[Snydly]

Hello. I'm relatively new here, and I've been having difficulty processing photo's, not only from my K7 and K-x, but my older digital cameras, and video cameras as well.

I'm fairly computer literate, as a matter of fact, after getting my first digital camera, a sony 4 mp model, I was able to extract images, cut and paste parts of images and do general touch ups with no problem. It seems the more advanced things get, the more difficult it is to process, and it should be the other way around.

Anyway, a couple questions. Some may be 'stupid', but I'm thick skinned...

1. Should I use the in-camera raw converter, and if so, should I convert to tiff or jpeg?

2. If I convert in camera to tiff, is there any special considerations? I realize the file size will be large. I'm asking this because I shot some raw today, and tried downloading with every win, picasa, gimp, hp, etc program on my computer, and I don't feel I have the control I had with the MGI photosuite I got with one of my old sony cameras. I don't see the raw files on the external drive I copy to.

3. What should I buy, or what freeware should I use? IOW, what do you guys use? I could get photoshop elements, and or the other one premiere elements, (what's the difference???), or anything else except for cs4 due to financial constraints.

4. How does everyone download from their cameras? What have you found is the most efficient way? For example, I used to download automatically by date, but wanted to consolidate a little so I used refiled into months. I still shoot and scan film, and use other digitals at times, so I want to be able to distinguish.

That's enough for now. I appreciate any input. I'm usually very organized, but this is frustrating me. It's ok to respond to me like you're teaching me, or like I'm stupid, cuz that's how I feel...

I searched for these topics, but not TOO deep. Things change almost monthly anymore, so I was hoping to find somebody who's recently solved these problems...

Thanks

Bill

[Marc Sabatella]

RAW processing is not the place to do things like cutting and pasting parts of images. RAW processing is for basic exposure & color adjustments, noise reduction, sharpening, and so forth. You do that in RAW processing, then if you want to cut and paste parts of the pictures, convert to jpeg (or tiff if you think you can see a difference and don't mind the much large file sizes) and do the cutting and pasting in some other program.

As for what programs to use, please continue to browse this forum - there must be at least a hundred threads of people discussing the various options. for example, one called "post processing newbie - what to use" right on the first page as I type this.

[Snydly]

Thanks Marc, I'll continue the research...

[WMBP]

Hello. I'm relatively new here, and I've been having difficulty processing photo's, not only from my K7 and K-x, but my older digital cameras, and video cameras as well.

Life is full of pain and difficulty, and then you die. ;^)

1. Should I use the in-camera raw converter, and if so, should I convert to tiff or jpeg?

I'm not sure what question you're asking. It sounds like you're asking if you should put the camera on its Raw setting (so it writes raw files, which you then transfer to your computer for later processing) or put the camera on its jpeg setting.

This is still a matter of at least some dispute. I think the majority of serious digital photographers let the camera write raw files, so they can do keep all the additional info that is in the raw files and work with it on their computers. That's what I do. But I know a few good photographers who still pooh-pooh raw files and simply shoot high-res jpegs. Personally, I think you should at least try both and decide for yourself.

If you're letting the camera convert the raw data for you, does your camera HAVE an option to convert to TIFF? I don't think my K10D/K20D cameras do. I think jpeg is the only option.

Or are you asking about something else?

2. If I convert in camera to tiff, is there any special considerations? I realize the file size will be large. I'm asking this because I shot some raw today, and tried downloading with every win, picasa, gimp, hp, etc program on my computer, and I don't feel I have the control I had with the MGI photosuite I got with one of my old sony cameras. I don't see the raw files on the external drive I copy to.

Sorry, I'm still not quite sure what you're thinking about. I'll take a stab at it anyway and forgive me if I blab on about something that doesn't answer what you're trying to ask.

I never both with TIFF. Well, to be honest, I admit that about once a year some local news editor asks me for a TIFF file. (I don't get a lot of photos into the area papers and perhaps this would be a more common request if I did.) Anyway, I work only with raw files, and I output only jpegs. Here's my workflow.

1. In the camera, I shoot raw (PEF)
2. I remove the card from the camera, put it in a reader, mount the reader/card on my desktop, and copy the files to the RAW IMAGES folder on my hard disk. I usually do this "manually", that is, I just open two folders and copy the files from one folder to the other.
3. I launch my preferred image management program, which for a good while has been Adobe Lightroom, and I import the images into the program's database.
4. In Adobe Lightroom, I convert the images from PEF to DNG. (I have also used Adobe DNG Converter to do this, without using Lightroom.)
5. I view the raw files in my image management software, delete the stinkers, flag the good ones, add metadata like keywords, etc.
6. I process my picks, adjusting exposure, contrast, color, etc. as necessary.
7. I export processed images to jpeg files, either high res (if I'm going to print) or medium res (if I'm just going to share online).

