graybalanced

graybalanced

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 11, 2009

Comments

Total: 436, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ssh33: I refuse to use anything "cloud" out of principle. The files I pay for or create are going to live on my hard drives or my colocated servers.

"Why would anybody privately and on purpose give his data to someone he/she doesn't know is beyond me."

If your retirement funds, stock investments, etc. are entrusted to a company with a web site that you access and manage online, or if you store your photos on ANY web site not owned by you with a CDN with overseas nodes, then the concept isn't actually beyond you. I don't like the cloud either, but I'm just sayin'...

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2014 at 23:25 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: i love my 9.99 subscription. Ive pretty much always had to pay this much for photoshop and lightroom to be up to date. and the new mobile features are great. and photoshop now runs on my mac and pc with the same subscirption

No, that's not what he's saying, since the non-subscription Lightroom doesn't have mobile sync and is only licensed for Mac or PC only, not both. He's saying he likes thoese additional features CC has the non-CC doesn't.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 11, 2014 at 23:22 UTC
In reply to:

wetracy: Nothing more than glorification of war and war machines.

I have been opposed to just about every US war in the last 60 years. But without our armed forces, you wouldn't have much left to glorify at all.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2014 at 23:42 UTC
On Quick Review: That Steady Thing article (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

stevens37y: What about using a tripod?

There should be a way to automatically downvote posts that either didn't comprehend the article or didn't read the comment from the manufacturer further down.

If the thread was read, the complementary comment would be "Why don't you use a tripod as a walking stick?"

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2014 at 23:40 UTC
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (422 comments in total)

On the bright side, one set of DPReview forum holy wars has just evaporated. Now if only Canon or Nikon would stop making cameras, or if Apple would stop making computers!

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 00:05 UTC as 76th comment | 3 replies
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (422 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stewart McKInlay: As there is no mention of the new Photos for OSX being able to manipulate photos like Aperture we can only assume a dumbing down as suggested is happening. Most of us who enjoyed Aperture will feel sorely let down. But as usual Apple will expect loyalty from us!

"iPhoto and even Preview can manipulate RAW files."

In this discussion that's kind of like bringing up a Kia as a replacement car when one is used to driving a Ferrari, on the grounds that the Kia has four wheels and carries people.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 00:04 UTC
In reply to:

Sandler Photography: Where can we download the (non release-candidate) Adobe Camera Raw 8.5?
I can only seem to find the link to the DNG converter or the RC.

If you are able to first download ACR on a computer that does have Internet access, all it installs is just one plug-in file. You can copy that to the machine without Internet access.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 23:11 UTC
On Adobe CC Announcements: What you need to know article (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prognathous: The only thing you need to know: the $10 photography bundle is a trap.

Quote from Adobe's membership contract:

"The price of your one-year commitment (as reflected in the monthly installment amounts) may change for your next annual renewal, and we’ll provide you notice of a change by email"

In short, nothing but a teaser price. Get ready to pay through the nose as soon as you've created enough project files and can't properly open them by anything else. Good luck being Adobe's hostage.

It's strange that you call it a teaser price when they ended the actual intro period by making the offer permanent, instead of increasing it. They did the opposite of what you said they'd do.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 23:28 UTC
On Adobe CC Announcements: What you need to know article (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joe Mayer: I must be a dino. I have no interest in manipulating any images on my i-anything. I don't see the point in using Photoshop AND Lightroom. LR is simply PS-lite and if you have PS, the "free" LR is of no use unless you really have poor cataloging skills and need a program to keep track of your stuff. As for the new features of PS, well, Adobe has always introduced new touch-feely stuff to attract people to update. In this case, they are giving it to those subscribed and are trying to tempt the hold-outs. I don't need to blur my photos and selecting according to sharpness is something I don't get. If I have a shot with great bokeh, I want to select the sharp part? Most people want to select the model so they can create fake bokeh. I'm sure there's a use for it but I can't figure any for my use so for those who can, enjoy. The only use I've seen for sharp masking is in the selection of a group of photos where you can immediately see which ones nailed focus.

If you think Lightroom is Photoshop Lite, you have no idea what Lightroom is about.

