Jump to content

M.Chapman

Verified
  • Content Count

    2,819
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by M.Chapman

  1. You may need to be careful using a closeup filter. The degradation in image quality can be significant if you buy too cheaply and may give problems with Alamy QC. The Marumi achromatic close-up filters seem OK though, so much so that I no longer bother carrying my macro lens with me.
  2. Given that floppies were 720K or 1.44MB they wouldn't have been much use for storing images....
  3. That's why I use commas as well as quotes.... Belt and braces.
  4. I share your cynicism. Historically that has indeed been the case. A lower payment threshold has been the precursor for lower prices. On the positive side it suggests Alamy are quite happy with their cashflow/balance at the moment.
  5. Do you mean the caption field? The description field has up to 2000 characters. I have just tried to put more than 128 characters in the caption field, and I am not able to. Or perhaps it is a LR thing? The flash control in manage images is probably what's restricting how many characters can be entered. Whereas a direct upload has bypassed this check and may have revealed that the Alamy database can now handle more characters?
  6. Sounds like you've been one of the testers of the new Alamy system. Maybe that's how you got 24,000 images keyworded in just over 2 years?? .
  7. Alamy, many thanks for the quick update. It's just a shame that someone Alamy (inadvertently?) published one of the specific details "prematurely".... on a Micro-stock forum of all places.... Reading between the lines of your posting suggests that three keyword fields may still be there (albeit renamed), but it won't be mandatory to fill them all in. Looking forward to your blog post.
  8. What disturbs me the most is the way Alamy have posted this on another forum first before informing their contributors directly. Not a good way to treat us! Similar things have happened before, with Alamy keeping developments close to their chest and their contributors in the dark until the change has gone live. Remember the image stacking change..., the creative collection change..., the failure to actually utilise square brackets added to keywords, lack of info on commission rates for print sales via art.com. Come on Alamy, please keep us more informed.
  9. I was pleasantly surprised to get a sale of the interior of a famous UK Cathedral a couple of months ago. Why they picked mine over the other competing images I'll never know, but I'll take the sale just the same. The image was taken handheld from just outside the "pay to enter" area and it took some effort in processing to improve lighting, composition and symmetry. Maybe they liked the rows of chairs that I included in the frame, and the lack of people, who knows?
  10. I found when switching from Windows to Mac that I have to be much more precise when pointing to and clicking on check boxes or radio buttons. It seems in Windows that if the tip of the mouse pointer is near to a checkbox it just guesses what you're trying to do. On a Mac one has to be precise. I soon got used to it though. Another thing that happens quite often is that I find the the mouse "focus" is in a different window. The first click just moves the mouse focus into the window I want, the second click actually ticks the box.
  11. Interesting article and statement. I note the article appears to date from 2009.
  12. I suspect Betty is hoping to import the extra images so they join the others in her "Previous import" collection as she doesn't use LR "folders". I think my suggestion above is possibly the only way to achieve this. It may be an illogical way of working, but Betty isn't the only one working this way. I do the pretty much the same. All my images are already stored in a folder structure of my own making going back over 30 years now. I've no need or desire to import this structure into the LR catalogue. When I'm about to process a batch of images for Alamy, I select and copy some RAW files from wherever into a folder called "Working folder" using BreezeBrowser. I then import the contents of this folder into LR and adjust and convert each RAW file into a PSD which is exported directly into PSE where I make the final edits and save as 8 bit jpg. I upload the finished jpgs to Alamy. The JPGs and their RAWs then get archived (moved) to a new folder called "Alamy submission NNNNN" and the PSDs get deleted, leaving the Working Folder empty. I then clear the LR catalogue, ready for the next batch. A bit convoluted, but it works for me. Why don't I use LR for everything? 1) I find BreezeBrowser provides much, much faster way of viewing, sorting,rejecting and moving images without any need to import images first. The 100% side by side compare of 2, 3 or 4 iages is superb and extremely fast. 2) For pixel based editing I much prefer PSE to LR Why do I use LR at all? 1) I like to use develop presets 2) Excellent CA removal Mark What I don't understand is why you don't retain the archived raws in the LR catalog and don't wish to import your file structure. You must surely want to make changes sometimes to your original raw conversion even if it's a tweak of white balance. If so, then you have to reimport given that you are using PSE and don't have full PS/ACR. Using LR and BreezeBrowser together would not conflict. Similarly I don't understand dumping PSDs on which you have worked - presumably saving disk space but I guess that depends on how you value your time. Disk space is very cheap now. Also you never want to modify or tweak your PSDs? I'm frequently going back to my PSDs and raws and making changes - easy when all held together in a LR catalog. But I doubt anything I say is going to change your mind. I think the difference between you and Betty is that you are very comfortable with computers and don't have problems with your workflow, even if it is non-standard. I think Betty's problems all arise because of her refusal to understand that very fundamenal LR feature - the catalog and how it works with file storage. Hi MDM, As a result of your encouragement I've taken another step towards greater LR integration into my workflow. I had been using Downloader Pro from Breeze Systems to download my images because it supported my 30 year old directory/folder structure, whereas LR didn't. However, after some digging I found the trick of editing the LR file called TranslatedStrings.txt that allows customisation of the options for the destination folders. So I was able to create an option that doesn't occur in the standard list. If anyone else is interested the trick is here. So now another part of my workflow is handled by LR and is fully compatible with my folder structure.... I'm getting there - one step at a time! Now I don't need Downloader Pro any more, which is good because it only ran under Windows (or in a virtual windows machine on my Mac). Thanks!
