm fortunate in being leisured enough to be able to choose my
editors based on features and perforamnce rather than number of
keypresses.

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

Chris Malcolm wrote:
In rec.photo.digital ransley wrote:
On Mar 6, 2:55?pm, Chris Malcolm wrote:
In rec.photo.digital ransley 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 :-)

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.

I'm very impressed that you are so busy earning so much money that the
time lost in making one extra keypress per image counts for so
much. I'm fortunate in being leisured enough to be able to choose my
editors based on features and perforamnce rather than number of
keypresses.

What strikes me is that Mr. Ransley doesn't appear to actually have a
clue how ANY of this software works. Most of them, you have to click
File - Save, which will simply overwrite your original, or File - Save
As... to save a new version of it. In Picasa, you don't have to do
anything and your changes will still show up the next time you open it,
or you click File - Export to save a new copy of the modified picture.
Seems Picasa actually takes LESS interaction.

Last time I checked, Corel (.PSPimage) and Adobe (.PSD) won't open each
other's proprietary save formats either, so with any of these, you still
need to save your work in a common format before the others will open it.

If he's simply overwriting his originals in order to achieve this
magical "intercommunication" with a single Ctrl-S keypress, well... I
think that speaks to the level of intelligence we're dealing with right
there.

On Mar 6, 12:54*pm, -=Rob wrote:
How can you use Picasa's web-site without using Picasa software ?

Picasa (Google Photos) website is no different than any other website.
I go to the URL (photos.google.com/Imagebuffet will work, though
Picasa switches the URL), log in (if I'm not already), then use the
navigational controls on the Website to load or browse my photos. I
don't need the Picasa software because I already have my own.

On Mar 5, 10:55 am, "norven_munky" 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

couple of things I've found out.

1) when you save sharpening done by picasa gets 'lost' although other
edits are ok.
2) picasa doesn't read the exif info for my canon cr2 raw files. And
obviously making edits to the raw image then saving it as a jpg dosn't
preserve the exif info. Although it does preserve the raw original so
your exif info isn't lost totally, you just need to use another editor
or exif viewer to get at it. It would be nice to be able to see the
exif data of raw files in picasa and it would be even nicer if the
searching by exif values that picasa does would also work on raw.

Tony

norven munky schreef:


1) when you save sharpening done by picasa gets 'lost' although other
edits are ok.

You have to "export" the image to keep the sharpening.
I think Picasa sharpens too. Ther should be at lest 2 or 3 more steps in
between.

-=Rob

"norven_munky" wrote in message
...
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


few *big* picasa downsides :-

1) picasa adjusts the exposure of raws.
2) no exif info available for raw (and obviously any jpg's you create based
on the raw won't have exif)
3) sharpening changes are lost when saved

1 & 3 have been acknowledged by picasa, not sure about 2

..

In rec.photo.digital norven_munky wrote:

few *big* picasa downsides :-

1) picasa adjusts the exposure of raws.

Anything which displays a viewable image from a raw file must make
assumptions about exposure etc. in order to display the image at
all. Picasa doesn't allow you the full control over those that more
sophisticated raw editors allow. It does allow you do the usual
tweaking they also permit on jpeg-derived images, and does so on the
basis of the larger adjustment headrooms available from raw.

If that's not good enough for you, it's a simple enough matter to pull
in another editor to process the raw file. As usual, Picasa saves a
copy of the untouched original whenever you save any changes, so you
don't lose it.

2) no exif info available for raw (and obviously any jpg's you create based
on the raw won't have exif)

That *is* a real nuisance.

3) sharpening changes are lost when saved

But not when exported. I believe this is not so much a bug as a design
decision which may not have yet been fully thought through in all its
implications. The point behind it is that sharpening should be
specific to a particular selected resolution of display or print, and
therefore should always be the last process applied, and not applied
to any copy which is intended to be the full carefully edited original
which can be (say) printed from in a variety of sizes.

It's an interesting point of view, which I hesitate to say is a
mistake simply because it's different from the assumptions on which
most editors work, and I'm reluctant to say that the best way to fix
any annoyances in its current implementation, once properly
understood, is simply to junk the idea and make it work like most
other editors.

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