Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: Cornfield on April 27, 2019, 12:20:39 pm
-
I would like to hear comments from anyone who has subscribed to Guy Gowan's processing site recently. He is mentioned in a few old posts on here but an update of his current processing/workflow from a current member would be appreciated.
After spending a few hours to watch three of his free videos I think his approach could be very useful if it's as good as he implies.
Replying to emails from potential members is not one of his priorities.
Thanks
-
I never heard of the guy (Guy?), but I would be rather reluctant to let someone else's prescription on how to process my photos. My photos, my processing. Me-too movement never amounted to anything good.
-
In general I would agree with you. But I think he really has something better than ACR and probably any other raw converter.
-
In general I would agree with you. But I think he really has something better than ACR and probably any other raw converter.
What kind of a hook is this?
I prowled around his website, found a lot of either out of date or inoperative videos. The ones that would play seem to consist mostly of him talking without much meat. The one video that purported to give an overview of his technique was dead, i.e. "late to the webinar" or something like that. Apparently one has to pony up the subscription fee to find out anything of substance.
I am suspicious of your intentions in starting this thread.
Richard Southworth
-
I am suspicious of your intentions in starting this thread.
That is an unpleasant comment with no apparent justification.
Jeremy
-
I wouldn't call it unpleasant, perhaps unjustified. When somebody asks for a reference, and then without receiving such posts a positive statement such as the one I quoted, I wonder about the intent.
Richard Southworth
-
A few years ago I subscribed to his site for a year. As I recall, he offered weekly live presentations where he would also answer questions and comments from members. He was very dismissive of the whole slider based file manipulation system on which LR is based. He had/has various workflow downloads that, after you got used to them, yielded excellent images. He was always modifying and upgrading those workflow versions and one could download them for free. But I wouldn't say they produced results that were any better than LR or C1.
Merrill
-
A few years ago I subscribed to his site for a year. As I recall, he offered weekly live presentations where he would also answer questions and comments from members. He was very dismissive of the whole slider based file manipulation system on which LR is based. He had/has various workflow downloads that, after you got used to them, yielded excellent images. He was always modifying and upgrading those workflow versions and one could download them for free. But I wouldn't say they produced results that were any better than LR or C1.
Lots of people have different workflows. Not so many try to sell them to others. By the way, you don't have to use the sliders in LR. You can input discrete numbers instead. That tip is free of charge.
-
Merrill, many thanks for your civil and constructive reply. Just the sort of feedback from first-hand experience I'm looking for.
Some of the examples GG shows are impressive and quite compelling. His demeanor and negative comments about all other raw converters raised alarms with me which led to this thread.
-
Some of the examples GG shows are impressive and quite compelling. His demeanor and negative comments about all other raw converters raised alarms with me which led to this thread.
Hi,
What I remember from when I saw his free video tutorials a long time ago:
1. He has a background/bias in (Pre-)Press oriented workflow
2. He used a condescending tone towards how Lightroom's default rendering is.
3. He did have a point about Lightroom's excessive highlight compression, in order to 'recover' highlights (even when there are none to be recovered)
I forgot his method to remedy it, but it could be achieved with a simple -100 (or so) highlight slider control adjustment, instead of what he did.
I don't know if his later videos still have the same tone and advocate the same method, but there are more than one ways to skin a cat. I do think it is important to have control over highlight rendering, perhaps because I'm from the Film era where it was quite difficult to achieve without a lot of (literally) manipulation of the processing and development process.
But modern software offers just that, lots of control. In that respect, I really love the Luminosity masking capability on adjustment layers that Capture One now offers together with a linear tone-curve rendering.
Cheers,
Bart
-
...comments about all other raw converters...
Hello,
There have been a few references to the subject of this thread's choice of raw conversion, but the actual raw conversion application has not been identified.
Has Mr. Gowan developed his own raw converter, or is there some publicly available product, other than those mentioned as having been dismissed, that is used in his demonstrations?
Thank you.
-
I wouldn't call it unpleasant, perhaps unjustified. When somebody asks for a reference, and then without receiving such posts a positive statement such as the one I quoted, I wonder about the intent.
Impugning the motives of a forum member, in a way which clearly implies he has acted with some ulterior motive, is unacceptable and without doubt unpleasant. It is not, I would hope, something you would have done to his face. You ought to apologise.
Jeremy
-
There have been a few references to the subject of this thread's choice of raw conversion, but the actual raw conversion application has not been identified.
From the details on his web site, it's all about Photoshop, so using ACR for conversions.
I think I'd be wary of punting up £100 for someone who doesn't even have a portfolio of his images on his site.
The world's hardly short of Photoshop 'experts' or tutorials.
-
Cornfield,
I apologize, I was out of line.
Richard Southworth
-
Thanks.
-
His approach is that you can't just slide sliders, you should understand colour theory and how digital imaging works if you want to shoot and process your images with skill towards desired outcomes. Nothing wrong with that. He builds PS actions and workflows that are built upon that approach.