  13. When using the grad filter, which I've done, I need help here. It easy to use the grad for landscapes with nothing tall jutting up. But how can I use it if a power pole, a tree, or something tall intrudes far into the sky? The grad turns half of these objects dark. I don't care to use the erase tool if the subject is complicated, like a tree or multiple objects. Have you tried using the highlight slider in the LR grad tool instead of the exposure slider? The highlight slider will adjust your skies with less effect on darker items.
  14. Agreed I use the auto upright / straighten / rotate tools. They seem to work really well, especially with the auto-contstrained crop. I usually find I don't need NR in LR as I usually shoot at lowest ISO on MFD sensor and don't apply much detail sharpening
  15. Thanks for your detailed description of your workflow in LR. Very informative.
  16. Hi MDM, many thanks for your comments. I hope that you're being too pessimistic when you doubt that anything you say will change my mind. I'd like to think I am receptive to change, indeed I recently changed from Windows to Mac and I'm quite happy with Linux and DOS. But it is getting more difficult. The reason I don't retain the LR RAW adjustments in the catalogue is that they are usually so quick and minor and I simply use a preset. The majority of my time editing is still done in PSE where the adjustments are not recorded anyway. Also I rarely go back and re-edit (I've got too many new images waiting to be processed, without going back and re-tweeking ones I've already finished). If I need to make a tweek I'm usually happy to edit the quality level 11 jpg again anyway, or to start all over. I am slowly doing more in LR (as I learn), but in most cases I still find PSE to be faster (partly because I am more familiar with it, but also because I find most adjustments I make in PSE appear instantly (i.e. very interactive), whereas (on my hardware) LR is somewhat laggy. Notwithstanding, this is a useful thread. At some point I may go fully LR and then I'll get all the benefits, but it may have to wait until I have more powerful hardware.
  17. I suspect Betty is hoping to import the extra images so they join the others in her "Previous import" collection as she doesn't use LR "folders". I think my suggestion above is possibly the only way to achieve this. It may be an illogical way of working, but Betty isn't the only one working this way. I do the pretty much the same. All my images are already stored in a folder structure of my own making going back over 30 years now. I've no need or desire to import this structure into the LR catalogue. When I'm about to process a batch of images for Alamy, I select and copy some RAW files from wherever into a folder called "Working folder" using BreezeBrowser. I then import the contents of this folder into LR and adjust and convert each RAW file into a PSD which is exported directly into PSE where I make the final edits and save as 8 bit jpg. I upload the finished jpgs to Alamy. The JPGs and their RAWs then get archived (moved) to a new folder called "Alamy submission NNNNN" and the PSDs get deleted, leaving the Working Folder empty. I then clear the LR catalogue, ready for the next batch. A bit convoluted, but it works for me. Why don't I use LR for everything? 1) I find BreezeBrowser provides much, much faster way of viewing, sorting,rejecting and moving images without any need to import images first. The 100% side by side compare of 2, 3 or 4 iages is superb and extremely fast. 2) For pixel based editing I much prefer PSE to LR Why do I use LR at all? 1) I like to use develop presets 2) Excellent CA removal Mark
  18. In a way, that's the problem. I wish changes made elsewhere were seen by LR. If I move/delete/rename/copy an image using Windows or OSX or another application LR losses track of the file. Whereas all my other applications PSE, BreezeBrowser, Finder or FileExplorer are "self-synchronising" as they just use the existing directory structure. Kind of. It's all down to the hardware I have. I have a MacBook and a PC in a different locations. I prefer Mac OSX to Windows, but my old PC hardware won't run OS-X. So, until I can afford to upgrade my PC to a Mac, that's where I am. I like to be able to use whichever system depending on where I am.
  19. It is indeed benign and well written and I agree that I (and Betty?) use LR in an odd way. But for me, OSX and Windows already have indexed filing systems that I'm familiar with and do what I need. I just connect my external HDD to whichever computer I'm using, and wham, there are all my images. I can search them, copy them, rename them, view thumbnails, slideshows etc. It's not as powerful as LR, but I know how to use it, there's no catalogue to get out of synch and I'm free to use whatever tools I want to directly access and modify my images at any time. Apart from LR which requires images to be imported first. If I could use LR without the catalogue I would, but unfortunately that's not an option. So my RAW images are temporarily imported into the catalogue for processing and then removed afterwards. That being said, I am slowly doing more of my processing in LR and less in PS as I learn more. Maybe one day I'll do it all in LR, but I'm not there yet...
  20. Hi Betty, I work in a similar way to you. I think there maybe a slightly roundabout of doing this, providing you haven't made individual LR adjustments to the images you've already imported that you want to keep. When looking at the thumbnails of your Previous import in the Library tab, select all the images (cmd + A) Now right click and select "Remove photos" In the pop-up dialog box click "Remove". DO NOT choose the "Delete from disk" option or you'll lose your images altogether. This will remove the images in you previous import from your LR catalog, together with the record of any LR adjustments you made to them. Now simply reimport the entire folder to which the new images have been added. Then all your images will appear together as your "Previous import" Although it's possible to do it this way, you could simply import the new images and then Click on "Catalogue" in the left hand panel and select "All Photographs" instead of "Previous import" and you'll see all your images. However, if you've not been tidying up your catalogue when you delete the folder from your desktop each time, you may be horrified to see the thumbnails of all the images you've previously imported, processed and then deleted with exclamation marks in the corner of each (image is missing). If you want to remove all this "debris" fro the catalogue, then Cmd + A then Remove will do this. Assuming there's nothing in the catalogue you want to keep.
  21. Is there an automated way (e.g. preset) in LR to achieve a similar result to the auto-contrast function in PSE? I've tried the LR auto-tone and it messes with too many settings (highlights, shadows etc.) and I often don't like the result. I just want something that sets the black and white points automatically on a batch of images with varying exposure etc.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.