<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Using Linux for Photography, where we stand</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/</link>
	<description>Helpful stuff - I hope</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:07:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-2222</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:48:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-2222</guid>
		<description>For scanning I use VueScan by hamrick. Mac, Windoze, linux... it&#039;s the same everywhere and well worth the one-time-for-lifetime non-freeness.

Otherwise, I agree with the needs presented in the post, but note that one person&#039;s workflow is not another&#039;s. On the Mac I choose to keep original raw files, work on 16-bit PSD and save final JPEG in archive, flickr (1600x1200) and website-sized (800x600) files; more to the point, I have 160Gb of stuff, all of which lives on a backed-up RAID volume with my own directory-structure, and only the most recent work-in-progress lives on either the mac or linux boxes. And I like it this way; nothing that relies on a central library (like iPhoto/iTunes) is ever going to do it for me.
On linux, where an increasing amount of my photo-processing happens, I can *just* cope with gimp as long as I do something to smooth the histogram (wide-radius USM, orton, whatever) at the end but I would rather be using 16-bit TIFFs there. The workflow is mostly shell-scripted; I have functions for doing bulk RAW conversion with dcraw, for invoking gimp across files in turn, for renaming them, for restoring EXIF info, for geotagging, and for outputting in the various required sizes.

Much as we need visual tools for editing, and like them for image-selection, we need something that has a &quot;push to archive&quot; function so it only shows the stuff actually being edited.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For scanning I use VueScan by hamrick. Mac, Windoze, linux&#8230; it&#8217;s the same everywhere and well worth the one-time-for-lifetime non-freeness.</p>
<p>Otherwise, I agree with the needs presented in the post, but note that one person&#8217;s workflow is not another&#8217;s. On the Mac I choose to keep original raw files, work on 16-bit PSD and save final JPEG in archive, flickr (1600&#215;1200) and website-sized (800&#215;600) files; more to the point, I have 160Gb of stuff, all of which lives on a backed-up RAID volume with my own directory-structure, and only the most recent work-in-progress lives on either the mac or linux boxes. And I like it this way; nothing that relies on a central library (like iPhoto/iTunes) is ever going to do it for me.<br />
On linux, where an increasing amount of my photo-processing happens, I can *just* cope with gimp as long as I do something to smooth the histogram (wide-radius USM, orton, whatever) at the end but I would rather be using 16-bit TIFFs there. The workflow is mostly shell-scripted; I have functions for doing bulk RAW conversion with dcraw, for invoking gimp across files in turn, for renaming them, for restoring EXIF info, for geotagging, and for outputting in the various required sizes.</p>
<p>Much as we need visual tools for editing, and like them for image-selection, we need something that has a &#8220;push to archive&#8221; function so it only shows the stuff actually being edited.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob K.</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-2143</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob K.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 20:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-2143</guid>
		<description>So in other words professional photographers should forget about Linux completely. And just be content with MacOSX or Windows, since there won&#039;t be any high end photo editing apps natively on Linux in the near or distant future!. Great!!.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So in other words professional photographers should forget about Linux completely. And just be content with MacOSX or Windows, since there won&#8217;t be any high end photo editing apps natively on Linux in the near or distant future!. Great!!.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-2084</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:25:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-2084</guid>
		<description>Thanks Peter - I thought you COULD using levels, set to value I believe, and use the middle slider.  FastStone alters Gamma.  Well.  FastStone has trouble running in Wine, at least for me.

Hope that&#039;s clearer and thanks for the input / p;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Peter &#8211; I thought you COULD using levels, set to value I believe, and use the middle slider.  FastStone alters Gamma.  Well.  FastStone has trouble running in Wine, at least for me.</p>
<p>Hope that&#8217;s clearer and thanks for the input / p;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterM</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-2083</link>
		<dc:creator>PeterM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-2083</guid>
		<description>&quot;
Paul Says:

Namely gamma control, for which I was using FastStone and which doesn’t run well in Wine. &quot;

