A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old November 30th 13, 12:07 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
sid[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

nospam wrote:

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

[...] most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice
of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying
attention to improving your photography.

That in fact seems to be *your* most serious impediment to
improving your photography.

The OP seems to be well aware that a more functional OS is
eventually going to allow him to produce better results...]


I am curious how you come up with this. To me, it's like saying a
better developing pan will lead to better photographs when working
with film.


the advantage of a more functional operating system is the availability
of more functional apps which can produce better results.


His OS of choice does not at all improve or hinder his ability to take good
photographs. In your opinion his OS may limit his ability to post process
his photos but in others opinion it does not. There is little point in
having the whole photoshop vs gimp discussion here again is there?

better apps can also greatly increase productivity, which means fewer
hassles in producing the results, leaving more time to concentrate on
photography itself rather than the processing.


There are any number of good programs available for his OS allowing him all
those advantages too, why do think that's not the case?

--
sid
  #22  
Old November 30th 13, 01:31 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

Parko wrote:

Can't offer any insights into Canon's propriety firmware, however...

Have a crack at using Darktable - it's in the repos - for RAW image
editing and conversions. It leaves the raw data untouched and creates a
sidecar xmp file for the image edit info. It has an active NG/mailing
list at gmane.comp.graphics.darktable.user. Highly recommended.


I hadn't tried that for many a moon (three years back at version
0.7.1, which was clearly a beta version).

It has matured nicely. For anyone who wants a do it all in one
program, that looks pretty nice.

It also has an advantage in that they've done a very good job of
making use of multi-core systems. I tried it on an 8 core
system and got virtually the same speed for a batch process
of 10 NEF files as I got with the very efficient batch
processing system that I use with UFRAW.

Of course since I am not at all familiar with it I can't attest
to how it works in a production environment with a practiced
operator, but nothing I saw suggested it would not work quite
well. (The big question I would have would be what happens when
it is used on a folder with say 500 raw files. But given how
well other parts are implemented I would expect that to work
smoothly too.)

I'm not enthused about the specific tool functionality, as I am
very much in favor of a core set of primatives rather than a set
of "magic box" functions. Most people would probably do well
with as many magic box tools as possible though.

And the one tool I used with a "curves" functionality was
extremely difficult to use, as was the histogram provided.

I certainly didn't see any reason that I would switch over to
using it, but from now on when someone asks about what is
available that will be added to the very short list that I
think are worth looking at.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #23  
Old November 30th 13, 02:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

sid wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

[...] most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice
of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying
attention to improving your photography.

That in fact seems to be *your* most serious impediment to
improving your photography.

The OP seems to be well aware that a more functional OS is
eventually going to allow him to produce better results...]

I am curious how you come up with this. To me, it's like saying a
better developing pan will lead to better photographs when working
with film.


the advantage of a more functional operating system is the availability
of more functional apps which can produce better results.


His OS of choice does not at all improve or hinder his ability to take good
photographs.


As noted by Ansel Adams, "You don't take a photograph, you make
it." And today that is mostly done with a computer, hence his
choice of computer software has a lot to do, not with taking the
exposure, but with making the photograph.

In your opinion his OS may limit his ability to post process
his photos but in others opinion it does not.


But regardless of opinions, it *does* limit a photographer's
ability. It's just plain ignorant to suggest otherwise...

There is little point in
having the whole photoshop vs gimp discussion here again is there?


It's an endless argument, so it's one they can't lose too.

better apps can also greatly increase productivity, which means fewer
hassles in producing the results, leaving more time to concentrate on
photography itself rather than the processing.


There are any number of good programs available for his OS allowing him all
those advantages too, why do think that's not the case?


He's got religion. I don't know if Buda, Jesus or Muhamed loves him, but
Adobe does!

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #24  
Old November 30th 13, 03:36 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

On 2013.11.29, 22:01 , Parko wrote:

Have a crack at using Darktable - it's in the repos - for RAW image
editing and conversions. It leaves the raw data untouched and creates a
sidecar xmp file for the image edit info. It has an active NG/mailing
list at gmane.comp.graphics.darktable.user. Highly recommended.


All editing of raw photos leave the raw data untouched. The adjustments
made are for the viewing/presentation of it, not changes to it.


