spitfire31

spitfire31

Lives in Sweden Nykoping, Sweden
Works as a Photographer and videographer, editor, producer
Joined on Jul 14, 2010

Comments

Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Google and GoPro unveil 16-camera 'Array' VR rig article (45 comments in total)
In reply to:

spitfire31: It'll be fun changing batteries on that lot… ;-)

That's a very reasonable assumption. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on May 30, 2015 at 15:12 UTC
On Google and GoPro unveil 16-camera 'Array' VR rig article (45 comments in total)

It'll be fun changing batteries on that lot… ;-)

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2015 at 22:44 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

mimot13: Answer to this question is IMHO : NO !

For people who doesn't need any "Pro or Enthusiastic Photographer application", PHOTOS from Apple will be enough. Perhaps.. Photos is NOT no pleasant to use.

For all other users and those ones coming from Aperture, there should be no discussion : Lightroom or C1 v8 !!

But as long as DxO OP can't do local adjustments, it can't really be taken seriously. IMO, of course. ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 21:15 UTC
In reply to:

DaveE1: Interesting software from an interesting company. They have been producing the excellent Affinity Designer for a while now. Great to see them take on the photo editing task too.

Does it have all the features of Photoshop? Of course not. Why would anyone expect that a new beta application would have all the features of one that's been developed for a quarter of a century! (Yes, PS is 25 years old this year).

Photoshop is largely redundant for many photographers in that the same core editing capabilities are available in other software, without the need to mask and layer. Adobe tried to simplify Photoshop with Express. Then they acknowledged the need for something more photographer focused with their Lightroom application. I think that some others still do that better (like Capture One Pro 8).

People will always run down the feature checklist when comparing software, but what really matters is whether what YOU need is there and works well for you.

FWIW, Layers and masks are THE power features of Photoshop that I couldn't do without.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 06:20 UTC
In reply to:

Wye Photography: Apparently PS CC costs $9 per month. $9 a month may sound cheap but that is $108 per annum, $324 over three years, $540 over 5 years.

Affinity photo will cost you $50 to begin with, the $50 you have already paid after one year. The $50 you have already paid after three years and the $50 you have already paid after five years. $50 vs $540.

This software is BETA

It can only get BETTER.

If you want to pour money into Adobe's coffers...

The choice is yours.

The price difference btw 9$ and 12.29€ is due to VAT being charged in most European countries, usually between 19% and 25%.

Blame the governments, not (in this case…) Adobe.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 13, 2015 at 06:15 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): For the younger generation who only know digital photo editing based on what their smartphone offers (many of them have never owned a DLSR and likely will not..by the time they have kids in school and want better optical zoom and faster shutter to shot response time as their kids play sports, MILC will likely have taken over), and have no idea what a photo editing suite really is, anything will impress them.

As for me, I am off to the darkroom to develop some 4x5 B&W film...will be printing this weekend.

I have it from a ususally unreliable source that the next PS CC version will have an optional analogue mode.

The image fades in slowly when you load it. Cooperation with Leapmotion will allow you to burn or dodge with gestures (a cheaper version will use a touch screen).

And, the piece de résistance: an electrostatic aerosolizer, adapted from professional aroma therapy clinics, will diffuse the uplifting fragrances of Microdol, acetic acid and fix.

There!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 02:17 UTC
In reply to:

fab38: On Mac OS X & Windows, there's also Photoline which is a good alternative to Photoshop. They have an ugly website and the software gui is a bit messy but it's really powerful (16bits per channel, layers and a lot more).

'16 bits/channel and layers' is hardly the definition of 'really powerful' these days, is it?

I applaud Serif's ambition, but there's a lot of catching up to do.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 12, 2015 at 02:03 UTC
In reply to:

spitfire31: How about plug-in compatibility? I use a fair number of plugs that I wouldn't be without.

I'll answer that one myself, since I found the info in the Affinity Photo forum: yes, Photo is supposed to be fully compatible with the Photoshop plug-in format.

