Everlast66: HowaboutRAW,Correct me if I am wrong, but the purpose of this thread is to discuss the article or news above.
Out of the 400 comments in it, 250 are probably yours and every third or so is a personal accusation, attack, insult or ridicule. If you are older than 18 years, start acting more maturely, if less ask your parents for direction and advice.
This is totally getting out of hand.
Wrong again HowaboutBADFAITH, it produces one gallery, in which there are albums. Such bad faith trying to worm your way out, shame on you.
HowaboutRAW: Le Kilt,
It sure looks like fraud, or theft.
Particularly since you don't do any identifying of the pictures as by someone else.
My assumptions could be wrong, but you've offered no good explanation for posting other people's photos in your DPR gallery. There are two with names embedded. Those are different names. So at least one of those images is not yours.
What rubbish, pathetic, find a bit of courage and face up to your actions.
tulku: I'm a little bit over the narrow mindset that appears to be a common thread amongst antagonists of the Lytro or Lightfield technology. I keep reading comments that photographers know what they want in focus and it's just a camera for bad photographers and the resolution is too low.
You cannot really hide things in a lightfield image, so as a photographer you have to be aware of the entire image that is being created. It's not about missing a shot and focusing later, rather, it's about taking time to really compose an image that can be explored by the viewer. I would have thought this factor would be intriguing to many photographers.
As for resolution, maybe it's not up there yet, but then again it's not really an image style for printing. Last time I checked I could not interact with a printed image and change focal points, or move around within the image like I can with a Lytro image.
Anyway just some thoughts.
HowaboutBADFAITH : Yet you the guy who tells people to check their facts before posting went and started a new thread at the top insinuating fraud or theft.Shame on you.
So with ambiguity you don't check, you start a new thread at the top so that more people will see it, and insinuate fraud or theft.
You were out of order, and now you're clutching at straws trying to justify your behaviour.
At least have the courage to apologise...
Except that I made no inaccurate claims about my gallery.You keep talking about filters, folders, subdivisions to avoid admitting there are just albums that are simple and straightforward, that even an idiot would comprehend. You still don't?
So you click on a photo, and immediately beneath it it says:This photo is in 1 album: Other members - adjustments
Now that's too complex for you to understand?
I can put anything I like in my gallery, as long as the owners are ok with it and I don't label other people's work as mine.
You have no idea, yet insinuated fraud or theft.
Shame on you, little man hiding behind his screen not sharing anything. Try sharing, it would do you some good.
HowaboutBADFAITH, you went looking for muck and found none, now you're clutching at straws.
You keep telling others to check their facts and you don't, what hypocrisy.Don't you realise that you can put anything you like in your gallery, it doesn't matter who it belongs to as long as they're ok with it and you don't claim them as yours. If you shared more your might know that. I took the trouble to put them in a separate album, but i needn't have done so, as long as I don't say they're mine. Grow up, little man hiding behind his screen and sharing nothing. Shame on you.
What hypocrisy. I checked and found out exactly what you were seeing.We've told you to click on the obvious link "View more photos in your gallery" that stares you in the face and you make excuses not to do so. One click! Do you need a screen capture to show you the obvious?Anyway, when you view the photo, it says just beneath it : This photo is in 1 album: Other members - adjustmentsIs that not clear enough for you? Really?Checking facts is not your strong point.Insinuating fraud or theft without asking or checking is.
Shame on you.
And from there you're not able to see the link "View more photos in your gallery" above all the pics?LOL!If you're not blind, stupid or lying, you have a more serious problem.
You're not capable of two obvious clicks when you go on about checking facts?Man up, have a bit of courage, you insinuated fraud or theft and got it wrong.Shame on you.
You insinuated fraud or theft because you didn't know how to use this site fully, I'm still waiting for an apology.
Found the link yet?Seen the albums?
It seems clicking on the right link is proving too difficult and looking for long words like "Albums" is too, we'll have to report this to DPR so they can simplify it for him.
Now that you've learnt to use the site, an apology would be in order.
Aha, so you can see albums now. One called "Other member's - Adjustments". Guess what's in there!
You say "Why do you think I've never looked at a website? "I don't, but you're struggling with this one then wrongly implying fraud or theft.Shame on you.
Everlast66: I am extremely grateful to its majesty, The Free Market, for sending this product where it belongs - history.It was obvious from the very beginning that it is not going to work - high price, inadequate image quality and questionable benefits.
But the most annoying thing for me was that the manufacturers were not open and honest for what they are selling. They are reluctant to tell their potential customers what the product is actually capturing and how. Many suspect this is because their product is just algorithms applied to regular image data. This would explain why they are unwilling to disclose any technical detail, because if they do they would not have a product to sell.
Yet you don't answer the question.
filmrescue: What I've always thought about Lytro cameras for photography...."Well that's really cool but I kind of know what I want in focus when I take the picture - most people do". Hope they have better luck with video...it actually makes a lot more sense. Focus pulling in post would be really useful.
You keep misusing the word fact, you ought to get an English language dictionary.
jtan163: The big problem with Lytro is I don't want to have to rely on their web software.It's a far worse cloud lock in that Adobe CC.
And they Lytro don't appear to understand the photography market.I mean what photographer wants a one button camera?
One button cameras are for people who use phones, and most of them don't understand focus - most people I know who shoot with phones don't tap to focus and therefore shoot blurry pics, unless their subject happens to be in the default depth of field.
In other words Lytros has been bit by the same "phone users don't care if their images are rubbish" bug as the rest of the industry.
You don't know Joseph James? A well known figure here.He specifically asked for help on that photo in the P&P forum.
Now if you made an adjustment to a photo and wanted to repost it, where on earth would you put it? The only practical place is in your gallery. And you could put it in an album called "Other member's - Adjustments" just so things are clear. Peter is a guy I know very well, and he lets me post his photos here.
So no misuse here. No fraud, no theft. An apology from you would be in order now.
grasscatcher: I have to wonder, with the improved processing speed of modern cameras (e.g. - 30fps @ 8mpxl), could systems be developed for focus bracketing, much like what is done for exposure bracketing? Thirty pics taken, each with focus pulled in a bit from the previous exposure, then a final processed pic with relatively infinite focus (algorithm could be developed to focus from, say, 30' to 3' based on x focal length, 50' to 5' for a longer focal length, etc. to more accurately capture moving subjects, plus a setting of 1' to infinity for landscape still photos...).
This would be a great boon for those of us who require maximum DoF for certain photographic applications.
Did you get any higher education?
LOL !You have shown nothing again, except your lack of knowledge of the site and lack of checking, even when all the pointers are there.I do check and have done so.You can't see a line right at the top saying the following ? :"Viewing Le Kilt's 49 most recent photos. View more photos in their gallery. "There could be a link hidden there somewhere...