TaoSpace

Aaargh!

David Hasselhoff has been chosen as Bluetooth Spokesperson For Germany!

RUN AWAAAAY! RUN FOR IT! HEAD FOR THE HILLS!!!

Printer

Just bought a simple printer. An HP 5150 to be exact. It was cheap enough to afford when you only really print stuff (like documents) at home once in a blue moon. Funnily enough I bought my last printer some 5 years ago and unfortunately it didn't survive the transition to Windows 2000 (no drivers for Win2K were ever released). That was a cheap one too, so I expected this is to be similar.

Much to my surprise it is a surprisingly decent printer. Quite fast and with good color. I'm still not printing my photos on it though.
However, one thing still puzzles me:
The document came out back to front, as in it printed to last page first, then the one before last, etc. The upshot of that is that, once done, the document faces you with the right side up (as opposed to most laser printers for instance). Nice idea, but why on earth don't they then also make it print the document "upside down", so that the document comes out as it would be if you had it in front of you to read?

That would have been a simple tweak to make, especialy given that they already went through the trouble of printing it backwards to begin with. Very strange.

iPhoto issues

Because of Pim's comment to my last photo tip (why does he always have problems with those?) here are my reasons for not liking iPhoto:

* It is very poor at handling larger amounts of images. The speed was supposedly increased in version 4.0.1, but that upgrade actually killed my entire collection of photos at the time. I have however understood from Oliver that even that version doesn't quite handle 1000s of images comfortably on a iBook or Powerbook. iView has no such issues at all.

* It only allows for a very minor level of annotation. Nothing like what is available in other programs.

* The annotations aren't written back to image. This means you will have to do everything all over again when you switch programs in the future.

* Has no real workflow features like watching folder or doing automated exports etc.

In short it is a nice program to handle a few photo, but if photography becomes a more serious hobby it just doesn't give you enough options and it runs like a dog when using it with lots of images.

The die-hards strike back

Some people really don't get it.

Tip #3: Sort out your workflow

Digital photography makes it easy and cheap to take lots and lots of photos. This is a good thing, because it will increase the chance you'll get some good ones and gives you all the room in the world to experiment.

Because of the large amounts of photos you are likely to end up with, it makes sense to start thinking about how to handle them. Good photo workflow (as the pro's call it) will make all the difference later on, allowing you to enjoy the fruits of your labour much more easily.

There are all sorts of photo workflow tools available and subsequently there are many different ways to set up a workflow of your own. Basically there are a couple of things you'll want to sort out:

1. Getting the photos on to your computer.
2. Sorting out your photos.
3. Annotating your photos.
4. Archiving your photos.

There are programs out there that will sort of do all of these things and there are some that are really good at just one. The ones that can do it all well tend to be really expensive, like Fotostation so they might not be a possibility for you. Stringing together several tools to get it all done however will work just as well.

As an example to get you started here's my workflow:
Firstly, I use Apple's standard Image Capture software to get the images on to my PowerBook.
This app can be set to run another application after it is done downloading the images from the camera.

The app in question that I've been playing with is Stick Software's PhotoReviewer. This app only does one thing and does it well: sorting photos. It displays all photos one by one and allows you approve or reject them. Doing so will have copy the photo in question to a corresponding directory. Actually you can set up multiple directories and have the app sort to each of them.

Once in a while I will go through all the photos in the "rejected" folder and delete them for good.

Last in the chain is a program called iView MediaPro that I'm evaluating. This is a media asset management tool that will allow you to store, annotate and retrieve photos as well as providing some image processing tools. I've got it set to watch the "approved" folder for new content and import it.

I then annotate the photos inside the app, using keywords and captions. Most applications will save these annotations into their own database, but iView also has the capability to write these annotations back into the photos. This is done using IPTC, which is the industry standard for annotating photos. This way it won't matter where the photos end up or what program I might choose to use in the future; the annotations will always be there (as long as the program in question supports IPTC of course!). If you're program doesn't support IPTC you'll risk losing all your annotations if you want or need to switch applications.

As for archiving...well that's one part I haven't sorted yet. I'm considering getting a DVD writer to back up all my photos. Once I do and I'll work out a good archiving strategy I'll post it.