Remains to be tested, though…

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 05:13 UTC

How about plug-in compatibility? I use a fair number of plugs that I wouldn't be without.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 03:16 UTC as 44th comment | 2 replies
On Apple reveals Photos beta for developers post (125 comments in total)

Since version 5.6, LR has a dedicated plug-in for importing Aperture (and iPhoto) libraries. It's under File:Plugin Extras.

Just sayin'…

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 05:46 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 First Impressions Review preview (1864 comments in total)
In reply to:

spitfire31: The LX7 has been my faithful companion since it was launched and I'll be standing in line for the LX100.

For me, though, one disappointment is the lack of either an articulated monitor or a ditto viewfinder. I shelled out for the LVF2 add-on viewfinder for the LX7, which can tilt up to 90°, and it's been worth the money many times over.

In fact, I use the viewfinder most of the time. When shooting CU of, say, plants and flowers or just when you don't want people to be aware that you're pointing a camera their way, the tilt option has been irreplaceable.

@nand0,

Even with an external mic, you wouldn't get 'high quality stereo sound' with a compact camera built-in mic pre, no manual level option and no monitoring.

The only solution is to use a separate audio recorder and use, for instance, Final Cut Pro X, Prermiere Pro CC or the stand-alone sync app Plural Eyes to sync up the separate audio to the in-camera reference audio track.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2014 at 06:30 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 First Impressions Review preview (1864 comments in total)

The LX7 has been my faithful companion since it was launched and I'll be standing in line for the LX100.

For me, though, one disappointment is the lack of either an articulated monitor or a ditto viewfinder. I shelled out for the LVF2 add-on viewfinder for the LX7, which can tilt up to 90°, and it's been worth the money many times over.

In fact, I use the viewfinder most of the time. When shooting CU of, say, plants and flowers or just when you don't want people to be aware that you're pointing a camera their way, the tilt option has been irreplaceable.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 18, 2014 at 17:48 UTC as 206th comment | 6 replies
On Exposing sharks in a positive light article (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hauer: Not so difficult to see that it concerns a Great White shark. Photos taken in South African Waters? Nice series!

Not difficult, if you're familiar with sharks, no doubt. No need to get snotty about it, eh?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 10, 2014 at 13:30 UTC
On Exposing sharks in a positive light article (62 comments in total)

Yes, great photos. But why no information about what species of shark, and where?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 10, 2014 at 12:53 UTC as 23rd comment | 3 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (840 comments in total)
In reply to:

spitfire31: I have searched through the whole article for "viewfinder" and found words to the effect that it's high resolution, has a good refresh rate and is "gorgeous".

But what about viewfinder LAG?

It's not the same as refresh rate. Low (imperceptible) viewfinder image lag is critical for capturing fleeting expressions and quick-moving wildlife, for example.

I've got an SLR. I was asking about the FZ-1000.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2014 at 13:09 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (840 comments in total)

I have searched through the whole article for "viewfinder" and found words to the effect that it's high resolution, has a good refresh rate and is "gorgeous".

But what about viewfinder LAG?

It's not the same as refresh rate. Low (imperceptible) viewfinder image lag is critical for capturing fleeting expressions and quick-moving wildlife, for example.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 22, 2014 at 12:17 UTC as 191st comment | 3 replies
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (648 comments in total)
In reply to:

spitfire31: One problem affacting all cameras with electronic viewfinder/monitor only, is *viewfinder delay*.

I became aware of this when shooting stills of a comp guitarist with my Panasonic LX7 and happened to have my other eye open. The guitarist's right hand in the viewfinder worked in counter-phase to his actual movements!

In effect, what you see in an electronic viewfinder (unlike a true SLR) is a recording of what has already happened.

You trip the shutter guided by a delayed cue.

Then I realised why it was so difficult to capture people's expression or a sudden gesture – they were already history!

Now, I'm re-learning to shoot with both eyes open – one for composition in and the naked one to see what' is actually happening in real-time.

But if shooting wildlife with a long tele, it may be almost impossible to see how a bird is turning its head with the naked eye.

Why hasn't DPR pounced on this aspect of mirrorless cameras? It is a real hurdle to nailing action.

@ Petak: In your lag calculation, you are missing out the in-camera PROCESSING of the sensor picture. You see, the analog information read out from the sensor has to be *digitised* and then *processed* to produce a relevant image.

