JordanAT: So what is the effective resolution of the resulting image, and is there/will there be a way to view this on a PC? Is there a standard format which this conforms to.
I ask because I'm often in archtectural structures where having a view like this would be a great memory tool to go along with the dozens/hundreds of detailed photos I take. But looking at the webpage and samples, it seems like it's little more than a low resolution gimmick.
For work stuff, I try and think linger term. I've only run my own shop for 10.5 years, but I have records back to day 1, and all but the first year is digitized. We went all-digital about 5 years ago, and started digitizing the back catalog 2 years ago. Getting everything into a format which has longevity is important - usually either PDF, JPG, or TXT. It's hard to stop and print some stuff (techincal analysis tools) when the answer is already done, but all it takes is letting one software license lapse and the original data is gone.
Not that it's too surprising - it's not as if there's a huge userbase for spherical panaoramas.
Lars: I'm mostly concerned about viewability of the file in 3-5 years when the company is abandoned, and having a local program which can view the image.
Menn: Thanks for the info and link.
So what is the effective resolution of the resulting image, and is there/will there be a way to view this on a PC? Is there a standard format which this conforms to.
HBowman: That's not fair NIKON ...
I tried switching to Canon glass, but it's hella hard to get those suckers to mount onto my Nikon bodies!
Madaboutpix: Wow, I've seen cool shots of snowflakes here and there, but these here are certainly stunning. The sheer beauty of Mother Nature. H2O and frost, maybe a little grass, period. And the unexpected variety of those crystal "designs". Ignorant as I was about this microcosm, I would've thought that snow crystals are pretty uniform. Well, they aren't. Thanks for teaching us, Alexey!
BTW, somehow, for no particular reason, I can't shake the feeling that Alexey's ingenious rig is much more to do with "purist" photography than the latest fashion for retro-style cameras (nice as some of those may be) ...
Yes and no. The articles are a fascinating read, using averaging, de-noising, sharpening, etc., multiple shots to get the clarity and impact from the consumer gear. The "simplicity" feels like old school, but this is really high tech, and lots of PP work. (and all to make it look "natural")
carrigman: "For anyone simply looking for the best image quality from a compact, the RX100 II is the answer." You can stop reading after that. IQ is what it's all about and the RX100 (versions 1 and 11) delivers that in spades. I have the original RX100 and I am constantly amazed at the quality it delivers.
It's all about prestige. If it doesn't come with a colored mark or genuine wood grip, I'm not interested.
MarcLee: The funny thing here is that so many people are claiming Creative Cloud is cheaper, while Adobe are introducing it to stabilise and maximise income. So something is not adding up.
I don't manipulate the content of my photos much, just the overall look. So Capture One is fine.
But thanks to the guy who introduced Photoline further down the page. It's worth giving them some support.
While Adobe (well, any company) is looking to maximize their profit, as a business gets more mature it looks to stabilize their revenue stream. To keep a marching army of 10,000+ employees requires a regular revenue stream. Having a revision even once a year means a large cash infusion which then tapers quickly. With rental, they even out their revenue stream considerably, which simplifies financial management. It also guarantees the continued support even in a "down" year (or poor release) - people pay the subscription instead of skipping a lackluster release.
GaryJP: They are not reducing their prices or expanding this offer out of kindness. Think, people.
I am not renting my software.
That's fine, but they won't sell it to you either. Enjoy your new photo editing software, whatever it turns out to be.
I'm happy they've opened it up. Right now I'm upgrading nearly every cycle for Lightroom at about $100 a pop. Until I got a (Very) cheap student version of PS 5.5, I was dropping another $50-$100 or so on PS Elements every year or two. So for the same money I'm already paying, I'm getting both with regular updates.
What happens when I leave? Well, in theory I lose my editable versions, but I still have my jpg finals. In practice most other major players support, at least to some extent, the psd format, so either I'll stop editing entirely (and the psds won't matter) or I'll go to a format where I can probably import most of the work for the rare case where I'm re-editing old photos.
I shot FM2 and F3HP in college (the paper's stable), but when I scraped the money together I got an F4s. The molded frame just fits in my hand better, so the styling is a negative. I LOVE the manual dials, and would have considered this as a replacement for my D3 - even giving up the 1/8000 shutter - until I read this:
"If your CPU lens has an aperture it must be locked to the smallest aperture 'auto' setting, and you cannot use the ring directly to set aperture.