I knew I shouldn't have...

Went to see Spider-Man 2 today, and I really don't understand where all the rave reviews come from.

The movie is slow and filled with boring melodrama that doesn't work at all. The "Peter is clumsy" routine get really old really fast but is still repeated ad-nauseam. The side-story about his powers failing is way to easily solved. The supposed inner conflict doesn't come across well at all, etc. etc. etc. OK, Spiderman is supposed to be a troubled character, but to spend by far the largest part of the film dwelling on it is unnecessary and just plain yawn-inducing.

At the same time the action scenes were excellent and imaginative, even though the physics were way off base for no explainable reason. A fusion "ball" that sucks in everything, except humans? And that right after it is pronounced to be "self sustaining" can be switched off by pulling the plug? While the second version of the same thing can't be?
And a guy that survives huge explosions and being thrown through walls etc. drowns in the slightest bit of water?

And what's the deal with the special effects? They were "OK" in the Spiderman I, although you could see that it was CG in some scenes. Here is was glaringly obvious from the very first scene Spidy appears in. The colors were off, the grain was off, and the whole thing would have looked more realistic if it was made in claymation ala Sinbad the sailor. For just a supposed blockbuster movie sequel, that I'm sure has had a staggering budget to use, this is just unnecessarily poor. Not that this in itself would have been a problem, but on top of everything else?

Still the film had its moments in both the action and the drama, but just sags bigtime in between them in a way that makes you want to shout "Get on with it!".

The main problem just seems to be that they wanted to put way to much stuff into this movie. As if they wanted to make 3 movies, only got budget for one but still ended up with 3 scripts and 3 directors all madly trying to get their story told.

After seeing The Eternal Sunshine...yesterday I knew I shouldn't have gone and seen this tonight...

In case you are wondering if my view is all distorted because of that: well, the girlfriend agreed and so did most of the audience, judging by what I heard in the lobby.

I really don't get it.

The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Just came back from the cinema. Wow! This is one of the best movies I have seen in ages. The acting (who knew Jim Carrey could actually Act!), the cinematography, the visual effects and the crazy cross-cutting. I've never seen anything remotely like it, unless you want to bring up Helzapoppin.

I can't say too much about the movie without giving away the plot, but if you like "complicated" movies, like Mulholland Drive for instance, you'll love this one.

Just go and see it, OK?

And now to bed.

Apple's Q3

MacNN has posted a sales breakdown summary of Apple's Q3 results. Quite impressive to look at, especially since it is not just iPods that are doing well, also Mac shipments are up.

They even made a whole $250 from iPod sales...oh wait...that's a typo :-).

Quicksilver

By some strange coincidence Oliver just posted about his fear of starting on Quicksilver by Neal Stephenson. The same book I just finished. He's gonna hate me for saying this but: WOW! what a book.

My guess is a lot of people will be utterly shocked by the intense amount of stuff that is going to come the way of anyone that starts reading it. There is so much detail about every aspect of life in the late 1600s, that you need to keep taking deep breaths while reading it, so as not to suffocate. With out going away to much: yes there is a point to all of that and yes you're going to love it. Just don't pretend you get "stuck" in the beginning. That's just your brain experiencing overload.

As to whether I'm going to start on The Confusion (part II) next, the answer is no. Since Oliver will be now be forced to start reading Quicksilver, I have just started his recommendation: The Da Vinci Code.

I aim to fninsh it later this week. Then we'll start with the Confusion. That is unless I get caught up reading books like Soldier of the Great War, Tokkaido Road, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Yellow Dog, the complete works of Roald Dahl or Crusader, all of which are stack mountain high on my bedside table, waiting to be read.

I gotta catch up.

Tip #2 update

In my previous post I mentioned that I wasn't able to find a european print-service with similar products as Shutterfly. Now I did however (Sorry Pim).

Have a look at FotoKasten, a German service that ships all over Europe (and beyond). It seems to offer print-sizes similar to Shutterfly, with your choice of glossy or mat paper (Shutterfly online offer mat for large sizes btw).

Prices are about the same. Even the shipping is, which is a bit strange, given the shorter distances. Anyway, the promise to deliver within 48 hours, which of course, is way faster.

I'll try them next and let you know.