1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Cambridge in Colour (tution site)

Discussion in 'Web Sites of Interest' started by dr_eyehead, Apr 25, 2014.

  1. dr_eyehead

    dr_eyehead Well-Known Member

    Anyone ever heard of this site or used it? I've used it a couple of times to learn about stuff. In my experience with it it seems like a very informative and well presented/knowledgeable place to learn about things related to photography and digital imaging/processing.


    I intend to spend more time browsing their online tutorials, which come in textbook form, with a view to learning more from them. I strongly recommend this site for the novice/amateur. It explains things really well, and succinctly.

    I just realised this place has a forum and may be your competitors. Sorry if I am breaking the rules. I just think they are a very comprehensive source and wanted to share.
  2. NosamLuap

    NosamLuap Rebmem Roines

    Yup, it's an excellent resource. I'd used it many times
  3. dr_eyehead

    dr_eyehead Well-Known Member

    Perhaps the answer to the blocky nef file mystery lies there? :cool:
  4. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    I've not checked it for a while, but last time I did (some years back) quite a bit was actually incorrect, so be careful.
  5. dr_eyehead

    dr_eyehead Well-Known Member

    I'll bear that in mind. You tend to find with most textbooks and manuals, even the best there are always a few errors. The trick is to be clever enough to spot them.

    I'm just reading through the CD manual for the Nikon D3200 and learning about all the features, and it's pretty good although I'm finding there are slight errors in there too.
  6. NosamLuap

    NosamLuap Rebmem Roines

    Oh, interesting.

    Was it incorrect in that it simplified a concept for understanding, but had technical inaccuracies, or was it just plain wrong?

Share This Page