• Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password.

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?

image quality ?

I usually just use Microsoft's Photo Editor to crop and do any editing of photos. My goal is mostly to get an image suitable for inclusion in a technical report, proposal, or powerpoint presentation.

This simple editing program has a balance and auto balance feature that has thus far proved adequate. I'm just pleased with the images that I get and the speed with which the pictures are available (no more need for photo processing by a lab or darkroom). I do tend to take a LOT more photos with the digital camera than I ever did with film cameras. So it is easier to toss the pictures that are unacceptable.

Even though my digital cameras have automatic features I like to play with the settings and bracket important shots. Sometimes though I miss using my F3. I used it for a far longer interval than any other cameras, but my digital cameras have taken more pictures.

That makes perfect sense, you use the tools that give the results desired and choose that which works quickly and efficiently for your needs at work. RAW is more geared towards "artsy" stuff where higher quality and attention to fine detail needs to be considered over speed of processing. I quite understand what you are saying having been a technical illustrator for some years involved with producing camera-ready copy for print. The quality of the image plays a less important role than does content and readability.

RM
 
Back
Top