Not sure what you mean here, GIMP does not allow for for altering the gamma in the image itself the way MTPaint does for example. (The screen layer is what I use to brighten portions of an image) The gamma of the main GIMP display window can be adjusted by means of the gamma option under the display filters.  xgamma also can adjust gamma on a display as GAPA does which runs well in WINE according to my experience.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8221;<br />
Paul Says:</p>
<p>Namely gamma control, for which I was using FastStone and which doesn’t run well in Wine. &#8221;</p>
<p>Not sure what you mean here, GIMP does not allow for for altering the gamma in the image itself the way MTPaint does for example. (The screen layer is what I use to brighten portions of an image) The gamma of the main GIMP display window can be adjusted by means of the gamma option under the display filters.  xgamma also can adjust gamma on a display as GAPA does which runs well in WINE according to my experience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-2080</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 03:23:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-2080</guid>
		<description>I want to thank you SINCERELY for this - I have been grappling with switching over from Vista (which actually runs well if it&#039;s tweaked) to Ubuntu/Xubuntu, and my ONE major drawback is I&#039;m a photographer and need something other than my default GIMP (which I use in Windows) to edit photos.  Namely gamma control, for which I was using FastStone and which doesn&#039;t run well in Wine.  I will be a regular visitor here and thanks so much for addressing photography wholly handled by Linux.

Considering 64bit Linux runs more efficiently than a 64bit machine running its default install of 32bit Vista (!?!?!) - I know I&#039;m making the right move (with tile cache boosted, GIMP runs terrific in Linux, for which it ws designed, obviously) . . . and look forward to any and all comments you make here.

I despise Fstop and need a thumbnail viewer that resembles &quot;FastStone&quot; in its ability to dimension crop, enhance, saturate and fix gamma contrast quickly - but if I have to I&#039;ll use GIMP for all of it.  I routinely use GreyCStoration and Unsharp Mask 2012 to finish up images, so it may just be a &quot;GIMP for all&quot; workflow change and I&#039;ll get used to it.

  Cheers and best regards to you! / Paul</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I want to thank you SINCERELY for this &#8211; I have been grappling with switching over from Vista (which actually runs well if it&#8217;s tweaked) to Ubuntu/Xubuntu, and my ONE major drawback is I&#8217;m a photographer and need something other than my default GIMP (which I use in Windows) to edit photos.  Namely gamma control, for which I was using FastStone and which doesn&#8217;t run well in Wine.  I will be a regular visitor here and thanks so much for addressing photography wholly handled by Linux.</p>
<p>Considering 64bit Linux runs more efficiently than a 64bit machine running its default install of 32bit Vista (!?!?!) &#8211; I know I&#8217;m making the right move (with tile cache boosted, GIMP runs terrific in Linux, for which it ws designed, obviously) . . . and look forward to any and all comments you make here.</p>
<p>I despise Fstop and need a thumbnail viewer that resembles &#8220;FastStone&#8221; in its ability to dimension crop, enhance, saturate and fix gamma contrast quickly &#8211; but if I have to I&#8217;ll use GIMP for all of it.  I routinely use GreyCStoration and Unsharp Mask 2012 to finish up images, so it may just be a &#8220;GIMP for all&#8221; workflow change and I&#8217;ll get used to it.</p>
<p>  Cheers and best regards to you! / Paul</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Lui</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-1963</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Lui</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 07:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-1963</guid>
		<description>One feature that I&#039;ve found very useful in F-Spot, that I haven&#039;t seen any other program implement, is the auto-versioning of images.

Simply put, whenever you edit an image F-Spot copies the image first, and lets you work on a copy. That way, you don&#039;t touch the original.

My wife likes to crop, and do simple edits to the images, having F-Spot automatically keep the originals is great.

I don&#039;t use F-Spot now because it starts slowing down when your collection gets very big.

