Graham

Verified
  • Content count

    114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

122 Forum reputation = neutral

About Graham

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    http://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={C82FFF61-C234-49FB-9082-CA5E8F6498D8}&name=Graham+Prentice
  • Images
    14576
  • Joined Alamy
    27 Apr 2008
  1. Helloooo, anyone home?

    Probably a technical issue. I have a normal (not news) submission which is still “processing” rather than awaiting QC some 18 hours or more after upload. I am sure they will sort it out on Monday! Graham
  2. We are all used to using the RGB colour system, or even CMYK, but if you look at LAB mode in Photoshop, you will see the colour controls are similar to Lightroom's in their effect: L controls brightness/exposure, while the A and B channels correspond to the magenta/green and yellow/blue sliders you see in Lightroom. It's worth looking at a curve in Photoshop in LAB mode and playing with the three channels to see what can be achieved with these adjustments. So Lightroom gives you a bit of the best of both worlds: the equivalent of RGB and LAB adjustments without having to switch modes. Graham
  3. I have been trying out panoramas relatively recently and have uploaded a few. I do this mostly for fun, which is a good job since none has so far even been zoomed, let alone sold! They take quite a long time to create in the first place (I generally use Lightroom, and they tie up computer resources for ages while they are created) and then a long time to check and review, both because the resulting images are so large and because Lightroom becomes so sluggish: to be honest, my time would be much better spent processing normal individual images, although I will probably continue to do some for my own satisfaction. They can be so frustrating: yesterday I was working on a panoramic view of Phnom Pehn over the Mekong River which was 19 images wide, although with a fair degree of overlap between them. There was one image in the middle that was unaccountably too soft to be acceptable, and try as I may, I could not eliminate it and rely on the overlap from the adjacent mages, but of course I did not notice this until reviewing the final image, by when I had wasted a great deal of time. Graham
  4. Worst photoshop job ever!

    Surely it’s a joke. It is very similar to Mr Bean’s treatment of Whistler’s Mother in the first Mr Bean film a few years ago
  5. Sorry about the late response - I have been away. I have both the 70-300 L and the 100-400 II. Both are excellent lenses, and I find separate uses for each. The 70-300 L is more compact and lighter than the 100-400 II, which means that it finds its way into my camera bag whenever I go out. The 100-400 is a little too large and heavy for this - in particular, it is just a little too long to fit comfortably standing vertically in either of my camera bags. For safaris, wildlife etc., the extra reach of the 100-400 makes it my preferred zoom lens of the two. I do not have either the 70-200 f 2.8 or the 200-400 f4 with its built-in extender. Moreover, the 100-400 II will accept the Canon 1.4x and 2x converters, which do not fit the 70-300. It annoys me that Canon do not include a collar and foot in the 70 - 300 L package, whereas the 100 - 400 II does include this, which means that if I know I am going to be using a tripod, the 100 - 400 II comes with an inbuilt advantage. In summary, if I do not have to carry it around too much, my go-to telephoto zoom would be the 100-400 II. If I do have to carry it around and the use is more speculative, then the 70 - 300 L suits my needs very well. Graham
  6. Wow, thank you so much for doing this - very informative. My computer crashed (not IMatch's fault) and I had to do a complete image restore from last weekend's backup. I have a busy few weeks coming up so I have decided to put my evaluation on hold and resume again later in November. Hopefully having restored the computer to a state it was in before I installed IMatch, I will get my intended 30 days trial, but we shall see. Graham
  7. Yes, he did - essentially I am putting in a very large number of files but IMatch should be able to cope once ingested. Do you use it for your keywording? If you do and are willing to share your thoughts, I would be very interested to know what you think of it. Graham
  8. I too am disappointed about the lack of development of keywording in Lightroom. I have previously looked at Photo Mechanic, but while it is good for importing and rapid sorting, it is weaker on keywording across multiple files: it does not do what I need it to do for the time being so I have passed on it. The developer has been teasing a fully fledged DAM system for, literally, years, but there is still no sign of it appearing. If they could come up with something good now, this would be a really good time to be marketing it, but I am not going to be holding my breath and I have been wondering for several years now how real this will actually turn out to be. I have therefore decided to have a look at IMatch, which gets consistently good reports. I downloaded the trial yesterday, and made the mistake of trying to import all my RAW photos to see how it performs, instead of just a few. 24 hours later, it is still chugging through them (and currently the progress box says 26 hours and something remaining...). I am not interested in something that cannot handle all my photos (Lightroom can, for all its foibles) and I do not really regret throwing the whole lot at it, since if it cannot cope with a large volume of photos without grinding to a halt, that alone will mean it is not for me and I will not have to waste my time learning it. Maybe at this rate I will have something to play with by the weekend... The other issue is that it seems relatively expensive for what it does. If it does keywording really well, it might be with the additional cost, we shall see. Graham
  9. license #s & $$"s up 500+% in 2017 !!!