There are lots of pros who know Photoshop inside and out, but have talked about how they spend most of their time in Lightroom now. Because Lightroom is a better, faster way to do a lot of things Photoshop does. Doesn't replace Photoshop. It's like owning an efficient commuter car and a big pickup truck, they both have four wheels but are for different purposes and both deserve to exist.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 23:26 UTC
On Adobe CC Announcements: What you need to know article (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photo Pete: If the Adobe business model is successful how long will it be before Apple and Microsoft go the same way with their operating systems?

How robust are Adobe? Even the largest companies can fold (remember Kodak?). If Adobe fail as a company what will happen to your ability to use the software after the first failed attempt to log into the Adobe servers? What will happen to your 20Gb of Cloud storage?

Why should a hobbyist have to pay to have the latest features they don't need and why would a professional place their work entirely in the hands of another company over which they have no control?

The business model stinks and the more people that refuse to engage with it the better. Low price offers are a good sign. It is an indication that insufficient users are renting to make the scheme profitable enough.

Microsoft already answered that question. You can subscribe to Office 365 already. The difference is that Microsoft still offers a choice of a non-subscription download of its apps.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 23:22 UTC
On New camera app features in Apple's iOS 8 post (67 comments in total)
In reply to:

rdscibilia: The iPhone needs more megapixels, although it appears Apple is not going in this direction. A quality eight-megapixel image is fine, but you need some space for cropping.

If you want to print an 8x10 image at 300dpi you only need 7.2 megapixels. So there is already space for cropping.

Next question: How many people still print 8x10 images?

In the reality of most people, the iPhone already gives them more megapixels than they will use 95% of the time. The iPhone already has twice as many megapixels as you need to fill a Retina MacBook Pro full screen!

For people who mostly post to social media, most of the current megapixels in an iPhone are dead weight that takes up valuable space on your phone and in your backups.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 23:20 UTC
In reply to:

Decoboy: So how do I get 8.5 ACR for my Lightroom 5.4? Weren't we told that LR would still be free-standing, i.e. not tied to CC?

I downloaded 8.5 but it says it is not applicable for me?

It's only a Release Candidate for testing. There is no final version of this for either Photoshop or Lightroom. If they keep them in sync as usual, we will all get a Lightroom 5.5 (I assume) when the final ACR 8.5 comes out.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 23:07 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: Did they all sign a model release? If no, the pictures are not photographer's, are they?

In the United States the law says you are wrong. Any creative work is copyrighted to the creator - not the subject - unless a contract has been signed to say otherwise.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2014 at 23:51 UTC
On Never forget a Photoshop or Lightroom shortcut again article (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tim Streater: This is a rubbish approach to a non-problem. At least it should be a non-problem; all the commands should be on menus, with the shortcut listed there. Then you can learn as few or as many as you feel like.

Obviously Adobe programmers think any sort of GUI is a waste of time. In fact, for editing stuff we don't even need any sort of computer at all. A bar magnet and a magnifying glass to modify bits directly on the disk is all that's required.

It's a non-problem. The shortcuts are already on the menus and tools for anyone who makes the slightest effort to look. Charts like this are for people who aren't looking closely enough at what they already have, kind of like when someone buys a $100 plug-in instead of learning how to use curves and masks for free.

The main reason the chart doesn't help is the main reason the menu shortcuts don't help: Neither is organized by user goal. But the keyboard shortcut table in the online help file is already organizes properly to solve that problem. (Yes, I know...nobody knows that exists)

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 23:42 UTC
On Never forget a Photoshop or Lightroom shortcut again article (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

Usernamefail: What I want in Photoshop (and Illustrator and Indesign) is a reverse lookup table that tells me what I just did when I accidentally get a shortcut wrong and weird stuff happens. :(

In Photoshop or Lightroom you can look at the History panel and it will tell you what just happened and you can backtrack out of the weird stuff.

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 23:37 UTC
On Never forget a Photoshop or Lightroom shortcut again article (70 comments in total)
In reply to:

Danny: Try to make keyboard shortcuts with a large Wacom tablet in front of you.

