Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 12/01/2013 03:08 (11/30/2013 21:08) |
| Message-ID | <301120132108581306%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Floyd L. Davidson |
In article <87ob51l6zh.fld@apaflo.com>, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@apaflo.com>wrote:
can't what?Floyd L. DavidsonEric StevensSavageduck
You have probably already done it but using configuration windows and menus etc. Lloyd uses a script.
So? That is what he needs to do because he is using Linux, with OSX, LR, & PS, I don't need to do that, but I could if I needed to. ...but why go to the effort?
You can't. Or you would! At least if you try to generate an effective efficient production workflow!
There are some extremely harsh limitations on using icons for an interface to anything that is complex.nonsense. the icon is only how the app is launched. what happens after that is completely separate from how it's launched.
And you are bound by that, but I'm not.bound by what exactly??
what is it you don't think you can do?
Your desktop interface was derived from systems that were single user single tasking. Each program went into a single directory. The icon that brings up an editor will always have the same working directory.more nonsense.
That is too restrictive.it's also false.
I use a system derived initially from a multi-user/multi-tasking environment.so do i, and it's called mac os x. it's based on bsd. perhaps you've heard of that.
Instead of each program being in one directory along with all of it's data, I put each *project* into a unique directory. Any program can be invoked from that directory, by any user, and will then have that as it's working directory. I don't mix data, or configuration files for various projects into the same working directory.you obviously have never used a mac.
user documents can go wherever you want, and are almost always *not* in the same folder as the app.
the more you post the more ignorant you show yourself to be.
With the iconified desktop you either mix the data files into the same directories, or each time you use a different program launched from an icon you will have to manually reconfigure it.nonsense.
That makes chaining the work of multiple programs together unweldy, and causes programs to retain a do everything style that was necessary when the "OS" was just a program loader. (And that is the root cause of most of the security problems with Windows.)there's no need to chain anything, but you can if you want, and without any of these fabricated issues that do not exist.
Icon base desktops are a very inefficient interface for a competent users,nonsense.
but have a relatively shallow learning curve for the new or intermittent user.being easy to learn is a huge plus. that makes people more productive in less time.
everyone was a beginner at some point.
The desktop interface that I use has a very steep learning curve, but it is exceptionally suited to an every day all day computer user that needs effective and efficient tools and will want to combine many tools in different groupings over different projects.given that nothing you said about other systems is true, that must also be wrong since it's based on incorrect information.
11/30/2013-
-
