Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 12/01/2013 03:09 (11/30/2013 21:09) |
| Message-ID | <301120132109061770%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Followups | Eric Stevens (16m) > nospam |
In article <87k3fpl6cb.fld@apaflo.com>, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@apaflo.com>wrote:
it has. what ever gave you the idea it wasn't????J. ClarkeFloyd L. Davidson
(1) Since a Mac is a unix box, shell scripts should work fine on it. (2) Powershell on Windows gives just as much control as any Unix shell, possibly more so.
That would be true if the tradition UNIX interface had been maintained.
But an icon based desktop requires a very different arrangement for user files and projects.nope. where do you come up with this shit?
While the shell is there, it is not nearly as effective to use.nonsense. you can do the exact same stuff in a shell and even in the exact same way with the same scripts.
in fact, you can even boot directly into a shell, skipping the gui entirely.
maybe if you weren't so ignorant about things you've never used, you'd not say such stupid things.
And example would be that if you click on the desktop icon to invoke a text editor (or an image editor), it comes up with the same working directory every single time.nope.
gui apps don't actually have a working directory at all. it's not needed.
they create a temporary document which can be saved wherever the user wants, assuming the app is document based. not all are. some manage storage automatically so the user doesn't have to.
It reads and writes to the same set of directories every time.nope.
And any subshell invoked will inherit the same environment.nope. shells work the same way in mac os x as they do in linux.
Chaining filters together with pipes requires effort to use correctly.no more than on any other unix system.
gui apps can also be linked with minimal effort (although there's rarely any need to do so).
The problems are just downright inconvenient. While the simplified icon interface is then attractive, even if it is not particularly efficient.the problems are purely a fabrication of your own imagination. they do not exist.
architects take programming courses??J. ClarkeFloyd L. Davidson
But the fact is that most photographers want to take and process pictures, not develop programming proficiency.
Most, yes... but those who are determined to do what it takes to produce a better work product either learn programming or hire programmers. That may seem odd, but I'll point out that for at least 50 years every engineer has been taking programming courses. You want to be an architech, you learn programming. You want to design bridges, you learn programming.
what apps have they written?
I'll give you a hint: if you really want to learn photography today, and in particular digital photography, you need to learn at least some programming. And the more programming you learn the better your work product will be.not if your work has little to nothing to do with programming.
the best thing someone can do to learn photography is work with an accomplished photographer and/or shoot lots of photos and practice.
knowing how to program won't make any difference in making more compelling images.
It isn't for everyone, or maybe even most. It's a requirement for the best.nonsense.
those producing the best work are using macs or windows systems because that's where the best tools are.
11/30/2013-
-
