Posts: neilds37 | Ugly Hedgehog

bsprague wrote:

If I quit drinking my daily beer, I would be saving $2190 over four years.

The secret to mental well-being is learning how to prioritize!!

Jul 20, 2021 15:34:59 #

CHG_CANON wrote:

I' m on the Adobe train too, but a bigger fanboy of the money I've saved by buying LR6 and saving now 4 x $120 / yr = $480, happily using my LR6 and even older PSE-11 that support my camera RAW files and do everything I need. If LR6 or a few unsupported Topaz models can't achieve what I need, I just delete the frame and move onto some other frame of the 1000+ I just shot.

Someday I'll buy a new camera, and only when that someday arrives, will I begin another ongoing subscription.

...and those are the monetary figures I keep thinking about. When PSE comes out with a significant feature I want I upgrade. I won't know if I can get my camera in the LR6 new install or not until I return home for the product key. Congress has done a good job at keeping my discretionary income at the 2008 figure, so caution is the norm.

Jul 19, 2021 18:33:15 #

DWU2 wrote:

As I recall, if you had LR 5 and wanted to upgrade to LR 6, that update was not free, nor were major Photoshop CS upgrades. If you subscribe to the Adobe $10/mo Photographers plan, upgrades to LR & PS are at no additional cost. And, they're not mandatory.

I think you missed a couple of beats in the money flow. Anyway, I now have the complete picture and can now make an informed decision.

Jul 19, 2021 18:08:26 #

bsprague wrote:

Paul is right. Historically, a long time ago we b... (show quote)

Thank you for the detailed situation, Bill. So, to sum up, the difference between old and new methods is that whereas PSE can be updated to a new version at any time the user feels the purchase price is justified by new features, now the update is mandatory each year whether the user wants it not, and the old version is no longer usable. Oh, wait, didn't I miss that now Photoshop is included and PSE is no longer needed.

Jul 19, 2021 11:01:58 #

CHG_CANON wrote:

Just to be 100% clear: Nothing about your images under control of LR-Classic reside in the cloud. The software installs locally and your images remain exclusively local.

The cloud aspect is a relatively modest storage space that allows you to share WIP images between your main LRclassic install and your mobile devices such that you can work remotely, say at an image shoot, and transfer that WIP back to your main LRClassic via the cloud, both the image files and the LR editing.

That does put a different light on things than what I thought I understood about the situation. Thank you for the clarification.

Jul 19, 2021 10:49:49 #

bsprague wrote:

The disk (probably) had Lightroom 6.0. It gradually worked through a series of full replacements to 6.14. When you were doing that on the old computer, the installation file downloaded and was then executed. Look for the downloaded installation files.

That said, Lightroom Classic is up to 10.3. It may be worth $10 a month if you enjoy photography enough to buy a new computer for it. Four full versions may actually have some significant new, fun features!

You are probably right. But, simply put, material that resides in my computer is always available to me. Material that resides in the cloud is NOT always available to me. BIG difference!

Jul 17, 2021 21:48:09 #

10MPlayer wrote:

Nope. Looks fake. I like the one you actually captured. Maybe it's not National Geographic material but it's the one you captured. Look around for another osprey nest in a more natural setting and do better next time.

Thanks, 10Mplayer. A little background for you. The pair began their nest on an active electrical power pole. Some wiser heads removed that nest and erected a bare pole about ten feet higher across the road from the power, with the shipping pallet on top. The birds had just started a new nest on it at the time of this photo. The last photo is of the new nest completed. The angle of view at the low position of the camera cuts off the lower portion of the bird, which is back from the leading edge. Looks pretty natural to me.
Cheers

Jul 17, 2021 21:05:25 #

Thank you Longshadow, bsprauge, and CHG_CANON for your informed responses. That covers the information I was hoping for. A relative we haven't seen since 2010 just showed up, so I'll have to wait a bit to put it to use.
Cheers, Neil

Jul 17, 2021 13:30:18 #

Longshadow wrote:

Maybe?
Do you possibly have all your sequential update files in a download folder somewhere?

Not that I'm aware of. I just performed the updates without knowing anything else except they worked. No idea where they reside in the file structure.

Jul 17, 2021 12:58:15 #

My five year old Lenovo was getting bogged down quite often, so after reviewing UHH user comments I ended up with a Dell XPS and 32GB of ram.

I installed Lightroom 6 from disk only to find it does not support the Sony ARW files. As Adobe no longer supports Lightroom 6 the camera updates are no longer available.

Question: Is there any way to transfer the updates from the Lenovo to the Dell?

Jul 15, 2021 10:07:20 #

Thanks to all that gave opinions/advice on this photo. For anyone who is still with me, how does this composite work for you? It certainly looks better to me.

(Download)

Jul 13, 2021 12:45:38 #

I just cannot convince myself that an osprey standing on a shipping pallet is something to hang on the wall. I agree with you all that it does not look right as-is. At this point I must cease deluding myself that the lack of a proper base is not that important, and either abandon this one-of-a-kind (in my collection) pose or move this moment in the lives of these two birds forward in time to when the nest is complete and can serve as a proper base.

[No typo. Both birds are represented in this image of the moment that results in the need to build a nest in the first place.]

Jul 13, 2021 09:17:35 #

charlienow wrote:

I too would like to see more of what lies beneath. There is nothing to see above. I am assuming you cropped out some of what is beneath. Depending on what is below I might even crop a tiny bit of the tip of the wing on the left to just above the wing on the right.

It would help to see the entire photo to make crop recommendations

Chuck

So, the entire imge...

(Download)

Jul 12, 2021 19:47:47 #

CHG_CANON wrote:

I too would take more in the bottom / below. Also,... (show quote)

If I'm reading you right, you are suggesting a tighter crop. I thought I had all of the sky selected for noise removal, but see now I'll have to redo the entire sky. Thank you for your comments...saved a spoiled print.

Jul 12, 2021 19:18:15 #

Novicus wrote:

Personally I would lik to see a bit of what is beneath it , and a half a stop brighter, just my opinion :-)

Thank you, Novicus. Opinions are what I'm after. The bird is in the beginning of a nest located on a new-lumber shipping pallet which I find quite unattractive and out of context. Shots from a few weeks later are showing a rather deep nest, which I'm glad to include. The sun was hitting the back-side of the bird and I've had to pull it out of dark shadow.