I keep the raw files. Yes, they're bigger than jpegs but that's the ONLY disadvantage they have. Raw files contain a lot more data than jpegs and you have more latitude for making changes if you want to.

3. What should I buy, or what freeware should I use? IOW, what do you guys use? I could get photoshop elements, and or the other one premiere elements, (what's the difference???), or anything else except for cs4 due to financial constraints.

You have LOTS of options here. I'll list a few and give you a quick opinion about them.

1. Adobe Photoshop Elements. Excellent program all around, excellent price, lots of power. This is Photoshop's little sibling. While it's not as powerful as full-blown Photoshop, it's got more features than you're likely to use. Both Photoshop and Photoshop Elements are designed (in my opinion) mainly for working on individual images, which means they aren't ideal for photographers who take LOTS of photos, like wedding photographers. One advantage of Photoshop Elements is that it's very reasonably priced. NOTE: You want Photoshop Elements. Premiere Elements is for editing video.
2. Adobe Lightroom. Great program, especially if you do work with lots of images. Doesn't have some of the very powerful features of Photoshop or Photoshop Elements, but has some strengths they lack, especially in the user-interface department. For the last couple of years, I've used Lightroom as my main image management and processing software. More expensive than Photoshop Elements.
3. Apple Aperture. Available only if you use a Mac. Fairly comparable to Adobe Lightroom but of course less widely used. Seems to be a very nice program.
4. ACDSee Pro 3. Similar to Lightroom. A bit less expensive than Lightroom. ACDSee Pro has fewer users - Adobe of course always draws a crowd - but it is used by pros and serious enthusiasts as well as more casual amateurs. Great feature set, pretty easy to use, stable. I just purchased ACDSee Pro 3 after working with the free demo. I'm still using Lightroom but I may start using ACDSee Pro for more of my work. (It's useful to me to have multiple programs, since different programs do different things.)
5. Silkypix. Also recently upgraded and the recent pro studio release is very good. I'm not sure how to describe it. It has fewer file management features than Photoshop Elements, or Lightroom or ACDSee Pro. And its image processing tools, while very strong in some respects, lack a few key tools found in the programs I've mentioned already. In particular, in Silkypix you can't do selective editing. Still it's a very nice program and you might like it. Main drawback: I think its priced a bit high at the moment. If I recall correctly, SilkyPix Pro Studio 3 is more expensive than ACDSee Pro 3, and I am pretty sure that it's fair to say that ACDSee Pro 3 is, overall, a more capable program.
6. Corel PaintShop Pro is similar in its feature set to Photoshop or at least Photoshop Elements but VERY reasonably priced. (There was a sale at Amazon yesterday, I think, where you could get it for $40. I was tempted to buy it and I don't even like it very much.)
7. Bibble Pro 5, which was just released. Bibble's advantage is that it's less expensive, yet has a feature set that, at least on paper, rivals the other programs mentioned. I've had stability problems with Bibble Pro 5 and I'm also not crazy about the user-interface, which I find rather quirky.
8. I will mention Light Crafts LightZone but only just. Development on the program seems to have stalled and I can't recommend it - although once it was highly regarded (several years ago).
9. Google Picasa (if you're on a PC) or Apple iPhoto (on a Mac). Picasa is free, iPhoto is pretty cheap, and both are decent, basic programs that will let you view your photos and make basic adjustments to them. And both are rather good file management programs.
10. The Gimp. Freeware, and apparently VERY powerful. Horrible user interface. If you are willing to work your way past the user interface, however, The Gimp has much of the power of Adobe Photoshop - and it's free.
11. The list above is not exhaustive. I've omitted Capture One (very high end) and Irfanview (very low end) and a number of other programs in between. And don't forget that you got software with your camera. I can't even remember what Pentax calls the software - Photo Lab, I think. Certainly something to try if you would prefer not to spend money.

You should know that just about every program I've mentioned has a fully-functional demo that you can try for FREE for 30 days. So download some demos and give 'em a try. My inclination at the moment is to say that ACDSee Pro 3 will give you the most bang for the buck, but don't take my word for it, try it and the others for yourself and see what you like. It's very clear that there is no one best program for all things. (That is why I own and use Lightroom, Photoshop Elements, Bibble Pro, LightZone, and ACDSee Pro, oh, as well as Picasa and The Gimp.)