This processing is done after the shutter has been tripped, when you take a picture. In that situation it's largely irrelevant if the processing takes some time.

But in producing an 'almost-realtime' moving picture in the viewfinder, processing time makes *all* the difference.

So, you are completely mistaken in stating that shutter lag is the lag-inducing component in viewfinder lag. I suggest that you might want to read up on digital photography basics.

@ Zeisschen: Thanks for the information! It seems that mirrorless camera designers are catching up, at last.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 18:55 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (648 comments in total)
In reply to:

spitfire31: One problem affacting all cameras with electronic viewfinder/monitor only, is *viewfinder delay*.

I became aware of this when shooting stills of a comp guitarist with my Panasonic LX7 and happened to have my other eye open. The guitarist's right hand in the viewfinder worked in counter-phase to his actual movements!

In effect, what you see in an electronic viewfinder (unlike a true SLR) is a recording of what has already happened.

You trip the shutter guided by a delayed cue.

Then I realised why it was so difficult to capture people's expression or a sudden gesture – they were already history!

Now, I'm re-learning to shoot with both eyes open – one for composition in and the naked one to see what' is actually happening in real-time.

But if shooting wildlife with a long tele, it may be almost impossible to see how a bird is turning its head with the naked eye.

Why hasn't DPR pounced on this aspect of mirrorless cameras? It is a real hurdle to nailing action.

@Petak
You don't quite make sense, man.

The 'lag' between eye and reality is negligible and, as it is something we have got hardwired from very early years.

The lag between pressing shutter button and actual exposure is also negligible in a reasonably modern camera, on the order of milliseconds.

But viewfinder lag can be on the order of tenths of seconds and can't be compensated for, because what you see has already happened – it's gone!

A good photographer learns to anticipate action. But anticipation is irrelevant if what you see, and consequently base your prediction on, is already water under the bridge.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 14:16 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (648 comments in total)
In reply to:

spitfire31: One problem affacting all cameras with electronic viewfinder/monitor only, is *viewfinder delay*.

I became aware of this when shooting stills of a comp guitarist with my Panasonic LX7 and happened to have my other eye open. The guitarist's right hand in the viewfinder worked in counter-phase to his actual movements!

In effect, what you see in an electronic viewfinder (unlike a true SLR) is a recording of what has already happened.

You trip the shutter guided by a delayed cue.

Then I realised why it was so difficult to capture people's expression or a sudden gesture – they were already history!

Now, I'm re-learning to shoot with both eyes open – one for composition in and the naked one to see what' is actually happening in real-time.

But if shooting wildlife with a long tele, it may be almost impossible to see how a bird is turning its head with the naked eye.

Why hasn't DPR pounced on this aspect of mirrorless cameras? It is a real hurdle to nailing action.

By Zeisschen: "It's been mentioned a lot actually in several reviews. But there are big differences between the EVF. "

I don't read all reviews, so that may well be the case.

I'm aware that there are differences, but all the more reason, then, to make measurements and comments of viewfinder lag a standard feature of reviews, isn't it?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 10:37 UTC
On Nikon 1 V3 First Impressions Review preview (648 comments in total)

One problem affacting all cameras with electronic viewfinder/monitor only, is *viewfinder delay*.

I became aware of this when shooting stills of a comp guitarist with my Panasonic LX7 and happened to have my other eye open. The guitarist's right hand in the viewfinder worked in counter-phase to his actual movements!

In effect, what you see in an electronic viewfinder (unlike a true SLR) is a recording of what has already happened.

You trip the shutter guided by a delayed cue.

Then I realised why it was so difficult to capture people's expression or a sudden gesture – they were already history!

Now, I'm re-learning to shoot with both eyes open – one for composition in and the naked one to see what' is actually happening in real-time.

But if shooting wildlife with a long tele, it may be almost impossible to see how a bird is turning its head with the naked eye.

Why hasn't DPR pounced on this aspect of mirrorless cameras? It is a real hurdle to nailing action.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2014 at 10:01 UTC as 105th comment | 9 replies
Total: 58, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »