[Mike.P®]

I also was getting new cameras and lenses more frequently then, whereas now, my next camera will likely be the K-1 III which won't come out till next year.

WOW, I missed that news .... where is that info from?

[Rondec]

WOW, I missed that news .... where is that info from?

There's no news. I'm just reading tea leaves in my spare time.

(I think it makes sense that the K-3 III improvements make their way into a full frame camera, but as far as timing, I have no real idea.)

[RobA_Oz]

Get into Photoshop. Don't let yourself get diverted into purported alternatives.

The alternatives may not be the same as Photoshop, but they definitely aren’t “purported”. I’ve looked at a few, and even bought some of them. The best, in my opinion and for the sort of processing I need, is ON1, although I’m disappointed to see that they’re going down a parallel to the Adobe route and charging pretty much the same for a yearly upgrade as Adobe charges for their annual fee.

The Adobe quasi-monopoly on photo-processing (at least as a user mind-set) reminds me of Microsoft’s similar position on Word. To be sure, there’s no rival for Word’s comprehensive feature set, but I’ve yet to find anyone who uses more than about 40% of it, and most use about 10%.

On the other hand, I tend to use CS5 for most of my work, along with Topaz filters (including the free Studio) to enhance it. Even CS6 didn’t attract me enough to buy it as a stand-alone package, and CSInfinity (I jest) certainly doesn’t. When I need a couple of better tools that I don’t have in the CS5/Topaz combo, I switch to ON1.

[janosh]

Talking about photoshop softwares is there anyone who have used a free software called Rawtherapy . If so please tell us who cannot spend much money , I mean the photo stuff are expensive enough
k30man

Photoshop is crucial "photo stuff" if you're even semi-serious. I never seriously studied it but I've found it's intuitive.

---------- Post added 04-09-22 at 04:02 PM ----------



---------- Post added 04-09-22 at 04:04 PM ----------

to make myself clear, for me the real photograph is the photograph I personally print (inkjet). I don't rely on laboratories or pharmacies because I take photography seriously...when Kodak started its death march (obviosly a couple of decades ago when they announced they would pull the plug on Kodachrome), I switched to scanning and inkjet.

My prints from back then look great and of course my earliest files (scans or digi) are more archival than any alternative. And my photography has consistently improved (experience, intentions etc).

---

Last edited by janosh; 04-09-2022 at 05:44 PM. Reason: Redundant