General Photography Chat - Page 25

LSyd · #**481** Posted: **Feb 7, 2010, 3:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by flar

You should get a more powerful PSU, I wouldn't go under 500 watts these days. Always go for quality on the PSU too, it's the most overlooked piece of hardware.

good suggestion; right now i'm going with a 500w Antec. i'll see how it handles the strain test.

-

Doady · #**482** Posted: **Feb 9, 2010, 8:34 PM**

A lot of discussion about equipment and post-processing software here, but what about the presentation, i.e. website and printing? Doesn't anyone here have a website or print their photos?

Of course, I have already mentioned my site, which I spent a lot of time redesigning. Now I am thinking of getting a really good photo printer. Of course, I used to have a basic A4 photo printer which gave very good results but not much options. Now I am thinking of getting something more serious like the Canon MP980, or even something as high-end the Epson 3880. I am currently leaning toward the 3880 because it is far more versatile and costs a lot less to operate. Of course, I will have to work 5 weeks just to be able to buy it in the first place, which is not good.

Before you call call me crazy for thinking about spending so much money on a printer, just keep in mind that I have not bought a new camera or lens in over 5 years (though I did buy a good Manfrotto tripod 2 years ago). I don't like to constantly buy new equipment so I am still using the old Olympus C-7070 (which technically only cost me $140 CAD). As long as it still works, I will continue to use it. So I think it is not totally stupid for me to buy good photo printer. But maybe you think otherwise.

initiald · #**483** Posted: **Feb 9, 2010, 9:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aleks

I'd like to upgrade to Win7, anyone here have it?

It runs much better on older hardware than Vista. I did some testing on P4 3.0ghz with 1 GB of RAM and it was fine for basic desktop usage where Vista would constantly lag and choke. But now all the system we're ordering at my job are quad core with minimum 8GB RAM and everything will be 64-bit from now on.

Ayreonaut · #**484** Posted: **Feb 9, 2010, 11:00 PM**

Here's my computer, except my HD is only 150GB.

I'd like to do some upgrades, but have never cracked open a laptop. Are they sketchy to work on, being so compact?

Perhaps I should take it in, rather that fuck something up doing something myself.

Quote:

Asus G2SG
:: Processor
Intel Core 2 Duo T9300 2.5 GHz
:: Mainboard
Intel PM965
:: Memory
4096 MB, DDR2 PC5300 667 MHz, 2x 1024MB
:: Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce 8700M GT - 512 MB, Core: 625 MHz, Memory: 700 MHz, GDDR3 VRAM, ForceWare 167.49, 7.15.11.6749
:: Display
17.1 inch 16:10, 1440x900 pixel, WXGA+ Color Shine Glare Type, glossy: yes
:: Harddisk
320 GB - 5400 rpm, 320GB 5400rpm WD3200BEVT-22ZCT0

I'm really not all that great with computers, the only numbers that mean anything to me there are RAM, HD, and Processor. I know when I bought it (a year and a half ago) the graphics card was top notch, but things advance so fast, I just don't bother keeping up.

Maybe I don't need to do anything for a while.

flar · #**485** Posted: **Feb 9, 2010, 11:04 PM**

I replaced the motherboard in my laptop. It's not for the faint of heart and I downloaded the service manual for help disassembling it. I forget how many screws I had to remove, but it was more than 50 and there were little tiny pieces all over. But I got it back together good as new.

ue · #**486** Posted: **Feb 9, 2010, 11:06 PM**

When did this become General Computer Chat

?

Ayreonaut · #**487** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 2:15 AM**

This may be a stupid question, but Imma ask it anyway.

Can I put a water mark on my photos using Lightroom? I'd like to do this so my name is on there when I have them printed.

Ramsayfarian · #**488** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 2:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ayreonaut

This may be a stupid question, but Imma ask it anyway.

Can I put a water mark on my photos using Lightroom? I'd like to do this so my name is on there when I have them printed.

Yes you can, but I think you might need a plug-in to do it. Try googling watermark + lightroom

I noticed that Apple has released Aperture 3.0 today. I'm a mac user but I think I'll stick with Lightroom.

giallo · #**489** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 5:01 AM**

You can do it without a plug-in.

After you've finished editing your photo, select PRINT on the upper right hand corner.

Once you've put your photo in print mode, scroll down to the OVERLAY section. Here you can write your name, select the colour, font and size you want. You can also toggle with the opacity to make you name appear more translucent.

Here's the result:

Ayreonaut · #**490** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 4:47 PM**

Yeah, I've tried that, but it seems like when I export them, the text isn't there.

Do you do that as an identity plate, or custom text (in photo info)?

1ajs · #**491** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 8:26 PM**

does light room have a layers feature one could just use that

Ayreonaut · #**492** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 9:15 PM**

Hmm, played around for a couple minutes just now. I'm sure it's not custom text, since that doesn't seem to be movable.

I'm guessing it is the identity plate (which can be moved around and resized, etc.) that giallo uses, but I'm still stuck trying to get that to stay on the photo when I export it.

toyota74 · #**493** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 10:44 PM**

If you dont figure it out Picasa 3 can add text easily

Ayreonaut · #**494** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 10:44 PM**

Apparently.

Aleks · #**495** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 11:09 PM**

I stopped using lightroom 2. now i use lightroom 3 beta, which is better imo because picture quality is MUCH better.

no noise added when sharpening, less noise when saturating colors, better everything. i hope lightroom 3 comes out soon, the beta version is already better than L2 2!

oh! and better layouts for printing and costume watermarks

ue · #**496** Posted: **Feb 10, 2010, 11:45 PM**

^How can image quality be better when the quality comes from the camera not the software?

Aleks · #**497** Posted: **Feb 11, 2010, 12:46 AM**

no no no, like, image quality after edit is better with lr3 than with lr2. not that theres more quality after edit in lr3 than the original. although sometimes imo there is.

lr3 imrproved everything lr2 was ok in. sharpness and nosie is one of them, although the luminance slider cant be used because its just a beta version.

Ayreonaut · #**498** Posted: **Feb 11, 2010, 12:47 AM**

Well I probably won't start putting watermarks on my photos for a couple weeks. When is the release date for LR3, and does it have an easier way to do this? Maybe it'll be out by the time I need it.

Ayreonaut · #**499** Posted: **Feb 11, 2010, 12:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aleks

lr3 imrproved everything lr2 was ok in. sharpness and nosie is one of them, although the luminance slider cant be used because its just a beta version.

I don't use the luminance all that often myself (though I do on occasion), same with hue. I mostly use the sharpen, clarity, saturation, and contrast sliders.
If LR3 improves on 2 as much as you say, then I'm stoked, because LR2 was a huge step up from anything I had used prior to buying it.

Ramsayfarian · #**500** Posted: **Feb 11, 2010, 1:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by edmontonenthusiast

^How can image quality be better when the quality comes from the camera not the software?

It's how the software translates the data from the camera into a viewable image. For instance, until Adobe released Camera raw 5.6 raw images from the Canon 7D looked better if you used Canon's software than if you used Adobe's software. interputs