The other thing I want to mention here (in case you're not already familiar with this concept) is "nondestructive editing". Several years ago - really, a rather long time ago now, by digital photography standards - if your camera was writing raw files, then, when you move the files to your computer, the first thing you had to do was convert the raw files to jpegs, and then you would edit the jpegs. There were two problems with that practice. First, you LOST access to a lot of the data in the raw files at the moment of conversion. And second, if you weren't careful, as you edited the jpeg and saved your edits, you would degrade the master copy of the jpeg (because jpegs get degraded in quality a little every time they're saved).

Well, around 2006, along comes the idea of non-destructive editing, and it appears at the same time as a couple of programs (Lightroom and Aperture) that are designed to let you edit raw files directly, skipping the preliminary conversion to jpeg. Nondestructive editing programs like Lightroom and Aperture don't write your edits into the image file at all, rather they save your changes as instructions. Every time you view an edited file in Lightroom, Lightroom very quickly loads the raw file and then reapplies all the changes you've made in the past. Those changes get cooked into a file only when you export a jpeg.

Just about all of the programs I mentioned above are non-destructive now, at least in their main features. One consequence of this is that it's as easy to work with raw files as it is to work with jpegs.

4. How does everyone download from their cameras? What have you found is the most efficient way? For example, I used to download automatically by date, but wanted to consolidate a little so I used refiled into months. I still shoot and scan film, and use other digitals at times, so I want to be able to distinguish.

The only system that makes any sense to me - and that I don't feel the urge to change - is to copy image files from the camera to folders that are organized by DATE OF CAPTURE. My raw files are organized by year, sub-organized by month, and within each month, I have one folder for each day on which I took photos.

All the rest of my organizing is done in software. In other words, in Lightroom (or now, in ACDSee Pro) I rank photos, assign keywords, and sometimes I create galleries or albums. The most important organizational thing I do is assign keywords.


Good luck,

Will

[Marc Sabatella]

I somehow missed the organization aspect of the original questions. I *highly* recommend "The DAM Book", by Peter Krogh, for a potentially life-changing look at the topic of organizing digital images.

[barondla]

A question for WMBP about organization and programs. You have organized your photos in Lightroom (with key words etc.). Now you are thinking of using ACDSEE Pro. Wouldn't you have to start your organization all over again with retagging etc? Or will One program work with what you have already tagged in a different program?

I recently got Elements 8 for Christmas. Also bought the official Adobe classroom book. There is so much to learn/remember about organizing it worries me. Biggest fear is doing all this tagging then changing to another program and all the work being lost. Hate the idea of starting over (have over 20K raw images now).

thanks
barondla

Check out POINT & SHOOT CONTEST #26 in compact camera forum. Enter # 27. Any brand camera. Enter now!

[Marc Sabatella]

IPTC is the common denominator to all organizing programs worth using. If you structure your metadata in a way that it can all be embedded as IPTC info within the image files, then moving between applications is easy.

[Snydly]

Will,
First, thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed response.

At times I feel as though I'm taking one step forward, and two steps back... and right beside me is the software du jour... I'm afraid to investigate much further into the forums lest I discover how behind technology I have become. For example, Marc and barondla are discussing 'IPTC' above, and my ego forbids me from blurting like the ignored kid in the neighborhood, "HEY, WHAT'S THAT?", but as my age increases, my humility decreases, so, HEY, WHAT'S THAT?... Just kidding, but really, what is IPTC?

Anyway, I've written some software, and two things I always insisted on were that the program be intuitive, to include being easily resettable, and like the program itself, changes must be necessary, and not just for change's sake. The new programs seem a far sight less user friendly than my old programs, and the features seem less accessible. Of course my older programs are now obsolete because the developers are gone.

I was set to buy Adobe Elements 8, and Premiere Elements because of the video capability of my k7 and my wife's k-x until my neighbor told me essentially the same thing I said above. Adobe 3,4-6 were easy to use, but 7 was a 'nightmare'. He doesn't know about v8, so now I'm back to square one...

