Re: Picasa?
On Jan 12, 1:07 am, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio fluxstrin...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Steve R mailing.lists.2...@gmail.com wrote: At 3:56 PM -0800 1/11/09, starrf...@valley.net posted: Just when I finally decided to use IPhoto to sort through our 50,000 images (five different libraries since iPhoto gets strange when it refers to over 20,000 or so) Google releases Picasa for Mac. It is pretty cool for a lot of reasons. And it isn't bothered by the large number of images. But the current Beta version seems a little buggy to me and I wonder if anyone else has seen this. [...] Any ideas? ___ Current security issues regarding social networking sites and online storgage mean that any family pictures that you put out on the net are rather easily accessed by anyone with a will to do so. You may want to reconsider any online storage options in light of this. What would your photos reveal about your family and lifestyle that you may not want hackers learning? A web security expert recently interviewed by CPU magazine claimed that anything, for example, linked to in Facebook or Myspace is unguarded and open to anyone who knows the method and has a reason to look. He demonstrated this at the Black Hat Conference. Picasa and other such methods are often linked to and or vulnerable to similar attacks. YMMV, pay your money and take your chance. What do you have to lose? I agree about these risks, but Picasa does not need to work on line. In fact, in the diallup world we still live in here, working on line would be impossibly slow. Even in a broadband situation, I don't think Picasa uploads anything without being asked to. I use Little Snitch to avoid unwanted uploads, and it would let me know. One advantage of Picasa is that it leaves your photo files in place and just links to them. It can automatically scan selected directories for new entries, which is sweet. Old versions of iPhoto had to copy all your files into its libraries, which either doubled disk storage space or required you to delete the originals. That's why I never liked it. Now you can select an option (in the Advanced tab of Preferences) that leaves files in place. (But you still have to ask it to import new pix.) Since both programs simply link to photos, there is no problem using both Picasa and iPhoto on the same batch of pictures. Which is what I am doing until Picasa starts to work properly. Rich --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Where do I learn.... becomes archiving files and images- the future
On 8/1/09 22:29, aussieshepsrock ilovaussiesh...@yahoo.com wrote: HiYa Pete and Everyone, My intended Scanning Methodology - Seperate from my Media Storage Options - is something like this. I've only done a 50 image or so 'test' run to sort out file size and physical process considerations at this point. Some of this is based on some comparative tests of various 'scanner driver' options. TIFF with internal compression OFF Photograph Fronts: 600 DPI Resolution 24 BIT Color Depth Digital ICE OFF - It's mucking much more than it's fixing. Unsharp Mask (in scanner software) at the High Setting because it appears to be a well behaved and subtle implementation in my testing up to this point. Photograph Backs: 300 DPI Resolution 8 Bit Grey Scale Unsharp Mask set to High All images receive Levels Adjustments Set Manually. The sliders for each color channel are tweaked individually so the sliders are just past the Highest and Lowest Point on the Histogram Display for Each Channel - ie the darkest/dimmest value is changed from zero to 9 if the scans histogram shows no info below 10. I am cautious about overpowering a particular channels level adjustments and making an image look 'wierd'. I believe this is called manually clipping the highlights and shadows. I can find very little 'standards or good practices' info via google or yahoo searches. This is just how I've learned to go about getting good scan results since my first encounter with a grayscale only flatbed back in the early nineties! Well you seem to have quite a job on so here's a few tips. The optical resolution of your scanner - say 600x600ppi for this purpose - is the limit for original capture - higher resolutions like 9600x9600ppi can only be provided by interpolation (guesswork from maths) and do not contain more detail from the original. So the lowest optical res of your scanner should give you your basic max scanning res - a 1200x600ppi scanner would be 600ppi - over and above this res you are only adding original data in one direction in the other direction the scanner is calculating the data - above 1200ppi it is calculqting the data in both directions. Unsharp masking is better done selectively per image in Pshop if you have it as ramping the edges to provide a sharper image can produce artifacts. Levels is a destructive process which affects the entire image - if you move the black point or white point by 10% you are not only disposing of 25 channel levels from each colour - you are creating 25 new ones for each colour as each channel must have 256 levels. I use the non destructive curves if at all possible and reserve level adjustment for very poor low key originals. Highest resolution? I would say around the 200/300ppi mark unless they are earmarked for substantial enlargement. The human eye can only resolve around 180 levels, b/w newspapers print photos at around 80 lines of dots per inch (the cheap paper limits the res) and we see them well as images. Glossy colour mags 133/150/175 lines of dots per inch and they look very acceptable even though the CMYK space is smaller than RGB. Computer monitors are limited by dot pitch and can only manage hardware res around 90ppi so any res above this is a software representation - tv's are worse with poorer dot pitch. My archive of high res images is stored at 360ppi, medium res at 180ppi - the odd numbers are due to my printer being an Epson inkjet which has a printing resolution divisible in both directions by 180 (5760 x 1440dpi) and the print results are much better and faster than if I ask it a difficult resolution recalculation - which it doesn't seem to be very good at - indeed the prorietary print driver's ability to convert well from RGB to six colour CMYK has always annoyed me - and b/w printing is awful - hopefully improved with their latest set of 8 colour printers - with three blacks. Black and white commercial printing of photographic images has always been a problem - solved usually by the use of duotone or tritone. If you come across a book of Bresson's work or Adams have a look closely with a magnifier - the b/w photos will probably be two or three colour. Finally I would add the fact that re-resing is always possible with a good image editor - a 200/300ppi digital image can be easily upped to 1200ppi without problems. The image editor is simply doing what the scanner does over and above it's optical resolution - interpolation - but probably doing it much better in the case of Pshop. Pete --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To
Re: Picasa?
