Ricoh GX100 users...a problem

[mrleonard]

My father shoots with the GX100 on a MAC with 10.4 os. Im not a MAC person, and my father is not technically savvy with computers too much.
He seems to have a problem opening his RAWS in PS CS2. He can open them in Lightroom but not PS.
Is there a way to fix this? I would prefer he doesn't have to upgrade to CS3 or anything overly complicated.
Also...he is having trouble with the dioptics (wears glasses) on the EVF viewer..he says it is fuzzy no matter the adjustment. Is this inherent  to the EVF or
thx

[Robert Roaldi]

This may not be an answer but just wanted to say that I need reading glasses but can use the EVF on the Sony R1 without them by setting the adjustment on the camera wit my naked eye. The adjustment on it and on my wife's Canon G3 is broad enough to cover my eye's deficiencies.  If your father is trying to use the EVF with his glasses on, then it may be that the operating range of the camera's diopter adjustment is incompatible with the strength of his glasses. Has he tried setting the camera for use without glasses?

In fact, because of my need for reading glasses I find rear LCDs next to useless. I have a p&s that only has a rear LCD and when I am without my glasses, using it is like shooting with film because I don't really know what I shot until processing the shots later on the computer. Sort of an odd throwback, workflow-wise.

[Richowens]

The GX100 is not supported in ACR 3.7, which is the latest version available for CS2. The later version ACR (4.X) will not run with CS2 but he can download the latest DNG converter, convert the files to DNG and then open them with ACR 3.7 or Lightroom.

 HTH

 Rich

[BernardLanguillier]

The GX100 is not supported in ACR 3.7, which is the latest version available for CS2. The later version ACR (4.X) will not run with CS2 but he can download the latest DNG converter, convert the files to DNG and then open them with ACR 3.7 or Lightroom.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204055\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Except that the format used by the GX100 is DNG itself...

Cheers,
Bernard

[DaveLon]

I need reading glasses (2.75 d) and have no problem with the EVF.

Dave S

[mrleonard]

Except that the format used by the GX100 is DNG itself...

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204164\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So are we saying that basically GX100 users have to upgrade to CS3? Can the DNG convertor convert from the GX100's DNG?
Another reason to overlook this little camera...lol. I used it very little , as I didn't like the interface,  and the build quality isnt that great. I'll stick with my LX2.

Any other workarounds or ideas? Or I guess my dad wil be making the jump to CS3...sigh

[picnic]

So are we saying that basically GX100 users have to upgrade to CS3? Can the DNG convertor convert from the GX100's DNG?
Another reason to overlook this little camera...lol. I used it very little , as I didn't like the interface,  and the build quality isnt that great. I'll stick with my LX2.

Any other workarounds or ideas? Or I guess my dad wil be making the jump to CS3...sigh
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not sure I understand this.  If I read correctly, your father has Lightroom and can open the files and work with them there.  And--he has CS2.  Why doesn't he just process his RAWs in Lightroom (same RAW engine as PSCS3), then either open them FROM LR into PSCS2 (he can do this--it will open as a tiff and make a duplicate file in LR which can be 'stacked' with the original) where he can process further in PS if he wishes--or export the files from Lightroom.  He really does not need to upgrade to CS3 if he has Lightroom.  If he explores using Lightroom further I think he will find that unless he uses PS a lot and has need of the newer things offered in CS3, he is just fine.

Diane

[BernardLanguillier]

Another reason to overlook this little camera...lol. I used it very little , as I didn't like the interface,  and the build quality isnt that great. I'll stick with my LX2.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That would be a pity, you can do these kind of things with a GX100...





Cheers,
Bernard

[mrleonard]

That would be a pity, you can do these kind of things with a GX100...





Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204258\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nothing I cant do with my LX2 frankly....

As far as opening in Lightroom and THEN CS2....of course he CAN. But is a bit of a hassle when he just wants to work in PS. Of course I can easily upgrade him to CS3...but at his age, I don't really want to bother him with another 'learning curve', especially as CS3 has a different 'look' to it.
Anyway...thx for your suggestions!

[BernardLanguillier]

Nothing I cant do with my LX2 frankly....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204262\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Great then, just throw away the GX-100 if you are confident that it doesn't bring any value to your photography.

As far as I am concerned I am still convinced that it helps mine more than any other compact would.

There are tons of raw converters than can handle the DNG files of the GX100. Just talking about those installed on my Mac I can use LR1.4, Raw Developper 1.72, Capture one 4.1. Each of those with different strenghs and weaknesses:

- LR is best overall detail/noise ratio for GX-100 files, I used it for the first image,
- Raw Developper is best detail and least amount of artifacts (like fringing), I used it for the second image since it is strongly backlight and exhibited quite a bit of fringing in LR.