Boom - no sale. I prefer to shoot in aperture mode most of the time, and my left hand still cradles the camera, ready to swap between focus, zoom, and aperture. With the D3, I feel like I'm missing part of my hand not to have an aperture ring, and this doesn't bring that back.
Yanko Kitanov: Call me back when this ...thing supports Capture One Pro full version and can process >30mb raw files in it in less than 30min.
Th iPad (and I own one) has nowhere near the processing power of a desktop intel processor (which is typically 4 physical cores/8 logical cores for consumer chips; hence the confusion. Xeon chips can have more cores). While you CAN edit photos to a basic level on an iPad, it is by no means a preferred medium. The inaccuracy of capacitive screens leads to a great deal of zooming to hit the right spot (vs a 30" monitor with a mouse). It can be done, but only if you must have it *right now* and you are willing to re-do all of your actual work in the office. Alternately, you can probably do some processing on the ipad (now that larger RAW files can be processed), but it will take 2-3x the time, and time is money. FWIW, the A7 processor is roughly equal to an Atom Z3770 (baytrail), which is about half of the speed of my i7-920 from 4 years ago, and less than 1/4 the speed of today's top i7.
chlamchowder: Looks ok, although it seems like some detail is lost to noise reduction even in the base ISO shots. Moving up the ISO scale, it still seems like the JPG engine should be doing a better job (because modern full frame sensors are so good that anything below ISO 800 is basically considered low).
It would be more interesting to look at processed raw files without noise reduction applied.
You know, SD cards aren't that expensive anymore, and they only cost $0.46 to mail cost to coast in 2-3 days. Even from TN. ;-)
Peter Bendheim: While I'm not normally a fan of HDR I think that it works very well with this series and adds rather than detracts to the overall feel of the images. Really good - would look great on huge enlargements I would guess.
It makes the images a but surreal and almost fake, but it also is the only way to reveal the information and allow the viewer to see everything in the room. It's just not possibly to capture all of the detail in such challenging conditions without HDR. In a way, it lets us see the rooms as we would if we were there (where our HDR eyes do get to see into dark corners)
Debankur Mukherjee: very usable focal length.........
Yeah, I wish is was a 2.8. I still use a Tamron 35-105/2.8 and *love* the range, even though the image quality is not really up to modern sensor standards. I haven't gotten a short or medium 2.8 zoom because the throw is so limited I may as well grab a prime.
Jim in Hudson: My recollection is the iPhone DID have a two-stage shutter button under iOS 6. First stage was touching the button icon and second stage (capturing the photo) was releasing your finger from the button. Doesn't seem that way with iOS 7 unless I'm missing something.
iOS6 (6.2, to be exact) actuates the shutter the moment your finger leaves the screen, allowing you to take a picture with minimal lag without "stabbing" at the screen.
Vladik: I agree with Gulffish, the images are flat and lifeless!
Ever seen raw images off of a D4 or MkIII? Flat, flat, flat. But full of data with possibilities. To compare untouched images to cheap cameras with balls-to-the-wall internal correction (*cough*Sony*cough*) means nothing.
Gosh, I hope Gayloard doesn't find out that the photos here (http://www.nps.gov/kowa/planyourvisit/permits.htm) are being used without payment to him.
danieljcox: Without the artist creating this image, there is no image. Why should he not get paid for his vision and creativity? Would anybody have bought this stamp had it just been a blank, white stamp without any sort of art? No! They bought it because it had something of interest that the artist created. The artist should be paid. Without the art the artist created, there is no stamp to sell. People who create good ideas or good art deserve to be paid.
Daniel J. Coxwww.naturalexposures.com
The US Postal service is losing money - no profit has been realized. The US Government paid Gayload $775,000 to purchase the design of the sculptures, and the sculptures have been erected on US Government property at US Government expense. You would think that the US Government, of which the US Postal Service is a(n independant) subsidiary would have the rights to use the likeness in works. I wonder if the artist is paid royalties for the use of the images on the National Park Service website and he gets 10% of the operating expenses of the park (which could be argued is the "admission" paid by US taxpayers for visiting and viewing his sculpture)
Jogger: i forget who makes it. but, there is a company in the US that buys Nikon 14-24/2.8 lenses and completely rehouses them in a cine body.
I'll bet those are cheap.
So that means PS/LR CC edition for $9.99 is also available? The original PS/CC press release said that it would be released with LR 5.2.