I guess I could go the route of getting several programs and weed out what I won't use, but as an engineering professor once told me, "don't reinvent the wheel". I figured I would rely on the expertise of experts like you and Marc and others to avoid the pains of re-discovery. That being said I have Picasa 3 and Gimp, but P3 keeps hanging up and dying on me, and Gimp as you indicated is a bit foreboding. File transfer and management is my biggest frustration at this point, because I can't even get the horse to water, so getting him to drink is not even on the radar... My old programs transferred and categorized effortlessly, and I did exactly as you do, a folder for a day of shooting, all within a month, then a year. I work between an XP desktop, and a Vista Laptop with a portable drive. Now when I connect my camera or insert the SD card a list of 12 different programs pop up asking me which one I want to use, like I'm an expert on all of them. I've tried most, and can't seem to get repeatable results between downloads. I feel ignorant, but don't think I am. Crazy people don't know they're crazy either...

Anyway, let me clarify my original questions, as I'm sure you could answer them if I present them better, and you don't mind...

My limited experience has been with jpeg. My Sony f828 had raw capability, but I never had the nerve to experiment, as the jpegs were sufficient... but now, I want to evolve, so I read here a lot of people use raw for it's flexibility, and I think that's the road I belong on. My k7 allows for recording in PEF or DNG. The Pentax k7 manual seems to nudge you toward DNG if I remember correctly, as it is a 'universal' format. However, your post was the second one I've recently read in which the user/poster said they use PEF. That works for me, as I gotta believe that Pentax would probably provide a better path for processing with their proprietary format, so I switched back to PEF. The camera allows for conversion to TIFF or jpeg, but my quest for knowledge makes me curious as to how conversion was done before this capability emerged. The LCD screen on both our cameras are nice, but a computer monitor is much bigger, so I would rather download the raw file, look at it and decide then how to convert, edit, alter, crop etc. This is how it used to be done, right? Or is this even possible? RAW seems to be a forbidden file to the extent I'm not sure it even showed up in the folder after the transfer. Is a RAW converter necessary, and if so is it in the provided Pentax Program? Is it automatic? Also, File transfer doesn't seem to be a big part of the provided software, but I could be missing that. I don't mind using one program to transfer, and another to edit. I just need to back up my photo's on a dvd so I can take more... That's another issue. I can't seem to write to a disc anymore. Do I use dvd-r, or +r? Do I make a master disc, or the other kind? I've tried both, and have a stack of ruined dvd's...

So, I think I just want to transfer, then do the editing, then the saving. Is Photoshop Elements a good place for me to get a user friendly, enduring file transfer program?

Sorry, I went way too long, and Bob Seger'd (rambling man) this reply, so if you ignore, I won't be offended.

Thanks again

Bill

[goddo31]

Hey Bill, A LOT of questions in your last post, maybe just take a breath
I'll have a go at answering a couple though...

I work between an XP desktop, and a Vista Laptop with a portable drive. Now when I connect my camera or insert the SD card a list of 12 different programs pop up asking me which one I want to use, like I'm an expert on all of them. I've tried most, and can't seem to get repeatable results between downloads. I feel ignorant, but don't think I am. Crazy people don't know they're crazy either...

Here is my advice from my IT support days:
- Copying images (whatever file type) to your PC is easy and should always be straight forward. Just ignore the 'pop up' menu, in fact I'd just close it.
- Open up your Windows explorer (windows button + E), or My Computer.
- You should be able to see your camera or memory card connected to your PC. In Vista for example, this might come up under 'devices with removable storage'
- Double click or open your camera/memory card
- You should see a folder, open this folder and you should see a bunch of files
- The files you see should be named DSCxxxx.JPG or DSCxxxx.PEF etc etc... they are your image files!
- Select all the files with your mouse, or by the key combination Control + A
- Now open another folder, the location where you would like the image files to be located
- Copy your image files to your desired location by pasting them, ie. press Control + V or right click and select 'Paste'

You're done.

Now, a quick note on imaging programs to use. BTW, WMBP's advice is good, and is quite similar to how I do things (really, I am not pro!). It's also really quite straight forward.
Unless I'm mistaken, you should be able to try most of the Adobe imaging software programs on a trial basis for 30 days. In the very least, you can do this with Adobe Lightroom, which is probably the main program you will want to have a look at. 30 days is a fairly long [free] period of time to see if you like using a program. The features are not restricted.

Re: PEF vs DNG, I don't think it will make any real difference at this stage, either should be fine if you want to use RAW.

...how to convert, edit, alter, crop etc. This is how it used to be done, right? Or is this even possible?

Definately possible, see what WMBP said regarding his 'workflow'.

RAW seems to be a forbidden file to the extent I'm not sure it even showed up in the folder after the transfer. Is a RAW converter necessary, and if so is it in the provided Pentax Program? Is it automatic?

RAW should be fine on your PCs. It really should show up in the folder, however the RAW files will be different than .JPG in that by default your Windows will not be able to view them as an image file. Really this is no problem, as you can load them in your imaging software or RAW converter anyway.

Yes RAW converter is necessary to view or print the RAW images in most normal circumstances. Yes it is in the provided Pentax software. I havent used this in a long time - but I think the provided documentation should be able to help you here.

I can't seem to write to a disc anymore. Do I use dvd-r, or +r? Do I make a master disc, or the other kind? I've tried both, and have a stack of ruined dvd's...

Hey, I ruin stacks of DVDs for various reasons too. I'd also recommend that DVDs are not a good way to back up your photos. For simplicity and convenience, I'd recommend a portable drive of some description - you mentioned you have a portable drive on one of your PCs? It should be as easy as copying your images to your computer. Just make a backup or copy of your images onto a suitable external hard drive and things should be OK... I'll see what you come back with before commenting further...

DVD+Rs can store more data than DVD-Rs. Other than that, refer to my above comment.

So, I think I just want to transfer, then do the editing, then the saving.

Yes, it's as simple as that mate. WMBP is describing a process that is basically doing this.

Is Photoshop Elements a good place for me to get a user friendly, enduring file transfer program?

I haven't used Photoshop Elements before, but it's not a file transfer program. See my comment about copying your images to your PC first

Good luck mate, you're taking the plunge and asking many questions. You'll get there.

cheers,

\

[Wheatfield]

I was set to buy Adobe Elements 8, and Premiere Elements because of the video capability of my k7 and my wife's k-x until my neighbor told me essentially the same thing I said above. Adobe 3,4-6 were easy to use, but 7 was a 'nightmare'. He doesn't know about v8, so now I'm back to square one...

Your neighbor doesn't like features. I've been using Photoshop since version 5 and am now on version 11.
I wouldn't call it a nightmare, but there is a lot of capability, most of which I don't use, but I use enough of what's there to want the full version.
The Adobe programs are pretty intuitive, but there is a learning curve. The major problem with the full blown versions of Photoshop is that they can do so many things in so many different ways that there is tremendous feature complication.
However, most of what you'd be doing are pretty much the same thing over and over again, so it isn't so bad.
The alternatives to Adobe are either not as good, or else you can go the shareware route and put up with a hodgepodge of program hell.
Adobe is the benchmark for a reason, but buy a manual (Scott Kelby's books are chock full of good information hidden behind an incredibly annoying writing style).

Your neighbor doesn't like features. I've been using Photoshop since version 5 and am now on version 11.
I wouldn't call it a nightmare, but there is a lot of capability, most of which I don't use, but I use enough of what's there to want the full version.
The Adobe programs are pretty intuitive, but there is a learning curve. The major problem with the full blown versions of Photoshop is that they can do so many things in so many different ways that there is tremendous feature complication.
However, most of what you'd be doing are pretty much the same thing over and over again, so it isn't so bad.
The alternatives to Adobe are either not as good, or else you can go the shareware route and put up with a hodgepodge of program hell.
Adobe is the benchmark for a reason, but buy a manual (Scott Kelby's books are chock full of good information hidden behind an incredibly annoying writing style).

Another thing besides buying books is joining NAPP. There are many tutorials available and Photoshop User magazine is always chock full of ideas. Another good one is Layers magazine. And Bill Scotts writing style ain't all that bad. He's a pretty nice guy and very willing to share his knowledge. As I have always said it's the best way to spend $99/year. And they have seminars on PS all around the US and Photoshop World is coming up soon in Orlando. Than they have another one in the fall usually on the west coast.

[Wheatfield]

Another thing besides buying books is joining NAPP. There are many tutorials available and Photoshop User magazine is always chock full of ideas. Another good one is Layers magazine. And Bill, while Scott's writing style ain't all that good, he's a really nice guy and very willing to share his knowledge for a price. As I have always said it's the best way to spend $99/year. And they have seminars on PS all around the US and Photoshop World is coming up soon in Orlando. Than they have another one in the fall usually on the west coast.

I fixed your post for you.
Now it's accurate.
I haven't joined NAPP yet, though it is on my bucket list.
I keep thinking, though, why should I pay to join NAPP when I can just send a PM to George for free?

BTW, did you see the latest Photoshop Disaster?

