"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Okay, it's official: I suck at doing "digital darkroom" stuff. >I saw others' complaints about the time required to do the post >processing digitally instead of handing it off to a lab to do >wet, and even with that in mind I'm too slow. And whether it's >lack of skill, lack of tools, or both (it doesn't help that the >machine on which I can display my editing software (GIMP) I only >have 8-bit colour), I'm not being as effective at tweaking things >as I'd like. Grrrr. > >This is, of course, subject to change after study and practice, >but that's not helping with the deadline I'm bumping into right >now. *sigh*
Study and practice are indeed the keys. I've been giving prints as Christmas gifts and have no trouble going from "insert the slide into the scanner" to "print emerges from the inkjet printer" in about 30 minutes. That might seem like a long time, but most of it is in Photoshop work (dust spots, levels adjustment, unsharp mask) and never needs to be done again for that scan, so extra prints are a point-and-click proposition. Also, this is for 12 x 18 prints of quality that I'd be willing to display myself (admittedly, I'm choosing slides that don't need anything more than basic Photoshop work - the quality of the original slide has a huge effect on how long it takes to make a decent print). For smaller, less critical prints I'd load slides into the bulk feeder, batch scan and print with less Photoshop work. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