Whether you meant to or not, you just gave everybody a very good tip, actually.

The big Wacom tablets have shortcut buttons you can map your favorite keyboard shortcuts to. Because of this, for certain kinds of work you can single-button your top keyboard shortcuts while you're painting, without a keyboard even connected!

Direct link | Posted on May 19, 2014 at 23:36 UTC
On Get more accurate color with camera calibration article (53 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: For people who think they can correct color by eye, you're fooling yourself.
Men generally have sub-optimal color discrimination and many are color blind to some degree—in other words, unless you've had your color abilities tested, you have no way of knowing whether your photos are accurate.
The other problem is that your eyes are infinitely adaptable, your mind compensates for missing colors, color casts, and other chromatic abnormalities. Fatigue, diet, and stress also affect your ability to discriminate colors.
Bottom line: you can't trust your eyes.

It's always ironic how, on a site where users haggle over the most obscure of technical specifications regarding image perfection, then they go out and spend their $4000 on the most technologically advanced bodies and lenses and flash modifiers (not counting their computer customized with another $2000 in RAIDs and RAM), only to come back to say that "eyeballing is good enough." It boggles the mind. Why not just use a camera phone?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2014 at 21:42 UTC
On 1939: England in Color (part 1) article (219 comments in total)
In reply to:

graybalanced: These are fantastic. Having done some projects like this, there is definitely some fun to be had finding the locations today (no GPS metadata) and coming up with Then and Now views. Thank you for adding that to the slide show.

While some in the comments talk about loving film, the color shifts that still exist in these after correction show just why I have no nostalgia for film. It doesn't take much time or much of a shift in environment to lose the original colors. If these had been in the samples gallery for the latest Sony/Fuji/etc, the camera would have been hanged in the forums.

Colors in digital files could conceivably be printed as true as the day they were taken, indefinitely into the future, the only requirement is migrating images in standard formats to current media. And that's not even talking about scratches, dust, and mold. Long live digital!

Holger, if you read what I posted (regularly migrate your photos to current media) you WILL be able to read those digital photographs in 75 years. All the horror stories about digital files not being readable 5 years later are from not having a suitable drive or driver. But there is so much history being recorded as JPEG today that it's a fair bet JPEG will still be understood by computers in 75 years.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2014 at 00:45 UTC
On 1939: England in Color (part 1) article (219 comments in total)

These are fantastic. Having done some projects like this, there is definitely some fun to be had finding the locations today (no GPS metadata) and coming up with Then and Now views. Thank you for adding that to the slide show.

While some in the comments talk about loving film, the color shifts that still exist in these after correction show just why I have no nostalgia for film. It doesn't take much time or much of a shift in environment to lose the original colors. If these had been in the samples gallery for the latest Sony/Fuji/etc, the camera would have been hanged in the forums.

Colors in digital files could conceivably be printed as true as the day they were taken, indefinitely into the future, the only requirement is migrating images in standard formats to current media. And that's not even talking about scratches, dust, and mold. Long live digital!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 23:22 UTC as 81st comment | 4 replies
On Lytro announces Illum light field camera article (346 comments in total)
In reply to:

jaykumarr: Say, you need to take photo of your teeth and send it to dentist on vacation or photo of something else to some other expert, then these 'refocus-able' camera is a boon. I think this is damn good for medical and science fields.

Else, not a great tool for the price.

You post seems to indicate that you think this is as 3D camera. It is not ad 3D camera because you will not be able to spin the tooth around and see all sides. It is merely a light field camera that lets you control depth of field.

If you don't have a 3D camera and you want to show the dentist a picture of your teeth, you DON'T want the Lytro camera because only a small slice will be in focus.

What could you use instead? Guess what...the cheapest point-and-shoot. Because it will have a wide angle lens with deep depth of field. That will *genuinely* be useful to a dentist, because *all* of the tooth will be in focus.

A slightly less cheap point and shoot would be better, because it might have a Macro function. That, too, would be more useful to a dentist than a Lytro camera that is designed to guarantee that most of the tooth is out of focus most of the time!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2014 at 23:49 UTC
Total: 436, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »