On 29 Jun 2004, at 00:51, Jonathan Coleman wrote
Indeed but its quite crude and you would do better to use Photoshop to do this using Channels etc.
Went to a seminar today and the Kodak SLR/n was being demonstrated. One face of, extremely impressive and worth upgrading from my trusty D1x's, but is that really the case?
Wide range of preset profiles (apparently, the 'Events' setting is ideal
for studio portraiture).
Turn selective images B&W or Sepia etc -
Yes obviously if you have followed accepted practice and saved all Raw files before doing anything in PhotodeskBUT can you save those amended images with a new file name so both original and amended images are retained?
Battery life on the 14n & SLR has always been panned and the truth lies between the two figures you have quoted. If you shoot without review you can indeed get a large number of exposures. Anyone who is shooting 300 frames a day has problems other than battery life i.e how and when to process all those files!
What I have heard from other users that concerns me: Camera Given the very large file sizes - battery life is closer to 40 frames than the claimed 400.
The real secret of good battery life is reading the instructions carefully and then charge and discharge the batteries before using which means you cannot use your new toy for 24 hours after you buy it. Also a battery inserted into a camera is discharging so if you leave a camera for a week the battery power is reduced. But only 40 frames - phooey. My two bodies regularly do a days work with up to 100 frames with review time and are rarely switched off during a six to eight hour period.
Kodak as ever still inhabit a different planet from those of us who expect the camera to walk the talk. Fringing is indeed much better but is most certainly not eliminated and Camera Raw is far better at getting rid of it than expecting the firmware to do it.Fringing, although this has all but been eliminated in version 5.0.1 of the firmware onwards.
Yes to a certain extent. Kodak would have you believe that PhotoDesk is a replacement for Photoshop. It certainly is good but not that good. Personally my work flow is to use PD to simply ensure pictures are numbered and IPTC info correct and then the Raw files are archived to CD. Then using batch processing files are converted to Camera Raw and adjusting carried out there. Dealing with pictures in PhotoDesk does not really speed up workflow as you still have to convert them from Raw to TIFF and one might just as well do that conversion at an early stage and use to more powerful and sensitive Camera Raw / Photoshop facilities to do really accurate and considered corrections. Also anything like dust busting cannot be done on PhotoDesk so really one has to regard PD as a very effective and efficient bulk handling tool and leave the quality adjustment to the specialist software such as PhotoShop.
Finally If the hype is right, it should be possible, with just a couple of clicks, to adjust the exposure and colour balance of a whole days work so that it is near enough right and then only minimal finishing will be required in PS of the images the client chooses - Is this Really True - if so, it would really speed up our workflow.
If you decide to batch process in PhotoDesk it is indeed faster than doing it in Camera Raw but then you are dealing with larger files anyhow so that is not a fair comparision. It really is a trade-off, speed and convenience against better control and quality.
Is working in Photodesk, with such large files, really fast.
Yes - it is a free, downloadable programme availiable from the Kodak website
Can Photodesk be installed on more than one machine (I am thinking of image preparation for viewing and manipulation for printing, which are done on two different PCs.
Cheers
Mike Sheil
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