He's quite a character. I attended one workshop he gave and it was, eh, bracing. I had no desire to purchase or subscribe but from what I saw he knows his stuff and the approach/actions which are built upon the user understanding what they are doing, do what they're supposed to. He did work, whether internally or as a consultant I am unsure, for Apple and while he spoke very highly of Aperture, he's probably not a fan of LR. My understanding is that he would use ACR for conversion.
-
From the details on his web site, it's all about Photoshop, so using ACR for conversions...
...I think he really has something better than ACR and probably any other raw converter.
Hi,
I am not trying to seem contentious, but I am confused.
Seeking further clarification...
Thank you!
-
He did work, whether internally or as a consultant I am unsure, for Apple and while he spoke very highly of Aperture, he's probably not a fan of LR. My understanding is that he would use ACR for conversion.
He presented Aperture for Apple at its London launch back in late 2005. He had a stock answer to questions about things it couldn't do - "don't buy it for what it is now, but for what it will be at 3.0"....
-
He presented Aperture for Apple at its London launch back in late 2005. He had a stock answer to questions about things it couldn't do - "don't buy it for what it is now, but for what it will be at 3.0"....
Adobe, in my view, was suddenly awake after Aperture got introduced and responded with a -then- free version of Lightroom, doing basically the same.
It is sad that Apple cannot be trusted by the Pro.... at some point they let it be and finally stopped.
That time i liked the raw conversion of Nikon's NX better than both those programs.. Now Lightroom has become a lot better, also since they introduced the enhanced DNG function that does a better job with fine detail and moiré...
-
responded with a -then- free version of Lightroom, doing basically the same.
I don't think Lightroom was ever free. The closest to that was the public beta before release.
-
I don't think Lightroom was ever free. The closest to that was the public beta before release.
That's correct. From early in Jan 2006 to about November.
-
Dismissing LR and then using ACR for raw conversions does not make too much sense to me. The conversion engine is the same.
-
I followed Gowan a long time ago for a while. These days I don't think he has much to offer. For me I think I'm much better off with Lr CC Classic, etc and PS and spending time and $ with Aaron Nace on PHLEARN honing PS skills.
-
These days I don't think he has much to offer.
rdonson, you have summed up the conclusion I have arrived at that.
Also poor when someone offering a service does not reply to an email question about membership.
-
(Late to this topic I know but here goes..)
I subscribed to his workflows for a year. You get access to his processing tools which are elaborate actions he has created from his huge knowledge of PS and pre press workflow. Essentially he uses Camera Raw or now C1 I think, to process a raw file with pretty much no adjustments made to it. You then run his action in PS to "process" the file. The results are very good; he does know what he's doing BUT with a decent understanding of LR or C1 I think you can achieve the same results. (He does have a good ability to extract detail in shadows, and seems to have a focus on wedding photographers struggling in bad / harsh light to control contrast).
His sharpening workflow is very good, but again if you understand the controls in LR I think you can achieve as good results in most cases. I found his sharpening was better than I could get in LR when sharpening very high res images from a camera I had used hi-rez (sensor shift) to create the image.
The down side to his whole approach is that he insists on mocking and deriding everything he dislikes. His tutorials are rambling, labored and bloated with his sneering and disgust at Adobe (and others) for how bad they are, how poor the processing or sharpening is, etc. In a way it's sad and a bit painful to watch; he's unable to simply say "This is my process..." he has to always put down the other ways of processing to justify his method! Also, as time has rolled along digital cameras have improved so much and digital processing has improved so much (LR & C1) that much of what he advocates is just overkill and out dated in my opinion.
Also based on my experience his whole operation seems a bit disorganized in terms of getting his webcasts up and running on time, and accessing tutorials on his website etc.
Alan.
-
Has any one ever found a tutorial that teaches how to make your own action that replicates Mr. Gowan's shadow action?
I'd like to learn a little more about what appears to be a complicated layering and masking approach, but I don't want to spend $145 to do so.
Despite Mr. Gowan's repeated suggestion that you should learn to know what you are doing rather than just using store bought solutions, the only concept that seems to be illustrated in the preview videos is that you can press play on one of his Photoshop Actions and find something to talk about while you wait for the list of commands to run its course.
It seems like someone somewhere would be sharing information about the details of, and reasoning behind, a similar list of commands.
Thank you.
-
I have seen some good results from shadow lifting actions in PS, but nothing I didn’t think could be accomplished with the highlight, shadow, white and black sliders in the HDR panel in Capture One combined with the exposure slider. This basic feature set is quite well developed in Capture One (more so with the addition of white and black in version 20).
This is before taking advantage of Capture One’s layers with luminosity masking features or luma curves.
-
I have seen some good results from shadow lifting actions in PS, but nothing I didn’t think could be accomplished with the highlight, shadow, white and black sliders in the HDR panel in Capture One combined with the exposure slider. This basic feature set is quite well developed in Capture One (more so with the addition of white and black in version 20).
This is before taking advantage of Capture One’s layers with luminosity masking features or luma curves.
I second your opinion with the exception of the tool references.
Guy Gowan technique to me equals equalizing tones and exposure for the sake of producing lifeless and expressionless yet clinic shots. Aside, I've always been skeptical about people trying to over-complicate simple tasks by adding their own "flavors" behind hidden action buttons and then selling it for the Holy Grail of...