OP
RonFrank
Contributor
Color aware applications are aware of color space. Many applications are NOT color aware, so they work in what ever color space that they support, generally sRGB.
Color aware applications like Adobe CS/CS2 are aware of the imbedded color profile that the camera may use. For DSLR shooters we often have the option of Adobe RGB, sRBG, and others. Color aware applications also are aware of monitor color space and offer proofing options like Windows RGB, and Mac RBG so one can *proof* what an image may look like displayed on different color spaces that the OS uses for a monitor. Another option is CMYK colorspace that may be required for publication.
So for many professionals color aware applications are necessary unless someone else is doing the editing.
Adobe is NOT an intituitive hunk of software. One criticism I have of Adobe is that it's difficult to learn. Of course it is very powerful, and it is also very supported. One can purchase a ton of cool plug-in's that do everything from adding frames to filters like digital Velvia.
For my $$$ the price is worth it. Keep in mind that most lenses that many of us use cost in the $1000-$1500 range. The D2x runs close to $5K, the D200 $1700, and a good printer can cost $2000. When you start comparing those prices, and factor in how important post processing is to digital photographer, Adobe starts looking very good. And you can take advantage of my cheapskate advice, and likely get Adobe CS2 for about $250
This is NOT a sales pitch for Adobe, but I think we should put this in perspective. After the initial outlay for the original license, one may want to upgrade every two versions or so at the cost of about $200 retail for the upgrade, that is less than $100 annual cost for software that is at the heart of ones workflow.
Color aware applications like Adobe CS/CS2 are aware of the imbedded color profile that the camera may use. For DSLR shooters we often have the option of Adobe RGB, sRBG, and others. Color aware applications also are aware of monitor color space and offer proofing options like Windows RGB, and Mac RBG so one can *proof* what an image may look like displayed on different color spaces that the OS uses for a monitor. Another option is CMYK colorspace that may be required for publication.
So for many professionals color aware applications are necessary unless someone else is doing the editing.
Adobe is NOT an intituitive hunk of software. One criticism I have of Adobe is that it's difficult to learn. Of course it is very powerful, and it is also very supported. One can purchase a ton of cool plug-in's that do everything from adding frames to filters like digital Velvia.
For my $$$ the price is worth it. Keep in mind that most lenses that many of us use cost in the $1000-$1500 range. The D2x runs close to $5K, the D200 $1700, and a good printer can cost $2000. When you start comparing those prices, and factor in how important post processing is to digital photographer, Adobe starts looking very good. And you can take advantage of my cheapskate advice, and likely get Adobe CS2 for about $250
This is NOT a sales pitch for Adobe, but I think we should put this in perspective. After the initial outlay for the original license, one may want to upgrade every two versions or so at the cost of about $200 retail for the upgrade, that is less than $100 annual cost for software that is at the heart of ones workflow.
