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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe still forcing upgrades to PS to get new RAW converter
The ACR is a curious beast grafted onto Photoshop that has the same
controls/filters packaged differently than the desktop. If you actually need to do something with the image you still have to run it through the desktop anyway. Hence it is a bizarre design paradigm that Adobe continues to split PS into two parts, the ACR and the desktop rather than opening images in one unified workspace with all processing controls available. I still do not understand why Adobe thinks so many adjustments to the raw image should be made in the converter in what is a one layer maskless paradigm rather than as multiple layers that can be revisited and tweaked. If you are a pro shooting multiple images under controlled lighting LIghtroom or (shudder) Aperture may be a better program than PS. In truth you can do most of what you do in Lightroom batches in Bridge and the ACR if you bother to learn how. Anyway, if you study how converters work you may find you are better off opening the image in the camera makers own software and then transiting to the PS desktop. For Nikon NX2 is, although expensive, a better converter than ARC and has the benefits of NIK point centered image adjustment. The Canon raw converter is also superior to the ACR but again images have to be transited to PS for actual use. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe still forcing upgrades to PS to get new RAW converter
In article , bmocc
wrote: The ACR is a curious beast grafted onto Photoshop that has the same controls/filters packaged differently than the desktop. it's not grafted on, it's intimately tied to photoshop. If you actually need to do something with the image you still have to run it through the desktop anyway. Hence it is a bizarre design paradigm that Adobe continues to split PS into two parts, the ACR and the desktop rather than opening images in one unified workspace with all processing controls available. in other words, you don't know how to use it. I still do not understand why Adobe thinks so many adjustments to the raw image should be made in the converter in what is a one layer maskless paradigm rather than as multiple layers that can be revisited and tweaked. the adjustments can be revisited and tweaked. If you are a pro shooting multiple images under controlled lighting LIghtroom or (shudder) Aperture may be a better program than PS. In truth you can do most of what you do in Lightroom batches in Bridge and the ACR if you bother to learn how. lightroom is great and it also uses camera raw. Anyway, if you study how converters work you may find you are better off opening the image in the camera makers own software and then transiting to the PS desktop. For Nikon NX2 is, although expensive, a better converter than ARC and has the benefits of NIK point centered image adjustment. The Canon raw converter is also superior to the ACR but again images have to be transited to PS for actual use. which converter is 'better' is subjective, and nx2 is *awful*. nikon can't write software to save their life. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe still forcing upgrades to PS to get new RAW converter
On Wed, 2 May 2012 12:56:15 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote: On May 2, 1:01*pm, nospam wrote: In article , bmocc Anyway, if you study how converters work you may find you are better off opening the image in the camera makers own software and then transiting to the PS desktop. For Nikon NX2 is, although expensive, a better converter than ARC and has the benefits of NIK point centered image adjustment. The Canon raw converter is also superior to the ACR but again images have to be transited to PS for actual use. which converter is 'better' is subjective, and nx2 is *awful*. nikon can't write software to save their life. Of the other converters out there, it's not so much the finished image they render, it's the horrible interfaces that are the problem. NX2, SilkyPix, etc. No one wants to use them. You mean they are different from Adobe? Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Adobe upgrades... | Longfellow | Digital Photography | 4 | March 14th 10 05:54 PM |
Adobe After Effects 7.0 PRO, Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 for Windows XP, and tutorials, Adobe After Effects Plugins Collection (WINMAC), updated 19/Jan/2006 | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | February 2nd 06 07:52 AM |
Adobe DNG Converter 3.2 | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 2 | October 17th 05 06:53 AM |
Adobe DNG Converter 3.1 available for download | John Francis | Digital SLR Cameras | 41 | May 11th 05 02:25 PM |