MatthewRogers: I wish people would call these images what they are, TONEMAPPED images, yes at some point they're HDR but the final output is as far from an HDR image as the source files are.
It's not semantics, HDR encompasses very specific file formats and specification.
Tone-mapping IS the PROCESS used to create the output so it's ignorant to call them anything else. Try using them in a 3D program as an HDR and see what happens. It just makes you look stupid.
I wish people would call these images what they are, TONEMAPPED images, yes at some point they're HDR but the final output is as far from an HDR image as the source files are.
The problem is they give out SO MANY awards they have no value. I know some photographers that have dozens now. What's the point ?
slncezgsi: 163 ppi is indeed quite a bit less than 263, but on the other hand it is still 60% more than 'common' MacBook Pro laptops. And with a screen of just 8" there is not too much space for photo work and for viewing it should be OK.
Where I would expect to see more of a difference to iPad 3/4 is the price tag which is only some 20 - 25 % (in Germany , cellular models, and depending on the memory) less. So it seems that the screen is not the main price-driver.
So I say - 163 ppi may be OK, but not for the price quoted by Apple at the moment...
This was cool in the Photoshop WOW V 1.0 book but not so much now. And are there really people using Photoshop that need such basic info ?
So it's reminiscent simply for the fact that it's an exterior photo of a person indoors in a lit environment.
Seems like some people are clutching at straws trying to make themselves sound slightly more intellectual than need be.
It's just a photo of a guy sat inside, nothing more, nothing less. Some of the comments are quite hilarious and pompous to boot.