I do believe that images shot with high end compacts deserve as much care as those shot with DSLR, if not more as far as raw conversion goes. But I guess that it depends how you consider images shot with these.

One more image for the road:



Cheers,
Bernard

[picnic]

Nothing I cant do with my LX2 frankly....

As far as opening in Lightroom and THEN CS2....of course he CAN. But is a bit of a hassle when he just wants to work in PS. Of course I can easily upgrade him to CS3...but at his age, I don't really want to bother him with another 'learning curve', especially as CS3 has a different 'look' to it.
Anyway...thx for your suggestions!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204262\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I guess I don't understand that---that's how many of us work daily.   If he's using Lightroom, the interface is actually easier--what does he want to do in PS??  The idea of LR is to work as completely as possible from editing to printing without having to enter PS except for extra processing or using plugins or actions (though I do).    

BTW--how old IS he?  If he's in his 80's or 90's, I can understand-- otherwise, if he understands LR AND PSCS2 (and he's obviously bought LR, so its a bit difficult for me to understand why he wouldn't use it to its fullest) then doing the round trip to PS is a piece of cake--and if he spends just a bit of time learning how to use the develop module he may never want/need to go into PS.  

Diane

[mrleonard]

I guess I don't understand that---that's how many of us work daily.   If he's using Lightroom, the interface is actually easier--what does he want to do in PS??  The idea of LR is to work as completely as possible from editing to printing without having to enter PS except for extra processing or using plugins or actions (though I do).   

BTW--how old IS he?  If he's in his 80's or 90's, I can understand-- otherwise, if he understands LR AND PSCS2 (and he's obviously bought LR, so its a bit difficult for me to understand why he wouldn't use it to its fullest) then doing the round trip to PS is a piece of cake--and if he spends just a bit of time learning how to use the develop module he may never want/need to go into PS.   

Diane
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204310\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I DID throw away my gx100...I gave it to my dad...

I've got my answer...I have to upgrade him to CS3 (garrrr). He is happy with CS2...but now he'll have to waste time to get his head around CS3...move all the plugins..etc etc...yawn..that goes with an upgrade.

He DOES use plugins, actions and local adjustments a lot..so YES..lightroom is not adequate for a lot of hiw work. I wish ADOBE would make their ACR at least a BIT backwards compatible.

He likes to spend his time,mental energy on creative things..rather than technical software issues.

[picnic]

I
He DOES use plugins, actions and local adjustments a lot..so YES..lightroom is not adequate for a lot of hiw work. I wish ADOBE would make their ACR at least a BIT backwards compatible.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204340\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's exacty why I don't understand him not doing a round trip from LR to PSCS2 which he owns and understands.  It simply takes a right click over an image (BTW, already processed in RAW) and one other click and he's into PS--it opens automatically.  So simple--nothing to learn, nothing to do, nothing to upgrade to, etc.  I don't know how much simpler it could be--plus  WAY less expensive.  The only other thing needed is to choose PSCS2 as your external editor in preferences.  

Adobe has never ever added a new camera to an old version.  

Diane

[BernardLanguillier]

I DID throw away my gx100...I gave it to my dad...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204340\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Would you happen to have any sample of work done with your preferred camera?I am genuinely interested.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Bernard

[mrleonard]

Would you happen to have any sample of work done with your preferred camera?I am genuinely interested.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204380\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My preferred camera? My 5d?
lol...
I prefer the LX2 for a number of reasons. Mostly better build quality than the GX100.I feel confident to put the LX2 through it's paces and have in my pocket without a case. The GX100 looks like it will break easily.Mostly though because I shot with the LX1 before it...easy jump.I hate Ricoh's interface...menu system.
Heres a few samples...

[BernardLanguillier]

Heres a few samples...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204386\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks. Did you add grain on purpose to the first one?

Cheers,
Bernard

[mrleonard]

Thanks. Did you add grain on purpose to the first one?

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204410\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Most certainly...good on ya to notice. I was driving a motorcycle along a stretch of goa , india....and shot it from my bike. It was horribly noisy as it was strongly backlit, and I didnt fuss to much with the controls. I generally ;add' grain to digitally  noisy images...just looks better I think.
Sigh...such a beutiful composition otherwise....would've killed to have my 5D there and then...but that is the true value of these P&S cameras..you always can have them with you.
I find that grain emulation on a digitally noisy image enhances it... All those years of film and grain have entrained our eyes to 'see' a certain way. Y'dig?