I have two main issues here:
1) I don't really care about color. That's pretty subjective though.
2) I'd like square or rectangular images with regular borders. I get the polaroid throwback, but don't need the heavy bottom edge.
Third bonus issue:I can print pictures on my home printer. That's pretty instant, too, maybe moreso than instant film. And I have complete control over the size. And choice of stock. And reliable film.... ah, I mean paper and ink.
This is cool, but for me, that's about it.
Tristan Cope: Perhaps the notion of "instant" prints might appeal to a generation that weren't around to experience them in the 70s and 80s (not entirely unlike 3D films).
I understand the benefits that instant film backs had for professional photographers, but my recollection is of consumer instant cameras being a bit of a gimmick and a fad. Quite of lot of people had one, but they didn't use it much after the novelty wore off. I guess it is a niche market.
"Quite of lot of people had one, but they didn't use it much after the novelty wore off. I guess it is a niche market."
I wouldn't say it came close to being a fad. Instant film and the wide availability of the cameras changed photography. They were equivalent to the first iPhones in terms of instant gratification.
Not sure what this story is about. Just clicked through to see a larger shot of the girl.
IMO this concept needs to be on glasses, and constantly recording with a loop of 2 minutes or so.
That way, you drive past something really interesting, press a button, and say to your passenger,
"did you see THAT?"... and they say no, and you say "I'll show you later."
The picture stream (video) from 5 seconds before and after is saved. You go back later and fish out the image(s) you want.
andrew turner: Looks very flat....
FWIW I'd like to see the focus target as well as a bunch of other stuff on the focal plane, but also a range of objects in front of and behind it as well.
Might be a good way to compare DOF capabilities?
All bokeh is not created equal...
@ M Jesper: LOL. That was funny.
Looks very flat....
Like the look but harsh on an iPad.
Also, on iPad, a little info window stays open that indicates the last thread viewed, I think... annoying.
Call them... Cameras.
I don't call my phone a smartphone.
"...redesigned UI featuring a brighter background and larger type for greater readability along with easier access to commonly used tools."
You know, as an investor and longtime user of Adobe, I'm worried.
To tout something like a brighter background is to admit defeat. It's 2012; any software company, especially one providing software widely used by imaging professionals, not only shouldn't waver between drastically different interface design, but also shouldn't make the interface static; allow the user to choose their own background color, their own icon layout, etc.
What's with the awful Organizer view? No info? Really?
Not to mention increasingly cumbersome pricing policies which are now edging out new users, amateur users, and those with either no need or without ongoing means to learn the system.
I think Adobe makes great software, and at this point they're lucky they have a relative monopoly on the "creative suite" market.
As a shareholder, as well as a longtime user of Photoshop and the creative suite, I can say without hesitation that Adobe is doing just about everything wrong.
I bet it won't look like that Hasselblad.
I still don't see the ability to view, sort, and rate the photos on my iMac's iPhoto library, preferably via my appletv so everyone can join in...
Maybe I missed it.
Hey, put all the Sony components you want in that thing. I just think it looks like they hired a yacht designer without telling him it's a camera.
A bad yacht designer.
That said, I don't doubt that plenty of people with money to burn will make sure that people see them taking pictures in public with it. That, in my opinion, is the only explanation for this, besides what seems to be genuinely strange management.
Note to Hasselblad: the backlash is real, but you won't be selling that thing to this audience anyway.
Heard this one's a kachillion dollars.
At $2700 this is hardly priced at "enthusiast" level, unless I'm misunderstanding the difference between someone who will spend $3000 on a camera setup for fun, and someone who will spend $3000 on a camera setup because they actually need it.
I don't mind an EVF - my first digital camera, a Dimage 7, had one (arguable far inferior compared to what's out there now) but I liked it.
Which leads me to my question - can I preview IR through it?
The Dimage 7i added an IR filter which killed this functionality. I'd hope that I'd be able to preview IR in something like this.
What a mess.
I first caught wind of Adobe's move toward subscription-based pricing when trying out Adobe Muse; then, when investigating the seeming hole in Apple's iPad, being lack of integration through Apple TV and iPhoto - and found Carousel, which is also subscription-based.
I use the professional CS suite at work and at home, though at home I'm at CS3. However - based on what I've been reading - while I may continue using Adobe products at work, I will likely end my relationship with them on an independent level and actively seek and use alternatives. The only piece of the puzzle I am truly uncertain about is InDesign - any suggestions?