Another is licence management, which I believe involves the program injecting something into core Microsoft code that you can remove only with special software tools or through a system re-install. One is pricing structure and level, changed recently but still arguably over-pricing the product hugely given the alternatives. Nevertheless there are a number of reasons why you might not want to tangle with it. Lenses will do.) Anyone use PTLens a lot and have an opinion?Īlthough I have seen plenty of positive comments about what DxO can do, for example the (now rather out-dated) article on Luminous Landscape Is there any downside to this? (Obviously Canon know more exactly what their There is one other option which I suppose I could investigate - using CS3's (orĪCR's) Lens Correction function - but it seems this must always be image specific.
#PTLENS ALTERNATIVE TRIAL#
Theįew trial photos I have tried it on seem to have their distortion well corrected. To me (because it's a PS plugin) it looks like the PTLens solution is very cheapĪnd also possibly the best solution for a large range of cameras and lenses. There is also DXO which looks like it may be very good.
ThisĬosts US$15 for a license and is a Photoshop plug-in (so I can create an importĪction that presumably can run it every time.) Not only a much larger number of Canon lenses but also many other cameras. I have a trial version of PTLens () that lists The reason Iĭon't use DPP normally is workflow - I import with Bridge, run some actions, Is ruled out for compatibility with a few of the listed lenses. (surprisingly) I don't see my 17-85mm lens listed as compatible (or 70-200, 50mmį/1.8) - the list of compatible lenses is not extensive - and after that my 30D I see that DPP3.2 has a correction feature (page 53 of the manual) but I have a 17-85mm lens and want to always correct its barrel distortion etc.
0 kommentar(er)