--
"The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and
co-operation;
it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another."
-George Orwell, 1945
  #26  
Old November 30th 13, 03:44 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

On 2013.11.30, 00:44 , nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Also be aware that with Linux if you become proficient at writing
shell scripts there is just no end of ways to improve productivity.
The ImageMagick tools are fabulous for editing. And there are
many ways a shell script can speed up your workflow. For example,
I preview my images, as JPEGs, with a very customized version of XV which can
sort them into various directories. The JPEG images I don't want to convert
with UFRAW go into one special directory, and then a shell script moves
the RAW files to the same directories where the JPEG is now at. Then
I run UFRAW and it never loads a file I don't want to process. Plus
when I want to run the batch on all of them, I use a script that does
odd things like automatically setting wavelet noise reduction depending
on the ISO it was shot at, and it determines how many CPU cores are available
and proceeds to keep each CPU busy with a different process (which with
as many as 12 cores can make a huge difference in how fast a few hundred
RAW files can be converted to TIFF files).


if that isn't proof that linux users do things in the most difficult
and most convoluted way possible, i don't know what is.


Well put. (Except that Linux users can make things even more difficult
and convoluted when they really warm up).

To a Linux user the above inanity is a badge of honour.

--
"The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and
co-operation;
it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another."
-George Orwell, 1945
  #27  
Old November 30th 13, 03:55 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,246
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

On 11/30/2013 4:47 AM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
Tony Cooper wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 17:45:26 -0900, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Savageduck wrote:
[...] most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice
of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying
attention to improving your photography.

That in fact seems to be *your* most serious impediment to
improving your photography.

The OP seems to be well aware that a more functional OS is
eventually going to allow him to produce better results...]


I am curious how you come up with this. To me, it's like saying a
better developing pan will lead to better photographs when working
with film.


No, it's more like having a drawer full of different sized trays
means the user can choose which one is most efficient for any
given job. That leads to a more effective system than one where
the only trays available come in just one size (that fits all,
supposedly).

Since most people never printed anything larger that an 8x10,
they don't see a difference. But for the photographer that
pushes the limits, trays large enough for 16x20 and 20x24 prints
make a huge difference. Not to mention they immediately bought
something like an El Nikkor lens rather than use the one that
came with the enlarger.

And while a 35mm enlarger from Ponder and Best or Durst, or even
the low end Beseler or Omega models might seem like a great
production tool for many, real darkroom workers wouldn't
consider anything less that a Beseler 23C, and would rather have
either a Beseler or an Omega 4x5 enlarger, even if all they ever
work with is 35mm film.

I used a 23C, IIRC I had three heads for it. Color, condenser and
fluorescent.


It's the difference between printing today with an Epson 2800
or using an Epson 4880 or 7890.


Many a fine art print has been made with the 2880 and 3880. IMO the 4880
is designed for higher output. I may have been told wrong, but i thought
the 4880 produced prints that were equal in quality to the other two,
but was designed for higher production rates, and larger format.

--
PeterN
  #28  
Old November 30th 13, 04:13 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

On 2013.11.30, 09:42 , Tony Cooper wrote:

So, how can a different OS make a person a better photographer?


When it supports the best in class photography software.

Linux, quite obviously, does not.

--
"The radio was once expected to promote international understanding and
co-operation;
it has turned out to be a means of insulating one nation from another."
-George Orwell, 1945
  #29  
Old November 30th 13, 04:30 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D

On 2013-11-30 14:47:10 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:56:47 +0000, sid wrote:

Savageduck wrote:

but most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice
of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying
attention to improving your photography.


That is just ridiculous, what on earth does his OS have to do with improving
his photography? At no point ever has the operating system on my pc affected
my ability to chosse what to shoot or how to compose that shot or how to
expose it. Is that what I'm doing wrong d'you think?

You misread the post. The Duck is saying just the opposite. He's
saying that concentrating too much on the OS choice distracts him from
paying more attention to developing his photographic skills.


Give that man a cigar!

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #30  
Old November 30th 13, 04:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
ray carter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D


I will say this, you should be seeing a difference, a big difference in
the image quality between files produced by your G2 and your 600D. If
not, the problem might lie in some peculiarity in your photographic
technique, but most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice of
OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying attention
to improving your photography.


There is much more that goes into the selection of an OS, at least for
most of us, than the impact of one application.

I have proudly used Linux exclusively for over a decade - I've yet to
find anything important to me that I can't do with it and in the process,
I've saved thousands of dollars.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
converting 35 mm slides to digital images LeighWillaston Digital Photography 30 June 18th 07 10:46 AM
Converting 35mm Slides to Digital Images Jim[_9_] Digital Photography 0 June 2nd 07 02:18 PM
Are you converting your RAW images to DNG? JC Dill Digital Photography 140 November 10th 06 05:07 PM
QuickTake 150 images - Converting on PC [email protected] Digital Photography 5 April 21st 06 03:00 PM
Tool for converting 12-bit TIFF images to 16-bit TIFF-images? Peter Frank Digital Photography 23 December 13th 04 03:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.