Software Friend or Foe

paulr

Like cameras and lenses we all have our favourites, But software is slightly different, You either like Post production or you find it a unecessary evil.
In todays market software Plug-in companies promise everything to everybody most of which could be done in Photoshop if you knew where to look.
I have most Plug-ins but find that some plug-ins suit some images but not all. In recent times the big three[ OnOne, Nik,Topaz} have reduced the cost of their Plug-ins dramatically, Maybe they have concerns about the New DxO Pro 10 taking over, This software actually works from the information gained from the camera and lenses Exif file, so it workks from true information rather than changing and moving information in post.
I know the purists would say that you should get it right in camera and Softwares are unecessary, but that is not always possible in certain conditions.
Digital cameras and Computers are joined at the hip, so why not take advantage what the computer can do with a little help from the software companies.
I do ,then I quite enjoy Post Production. and the Art form which can be achieved from an original image.

sevencrossing

I know the purists would say that you should get it right in camera and Softwares are unnecessary,

this nonsense if you take the output straight from any digital camera you just end up with load of ones and zeros

I don't use plug in but I develop all my images in LR

here are two images one "developed" and one not

heartyfisher

Just last week I rediscovered a plugin for Gimp I used to use .. it started with one very nice noise reduction filter ..
then a few years later it became about 5 interesting noise reduction filters and a couple of other "fun filters". well as I said I rediscovered it last week and what a surprise ! .. its expanded to over 500 filters !!
I am sure it not as fancy as the ones you have to pay for but its good to see that open source software is alive and well !!
Software friend or foe ? .. definitely friend !

spraynpray

Nice enhancements @sevencrossing.

My interest is really piqued by this new software @paulr, especially because it seems to be able to export the imported raw file from Lightroom and reimport it after development yet it says it doesn't affect the file in the way Adobes process version does. Interesting. I have seen the difference between Aperture and Lightroom and I liked that Aperture doesn't mess with the file like Adobes does.

paulr

Its interesting to note that DxO recommend that when you have put yor image through their software and wish to put back to LR they recommend sending it back as a Tiff file, If you send it back as a DNG file Adobe can alter some of changes DxO has done.

spraynpray

Nice. Interest is more piqued.

safyre

The trend right now is actually less photoshop as opposed to 7-8 years ago. You're seeing a huge resurgence of analog/low-fi with all these instagram filters and what not. Film is actually starting to make a comeback as well; there's quite a few high profile photogs I know that shoot film exclusively.

I used to be a huge photoshop person but once I started getting jobs and dealing with thousands of images a day, I've been more of a lightroom preset person, spending no more than 5 minutes on a single image. I know there are some people that enjoy spending hours behind the computer editing. Personally I would rather spend that time shooting.

sevencrossing

Film is actually starting to make a comeback as well;

too late

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/must_see/33584693

NSXTypeR

I hate editing photos. I like photography, not sitting behind a computer. I do understand that editing can give your photo an extra edge, but I really think it's unpleasant.

I'd rather spend more time behind a camera.

sevencrossing

I hate editing photos. I like photography, not sitting behind a computer.

I can assure you, Lightroom and PS are more pleasant and lot quicker than the days of the darkroom ,when editing a complicated shoot could take days

PB_PM

Not to mention how environmentally unfriendly the entire film process is, from making the film itself to the chemicals used for development there off. Sure SD cards cause pollution, when made, but unless you outright toss them in the trash the impact of them is far lower. I never toss an old memory card, there are many uses for even smaller cards, like having an off site backup of serial numbers etc.

WestEndFoto

Not to mention how environmentally unfriendly the entire film process is, from making the film itself to the chemicals used for development there off. Sure SD cards cause pollution, when made, but unless you outright toss them in the trash the impact of them is far lower. I never toss an old memory card, there are many uses for even smaller cards, like having an off site backup of serial numbers etc.

Careful with this. Data does not last forever if just put away.

sevencrossing

.... Data does not last forever if just put away.

nothing last forever

PB_PM

Not to mention how environmentally unfriendly the entire film process is, from making the film itself to the chemicals used for development there off. Sure SD cards cause pollution, when made, but unless you outright toss them in the trash the impact of them is far lower. I never toss an old memory card, there are many uses for even smaller cards, like having an off site backup of serial numbers etc.

Careful with this. Data does not last forever if just put away.

As long as an SD/CF card receives power once every 2 years data should be retained. In addition, even once the write cycles ware out it would still be readable long after that. In any case the files would need to be updates from time to time anyway. I don't mean keeping important data on one card forever, but I won't toss a functional card just because it isn't practical to use in a newer camera, which was kind of my point.

Anyway, film negatives and slide fade too. As @severncrossing said, nothing lasts forever.