[Marc Sabatella]

For example, Marc and barondla are discussing 'IPTC' above, and my ego forbids me from blurting like the ignored kid in the neighborhood, "HEY, WHAT'S THAT?", but as my age increases, my humility decreases, so, HEY, WHAT'S THAT?... Just kidding, but really, what is IPTC?

A set of fields within an image file where you can store information like captions, keywords, etc. The book I recommended earlier - "The DAM Book" - is an *amazing* resource for information on organizing, but there is a fair amount of information around on the net too. I wouldn't just Google the term IPTC (although (that would be a good start to get more info on that particular piece of the puzzle). The term DAM - digital asset management - is semi-standard in the industry but kind of quirky, and of course a search on that will tend to turn up lots of other stuff. But Googling for "dam images iptc" would turn up lots of relevant info (including web sites for various applications designed to help with the process).

I was set to buy Adobe Elements 8, and Premiere Elements because of the video capability of my k7 and my wife's k-x until my neighbor told me essentially the same thing I said above. Adobe 3,4-6 were easy to use, but 7 was a 'nightmare'. He doesn't know about v8, so now I'm back to square one...

Ease of use is a relative thing, as you know. But Picasa has a good enough reputation for both ease of use and features that I'd continue playing with that until you start running into limitations that you can put into words clearly enough to know what you might be looking for to replace it with.

The camera allows for conversion to TIFF or jpeg, but my quest for knowledge makes me curious as to how conversion was done before this capability emerged.

Same way it's still done - using software on your computer. There is virtually no point in shooting raw then converting it to jpg on your camera - you gain *nothing* from this. The additional flexibility that gives raw its potential advantage comes from what you can do with it in terms of adjsuting exposure or color *before* converting.

Some use the Pentax software and like the results just fine, but most find it rather primitive in its UI and instead use third party programs like Picasa or Elements (I use ACDSee Pro). Windows might not understand raw without a bunch of handholding, but there other programs do understand it just fine.

So, I think I just want to transfer, then do the editing, then the saving. Is Photoshop Elements a good place for me to get a user friendly, enduring file transfer program?

Both Elements and Picasa are fine all-in-one (downloading, cataloging, editing) programs, although I would read up on DAM and IPTC to be sure you're doing things in a way that will allow you to transfer your work elsewhere if necessary.

[SpecialK]

Here's what I do. Maybe some hints of software will help someone.

1. I use Free Commander file manager to just copy my PEFs into my hard drive directory. (I used Servant Salamander for years, but it was getting a little out of date, 15 years later :-).

2. View PEFs with Pentax Photo Browser (works for jpgs or PEFs). Delete the major duds. Select all, and "extract a jpg" (this is very fast).

3. Open ancient and discontinued Firehand Ember to actually "ooh and ah" over the images. Delete more duds and near-dupes. (Note that Pentax Photo Browser is pretty slow and clunky as a browser). Ember is the best viewer, though only fair editor, I have ever found (and I've looked) as you can have multiple folder windows of thumbnails.

4. Delete all jpgs (they were only for rough selection purposes).

5. Use free Flexible Renamer to rename the PEFs from IMGP to YYMMDD format. (How come I never found this excellent program until a month or two ago?)

6. Go back to Pentax Photo Browser. Add short description (like "Church" to the end of the file name. Chang a few -xxx sequence numbers if needed to make the images flow along.

7. Edit PEFs with Elements v6. (Note I had to download the latest Adobe ACR plug-in to recognize the K20D at the time). This is so much better than Pentax Photo Lab that I used for 18 months, because...

a. Easier to level the horizon (problem with both Pentax viewfinders..)
b. Selectively lighten or darken parts of image (dodge and burn)
c. Spot-healer brush for dust spotting (the major thing missing from Photo Lab) or fixing other blemishes.
d. It doesn't freeze up...

I never use tags, so all those features, and the Organizer section of Elements are unused.

8. Select all PEFs in Photo Browser and "save data list" which gets added to my master exif data file.

9. Store converted JPGs on computer hard drive in folder by date with short general description, like "091215 Zoo").

10. Save PEFs to external hard disc, and eventually onto 2 sets of DVDs.

11. Resize the better images and put on Photobucket. They eventually get moved from the main album into galleries.

I fixed your post for you.
Now it's accurate.
I haven't joined NAPP yet, though it is on my bucket list.
I keep thinking, though, why should I pay to join NAPP when I can just send a PM to George for free?

BTW, did you see the latest Photoshop Disaster?

Because I charge $150 per question. That reminds me Rupert still owes me that money.