Personally I tried iPhoto when it first came out (OS 9 was it?) and didn't like it. I found iView Media then and have been using it ever since. Luckily I was a registered user long before MS got their hands on it. I am up to version 3. something. I have used the PIcasa web app and liked that but I don't see a move from iView for myself. My .02 Diane --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Picasa?
On Jan 12, 2009, at 6:28 AM, diane wrote: Personally I tried iPhoto when it first came out (OS 9 was it?) and didn't like it. iPhoto then and the iPhoto now are VASTLY different beasts, essentially different programs, save for name and general function. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: RAM prices going up??
I would like 1GB (2 512s) for my QS ... but OWC says 32-36 per 512 ... which is the same price as last month. Total for 2 is around $64-72 plus shipping. A few years ago, I paid $69 (included shipping) for 1 512 stick at DMS. Maybe I shouldn't wait too long? Bill Connelly artsite: http://mysite.verizon.net/moonstoneartstudio myspace: http://www.myspace.com/moonstoneartstudio --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Macinhack
On Jan 9, 2009, at 1:19 PM, Bruce wrote: George Hozendorf wrote: Does anyone know of a successful hack to a PC laptop? Details of the PC please. George === Hello George, Yes, 10.4 on a Dell C840 laptop: http://thereformed.org/2007/04/25/howto-mac-osx-dell-latitude-c840-part-1/ http://thereformed.org/2007/04/27/howto-mac-osx-dell-latitude-c840-part-2/#more-104 http://thereformed.org/2007/04/30/howto-mac-osx-dell-latitude-c840-part-3/#more-105 http://thereformed.org/2007/05/01/howto-mac-osx-dell-latitude-c840-part-4/#more-106 http://thereformed.org/2007/08/04/howto-mac-osx-dell-latitude-c840-part-5/#more-111 Bruce Sugarberg Bruce, what would be a good 17 option? Thanks, George --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Mac os 10.4 server file sharing
On Jan 11, 2009, at 8:32 PM, jonas ulrich wrote: I have a powermac g4 running mac os 10.4 server. I have several hard drives in this machine, and i cannot acces them over the network through file sharing. When i was running the plain mac os 10.4 i could access all the hard drives. How can i access the other hard drives through file sharing using mac os 10.4 server? By running the appropriate file service setup in OSX Server. OS XX Server is a different beast that OS X Client, and this is one of the things that's different. The users on the other macs need an account on the file server. Get and read through the server setup documentation from Apple. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Picasa?
