Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Date | 12/01/2013 23:13 (12/01/2013 13:13) |
| Message-ID | <8738mcjk2i.fld@apaflo.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Savageduck |
| Followups | nospam (51m) |
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:
SavageduckIt would help you a lot to read what I say and cease suggesting *your* ideas came from me.
On 2013-12-01 12:48:35 +0000, sid <sidney@sidshouse.net>said:SavageduckThe advice he has been given is best described as arcane geekery.sid
Floyd may well have given a geeky reply, some people like to use their computers in that fasion some do not.
None of that is going to do anything to produce a better photograph, or image from a photographic source. ...but Floyd claims that the best photographers would prefer to do things his way.
Your statement is clearly a total evasion of what I have said, and reflects more of how you think about your views than anything about what I believe.
That is true in an odd way. Given that OSX makes every effort to obfuscate use of a CLI, anyone who wants to have easy access to that facility would simply avoid OSX. Hence anyone who insists on using OSX for things easier done from a command line is, yes, "geeky". There are better words to describe it though...sidSavageduck
According to nospam he could work in exactly the same way with osx if he desired. Using the same software and scripts. osx ..... arcane?
OSX isn't arcane, but its UNIX under pinnings certainly are, and those who insist on dealing with their Macs via the Terminal and Command Line input are as geeky, if not geekier than any LINUX user.
Wonderful. Who cares.sidSavageduck
You seem to think that anyone not making the same choices as you is somehow at a disadvantage. That isn't so.
Not quite. I don't believe that the full version Photoshop is the best choice for all. There are other choices which can fill most needs. However, none of those other offerings are as full featured and as flexible PS. Many come close, and I know you might not accept that GIMP is not one of those. I would use Pixelmator, Acorn, or PSE before adopting GIMP as my full time image editor (and I have it installed on this Mac along with X11 & Terminal).
I and others have been using GIMP for years to do professional work. Saying it can't be done is absurd.
Please do not mis-attribute your feelings. If you read my comments about the techniques that I use and look at the photography that I do and feel you are not equal to it, that is *your* statement and not mine. What I've done is describe how things can be done using Linux. You can use any OS, and any software to do the same. Some parts will be easier, some will not. You absolutely will have to use the same basic techniques to the the same results.SavageduckThat has nothing to do with his photographic skills or his selection of subject or camera choice,sid
So what did you mean when you said "but most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying attention to improving your photography."
I meant what I said. By locking himself out of obvious and accessible solutions, including the one provided by Canon when he bought his 600D, because he refuses to consider the option of another OS, is going to be a distraction. He might be talented at subject selection, he might be a natural at composition, the RAW files he captures in his camera might be the equal of Adams, Steiglitz, Karsh, et al, but he still has a problem, mostly due to his choice of OS. Now we know that that is not going to hinder Floyd is any way, but as Floyd has told us we are not his equal.
The OP asked how to do something, and I gave him a very detailed answer. You and a few others who have zero familiarity with the techniques used go into a frenzy with fits of terror that it can be done differently than you expected.
You say everything except your way is wrong.
Please note that I have *never* suggested that other ways are not possible, are not suitable for you, are not easy or even easier, and cannot be done.
But that is exactly what you and three or four other here say.
Oddly, unlike you, most of the people who make the claims you do also provide exactly no evidence that they even own cameras, much less that they ever produce photographs. But you do climb on the same bandwagon of abjectly illogical reactions to anything said that differs from what they are aware of.
Because it is rather obvious that the OP *is* going to find practical solutions using GNU/Linux OS and tools. There clearly are people doing a great deal of professional work with it.Savageduckbut his choice of OS. You and Floyd, and all the other fans of Linux can flag wave all you want,sid
I don't think you'll find that I've done any flag waving at all, it's not me saying you've made a bad os choice or bad software choices.
You certainly took offense when I suggested that he was not going to find a practical solution by locking himself into LINUX. ...and I pretty much believed that both you and Floyd would react as you did.
The way sid, Ray Carter, and myself have reacted is to first of all describe ways that we know about to do it, and only second of all to point out the mis-statements by persons like you claiming it can't be done.
We DO NOT say that about MS-WINDOWS or OSX and don't start rants every time someone mentions one of those systems. But there is a small group here that will do exactly that any time an OS other than the one they use is mentioned. That includes the mention of OSX or MS-WINDOWS, in which case the arguments are just as ridiculous as are those they come up with when GNU/Linux is mentioned.
*None of you say anything that is believable!*
You need to *logically* analyze the OP's request. The statement above is ridiculous! His problem cannot be solved using Canon's software, which won't run on his computer system. Even if we showed him how to run it on Linux, it is probably not acceptable in terms of its interface and ability to work with his other needs. I'm guessing to some degree, as I have no personal experience with Canon's software. I've never seen any software from a camera manufacturer that I'd want to use personally. Not that it does not have a place, not that you might not find it perfect. But I can see why the OP didn't ask how to get it to work on Linux.sidSavageduck
Not using your software choices is not a limiting factor.
In the OP's case it is. He has a problem which could be easily solved by using the software provided with his camera. He doesn't even have to use Photoshop to solve his problem, but he might have to consider an alternative OS to the one he is locked into.
And not everyone is willing to use the same arcane hoops that *you* do. Heh, we like our own!SavageduckSo to fix his issues the OP is going to be jumping through the arcane Linux hoops,sid
There are no arcane hoops to jump through, clicking icons and moving sliders is the same no matter what os you choose.
There are big differences when it comes to software selection.
Same problem you have!sidSavageduck
But your solutions are not more accessable to him are they?
No, because of the conditions he has placed on solutions he is prepared to accept. ...and so his problem persists.
Is that supposed to be humor? That's just about *all* you've done!sidSavageduck
So why are you so keen to berate others when they want to do the same thing but with different choices in os to you?
I haven't berated anybody.
You have posted exactly nothing that has been helpful to the OP. Not one single thing.
What I have done is point out that sticking to a non-mainstream OS he is limiting his options for a solution to his problem.That is true. On the other hand, sticking to a mainstream OS would also limit his options for a solution. He has priorities that make his choice of OS better, and the selection of options it provides better, for him than would be if he ignored his needs and substituted your priorities. That would be a bit stupid, but lots of people do make decisions that way.
The OP seems to have reasonable priorities, and his options for solutions will almost certainly provide him with better results than he would get following any advice you've suggested.
That is because the restricted set of options he has available are a better set of options for him than are available in your chosen, and equally restricted, set of options.
If you do then now is the time to provide *helpful* information to the OP.sidSavageduck
I understand the investment in time and money you have put into osx and adobe software but none of that either makes you a better photographer or makes the op less able to improve his own photagraphy.
Agreed, but I understand what can ease the way to improve his (if it does indeed need improving) and my photography (which is always in need of improvement).
Which would be doing exactly the opposite of what you have been.
-- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com
11/30/2013-
-