I especially don&#039;t like the way that F-Spot changes the EXIF timestamp. It&#039;s trying to account for timezone differences, but it&#039;s doing it the wrong way, without informing the user, and without the option to disable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One feature that I&#8217;ve found very useful in F-Spot, that I haven&#8217;t seen any other program implement, is the auto-versioning of images.</p>
<p>Simply put, whenever you edit an image F-Spot copies the image first, and lets you work on a copy. That way, you don&#8217;t touch the original.</p>
<p>My wife likes to crop, and do simple edits to the images, having F-Spot automatically keep the originals is great.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t use F-Spot now because it starts slowing down when your collection gets very big.</p>
<p>I especially don&#8217;t like the way that F-Spot changes the EXIF timestamp. It&#8217;s trying to account for timezone differences, but it&#8217;s doing it the wrong way, without informing the user, and without the option to disable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janne</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-1848</link>
		<dc:creator>Janne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:22:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-1848</guid>
		<description>I just noticed that Eye of Gnome and F-spot does support color management (Monitor profiling). You need xicc to set your monitor profile globally. Eye of Gnome will detect it automatically and use it. In F-spot you need to enable it in settings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just noticed that Eye of Gnome and F-spot does support color management (Monitor profiling). You need xicc to set your monitor profile globally. Eye of Gnome will detect it automatically and use it. In F-spot you need to enable it in settings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janne</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-1847</link>
		<dc:creator>Janne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:04:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-1847</guid>
		<description>I have tried using digikam and its color management (monitor profile) but I think something is wrong. Has anyone else noticed this?

I compared Gimp, Firefox, Geeqie and digikam. The first three shows images identically, but digikam view has a blue shift.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have tried using digikam and its color management (monitor profile) but I think something is wrong. Has anyone else noticed this?</p>
<p>I compared Gimp, Firefox, Geeqie and digikam. The first three shows images identically, but digikam view has a blue shift.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amir</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-1779</link>
		<dc:creator>Amir</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:40:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-1779</guid>
		<description>RAW developing in F-Spot: did you know about the two extensions, DevelopInUFRaw and RawPlusJpeg?

I am giving F-Spot a shot after a while, and apparently it now manages RAW files like regular photos in its database. Luckily, I looked at the extensions list before importing anything, so I did not immediately freak out. :-)

If you, like me, shoot only RAW, then no problem, DevelopInUFRaw allows you to do what the name suggests, and then the JPEG is associated with the RAW file as a version of the same photo. Batch operation is also supported and looks very promising, but I still need to figure out exactly how it works.

Additionally, if you, like I did on my trip abroad for sending pictures quickly, shoot both RAW and JPEG, then you need to run the function of RawPlusJpeg once after every such import roll, so to make the JPEGs versions of the RAWs.

Thanks for keeping the blog up!
Amir</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RAW developing in F-Spot: did you know about the two extensions, DevelopInUFRaw and RawPlusJpeg?</p>
<p>I am giving F-Spot a shot after a while, and apparently it now manages RAW files like regular photos in its database. Luckily, I looked at the extensions list before importing anything, so I did not immediately freak out. <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>If you, like me, shoot only RAW, then no problem, DevelopInUFRaw allows you to do what the name suggests, and then the JPEG is associated with the RAW file as a version of the same photo. Batch operation is also supported and looks very promising, but I still need to figure out exactly how it works.</p>
<p>Additionally, if you, like I did on my trip abroad for sending pictures quickly, shoot both RAW and JPEG, then you need to run the function of RawPlusJpeg once after every such import roll, so to make the JPEGs versions of the RAWs.</p>
<p>Thanks for keeping the blog up!<br />
Amir</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul</title>
		<link>http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/using-linux-for-photography-where-we-stand/#comment-1759</link>
		<dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:56:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/?p=111#comment-1759</guid>
		<description>Just a hint which might be useful: You can use f-spot without copying/moving all the photos to its own directory. You can import them leaving them where they are. It uses its own db (which is is a must for enable fast searching in filenames and tags).

Another hint: For RAW converting, if you mention Lightzone, there is Bibble, too. Quite Powerful, with a few managing features in the pro version, batch queues (which can be filled by digikam or f-spot plugins), etc, too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a hint which might be useful: You can use f-spot without copying/moving all the photos to its own directory. You can import them leaving them where they are. It uses its own db (which is is a must for enable fast searching in filenames and tags).</p>
<p>Another hint: For RAW converting, if you mention Lightzone, there is Bibble, too. Quite Powerful, with a few managing features in the pro version, batch queues (which can be filled by digikam or f-spot plugins), etc, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