But the current Beta version seems a little buggy to me and I wonder if anyone else has seen this. If I use a filter or some other action, most of the image directories in the left column disappear and can't be found unless I quit and restart the program. Has anyone else seen this? Has anyone found a solution if so? I love Picasa and use it heavily. It is so easy. If you read the offical Picasa Mac blog they say that there are still bugs in it they are working out. They promise full functionality down the road. I was really looking forward to the Mac version as I wanted to use it. However it only works on 10.4 and above. and I am still running 10.3 as I can't afford a copy of 10.4. Oh well, going to have to wait for a while. Paxton Hoag Astoria, OR USA Quicksilver 733 running 10.3.9 GigE ruinning 10.3.9 Smurf running Ubuntu 6.06 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Where do I learn.... becomes archiving files and images- the future
Hello Dan, Your suggestion of an iPhoto Coffee Table Book might make an excellent add-on to go out with the copies of the optical disc sets I am planning to distribute. I could cherry pick some of the best images, caption them, and make a nice pre-packaged album. As a method of generating a hardcopy storage output of the images in the collection, it's pretty unsatisfactory due to it's a) not being a long lasting visual medium and b) the picture quality can be rather hit or miss without a rigorous matching of one's files to the book printing process and the resolution is rather on the low side. The books themselves are definitely a good idea and can offer the chance to Graphic Design an album rather than knocking together one from small prints. Thanks, Richard On Jan 9, 10:52 am, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: At 10:10 PM -0800 1/8/2009, Paul wrote: One thing that never got mentioned was how much storage this project will use. Are you talking about dozens of DVD's, or over 100? Have you considered making at least one hard copy of the whole thing, for the sake of redundancy and for the greatest accessibility? Not necessarily for the primary hardcopy storage - but doesn't iPhoto have the ability to make a pdf of a coffee table type book? - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Where do I learn.... becomes archiving files and images- the future
HiYa Pete and Everyone! On Jan 12, 7:47 am, pdimage pdim...@btinternet.com wrote: On 8/1/09 22:29, aussieshepsrock ilovaussiesh...@yahoo.com wrote: HiYa Pete and Everyone, My intended Scanning Methodology - Seperate from my Media Storage Options - is something like this. I've only done a 50 image or so 'test' run to sort out file size and physical process considerations at this point. Some of this is based on some comparative tests of various 'scanner driver' options. TIFF with internal compression OFF Photograph Fronts: 600 DPI Resolution 24 BIT Color Depth Digital ICE OFF - It's mucking much more than it's fixing. Unsharp Mask (in scanner software) at the High Setting because it appears to be a well behaved and subtle implementation in my testing up to this point. Photograph Backs: 300 DPI Resolution 8 Bit Grey Scale Unsharp Mask set to High All images receive Levels Adjustments Set Manually. The sliders for each color channel are tweaked individually so the sliders are just past the Highest and Lowest Point on the Histogram Display for Each Channel - ie the darkest/dimmest value is changed from zero to 9 if the scans histogram shows no info below 10. I am cautious about overpowering a particular channels level adjustments and making an image look 'wierd'. I believe this is called manually clipping the highlights and shadows. I can find very little 'standards or good practices' info via google or yahoo searches. This is just how I've learned to go about getting good scan results since my first encounter with a grayscale only flatbed back in the early nineties! Let me dive in. :-) Well you seem to have quite a job on so here's a few tips. It is going to be a bit of a slog. It's the most photo scans I've ever done at once, although I have worked a couple times at jobs where high- speed document scanning was a part of what I had to do. A rather different beast that only in a narrow sense is the same as scanning photo's. :-) The optical resolution of your scanner - say 600x600ppi for this purpose - is the limit for original capture - higher resolutions like 9600x9600ppi can only be provided by interpolation ... Your input is greatly appreciated, but I'm fully up on the Optical vs Interpolated with Scanners. I have actually re-discovered the knowledge that my Epson 4870 PHOTO Perfection scanner only does Transparencies Film at 4800 dpi! Document/Reflective scans top out at a respectable 1200x1200 true optical resolution. If memory serves, it's because a different lens and a narrower scan path is used for film that gives the higher resolution, but don't quote me on it. Unsharp masking is better done selectively per image in Pshop if you have it as ramping the edges to provide a sharper image can produce artifacts. You are quite right about the Unsharp Masking in Photoshop being an incredibly better tool than the ones in scanning software itself. However, when the autoexposure system isn't used in the epson driver and it's harsh restoration and autopilot systems are avoided, the Unsharp set up in the Epson Scan has a very light touch in the 1200 dpi scan tests I've done. As a matter of fact, it's about a quarter of the strength my Photoshop Experience tells me that would be necessary to negatively effect an image's quality in any way. There is nothing dramatic about the differences between ON or OFF, it's there, measurable, but subtle. Levels is a destructive process which affects the entire image - if you move the black point or white point by 10% you are not only disposing of 25 channel levels from each colour - you are creating 25 new ones for each colour as each channel must have 256 levels. I use the non destructive curves if at all possible and reserve level adjustment for very poor low key originals. I only have personal experience to draw upon because authoritative information about this has been difficult to find, but I have doubts as to your statement's applicability to how I edit the levels and how I carefully monitor my levels adjustments and their effect regarding each level and how the levels act in conjunction to generate the whole image. I'll try to find a better way to write how I edit levels, how I approach them as a photo person, and what makes my methods seem to be 'non destructive' from my perspective as a photographer and someone trying to be faithful to what is or isn't in a scan. Highest resolution? I would say around the 200/300ppi mark unless they are earmarked for substantial enlargement. The human eye can only resolve around 180 levels, b/w newspapers print photos at around 80 lines of dots per inch (the cheap paper limits the res) and we see them well as images. Glossy colour mags 133/150/175 lines of dots per inch and they look very acceptable even though the CMYK space is smaller than RGB. Computer monitors are limited by dot pitch and can only manage hardware res around