    My (relatively few) weekend licences have tended to be PU licences (and, moreover, the ones that seem likely to be genuinely for personal use). Graham
  10. Thank you. I just checked the image guidelines, and indeed it is no longer mentioned. I would still be interested to know why, conceptually, there is a sudden decease in file size as export size limits in Lightroom are gradually decreased. Graham
  11. Maybe this is slightly off-topic, but it relates to Lightroom export settings and I would be grateful if anyone more technically savvy than I can give an explanation. Alamy uploads are limited to 25MB in compressed size. This has not been too much of a problem to date, but now I have to be increasingly wary of keeping within this cap with images taken with my Canon 5DXIV, which has a resolution of about 30 megapixels. How each image compresses when exporting to JPEG varies from image to image: while the pixel size can be calculated from image dimensions, the compressed exported size cannot (I only shoot in RAW, and use my own pre-set in Lightroom to export in Adobe RGB colour space, at full size whenever possible). I use the invaluable Alamy SizeChecker to make sure that the exported files are not too big. In the batch on which I am presently working, 2 of the files would have failed for being over 25MB. The difference was trivial: they were about 25.7 MB. I therefore tried limiting the file size by various amounts, getting as close as possible to (but under) the 25MB cap: I was trying to include as much information as possible within the permissible limit. Working my way downwards, a limit of 26,500k in the Lightroom export dialogue box still produced a file size in excess of 25MB. But then reducing the limit to 26,000k worked - but instead of being slightly under 25MB, the exported file was only around 16MB. I would have expected that small changes in the export size limit would have produced correspondingly small changes in the exported file size, but this is not always the case. This is not a one-off occurrence of this phenomenon, I have noticed the same thing happening before. The currency of this thread prompted me to enquire whether anyone has any explanation for this behaviour. It does not matter: so long as the file size conforms to Alamy's limit, it is fine, and I cannot detect any sudden degradation in image quality (a 16MB JPEG is likely to contain plenty of information, all other things being equal), but I just find the issue puzzling. I wonder whether Alamy might re-consider its upper cap on file sizes. I am encountering this on a reasonably frequent basis with the Canon 5DIV, but there are already higher resolution cameras than this, and the trend towards higher megapixel counts, such as with the newly announced Nikon 850, is only going to exacerbate the issue. I would have thought that Alamy would have wanted the greatest possible quality: it seems a pity to have a very high resolution camera and then to have to limit upload size to meet what seems to be a fairly arbitrary upload size cap, with the consequent risk of some, maybe undetectably marginal, loss of quality. With over 100 million images and six figure daily uploads, presumably Alamy has plenty of server capacity and upload bandwidth to make the cap unnecessary. Graham
  12. OMG I hope not. I have not encountered this, but my hearing is, shall we say, not very good and I very much doubt I would be able to use such a mechanism. And even for those without hearing impairments, how could this realistically be used in any noisy public place, such as on a train or in a coffee bar (I sometimes kill time working on keywords on the train, for example)? Graham
  13. I do not think that in-camera GPS is very accurate. It's fine to give a general idea where the picture was taken, but it is not accurate enough to be useful for automatic inclusion in the map location data. I recently went to Hungary to photograph birds from hides. Every shot from any particular shoot was taken from exactly the same spot in the hide, yet the Lightroom mapping module shows the images apparently scattered over probably several hundred metres! Same for both my cameras, the Canon 1DXII and 5DIV. I use it only to give me a general idea of where the photo was taken, such as from a moving vehicle such as a train, where otherwise I might not be very sure where I was at the time. Graham
  14. AIM Processing failed

    Oops, replied to wrong thread
  15. Captchas lock-out

    I have just returned from a week in the Maasai Mara. The camp had wifi, but it was intermittent and (when it worked) slow. What was frustrating was not only the slowness of the captcha process on a slow connection, but also that it was compounded by the all too frequent requirement to submit a second captcha, after completing a first, which doubled the pain. Worst of all, however, was when the captcha was submitted, it often resulted in a message to the effect that the captcha server could not be contacted, making it impossible to log in at all. In the end I just gave up - there were so many more interesting things to be doing than waiting and getting wound up by the difficulties of logging into Alamy. Graham