Is Free and Cheap software better?
On one of my ham radio blogs a week or two ago, I made a conclusive comment on a piece of electronic equipment, as I saw it from where I was standing, and had to elucidate, as it were, for the benefit of a couple readers, not that they were not following my reasoning, but they did not quite see it from the other side of the room like I did. In browsing my last post I note that I made reference to a situation, and I think that I should also elucidate and maybe illustrate and demonstrate, so that readers can better appreciate my comment. We now live in the information age so we should not be skimping on info, nor should we be trying to withhold, as in hide, info and knowledge from our bothers and sisters.
In paragraph nine [9] of the last post, inter alia, I wrote
So I do not use Photoshop, not that I do not have it on my computer, but I do not use it to process my digital negatives. If you are serious about photography you will find out that there are far better and cheaper tools on the market. Whether you are a professional photographer or not, if your camera can shoot RAW, use it and the FREE Google Picasa3 to make yourself look like a real pro. Most of the time the images wanted are for like Facebook, and other uploads, so no big deal.
Back up a bit to paragraph four [4] where I referred to the Facebook linked video that I had seen earlier, which triggered my comment above. So let us go forward, fast forward, but before that let me fess up and tell you that the list of software that I referred to in the first blog is not all of the software that is available here for digital film processing. Of course you did not think I would really tell you everything, did you? This blog is about pictures, images and photos and not the discussion, but at times it may be necessary to say a few words about "some things", that may just bring some teeny weeny bit of joy to someone else's photography.
So most photo gurus use Photoshop to enhance the appearance of their clients pictures, but this cheaper and specifically designed program, may be better for senior citizens like me who do not want to tangle with the Photoshop steep learning curve. Here is the link to the portrait professional website and at the recession buster of 69 uncle Sams you can't go wrong. Click on gallery and check out the action. This is a program that I prefer to use. I believe that most photographers, after paying two grand for their jack-of-all- trades program suite, are trying to get their money's worth, and very few of them, may be willing to invest another two grand in additional, new, sophisticated, cutting edge software, even though it may really put the icing on their photographic cakes.
I have worked with high tech equipment for all my life so it is a matter of course that I would gravitate to the top of the line cutting edge software that is available for any hobby or project that I decide to become involved with. For every high quality shareware program one can usually find an equivalent, comparable or better freeware program, with a little research, time and effort. At the professional end there may only be a handful of free and cheap software programs that can cut it, but invariably most pros just stick with JACK, but that Jack is not going to bust my brain.
I have finally found a free sharing website where I can upload FULL sized pictures. I still have to research the owners but for now they seem honest enough, as they always do, but in these recession times, I plan to use that service until I can save enough pennies for a 5 year subscription to the smug mug photo and video sharing web site here. I like to view images large and larger to appreciate them better. I am of the view that you, like me, would also prefer that too. I can understand the economics of face book, flckr and others web albums with 640, even 1024, but that is just not my speed. No problem, and no big deal. I will look in the archives and see if there is something that I can afford to make public, or just walkabout St Kitts-Nevis the most beautiful Islands in the Caribbean with the Canon camera and capture fresh images.
In paragraph nine [9] of the last post, inter alia, I wrote
So I do not use Photoshop, not that I do not have it on my computer, but I do not use it to process my digital negatives. If you are serious about photography you will find out that there are far better and cheaper tools on the market. Whether you are a professional photographer or not, if your camera can shoot RAW, use it and the FREE Google Picasa3 to make yourself look like a real pro. Most of the time the images wanted are for like Facebook, and other uploads, so no big deal.
Back up a bit to paragraph four [4] where I referred to the Facebook linked video that I had seen earlier, which triggered my comment above. So let us go forward, fast forward, but before that let me fess up and tell you that the list of software that I referred to in the first blog is not all of the software that is available here for digital film processing. Of course you did not think I would really tell you everything, did you? This blog is about pictures, images and photos and not the discussion, but at times it may be necessary to say a few words about "some things", that may just bring some teeny weeny bit of joy to someone else's photography.
So most photo gurus use Photoshop to enhance the appearance of their clients pictures, but this cheaper and specifically designed program, may be better for senior citizens like me who do not want to tangle with the Photoshop steep learning curve. Here is the link to the portrait professional website and at the recession buster of 69 uncle Sams you can't go wrong. Click on gallery and check out the action. This is a program that I prefer to use. I believe that most photographers, after paying two grand for their jack-of-all- trades program suite, are trying to get their money's worth, and very few of them, may be willing to invest another two grand in additional, new, sophisticated, cutting edge software, even though it may really put the icing on their photographic cakes.
I have worked with high tech equipment for all my life so it is a matter of course that I would gravitate to the top of the line cutting edge software that is available for any hobby or project that I decide to become involved with. For every high quality shareware program one can usually find an equivalent, comparable or better freeware program, with a little research, time and effort. At the professional end there may only be a handful of free and cheap software programs that can cut it, but invariably most pros just stick with JACK, but that Jack is not going to bust my brain.
I have finally found a free sharing website where I can upload FULL sized pictures. I still have to research the owners but for now they seem honest enough, as they always do, but in these recession times, I plan to use that service until I can save enough pennies for a 5 year subscription to the smug mug photo and video sharing web site here. I like to view images large and larger to appreciate them better. I am of the view that you, like me, would also prefer that too. I can understand the economics of face book, flckr and others web albums with 640, even 1024, but that is just not my speed. No problem, and no big deal. I will look in the archives and see if there is something that I can afford to make public, or just walkabout St Kitts-Nevis the most beautiful Islands in the Caribbean with the Canon camera and capture fresh images.
Comments