km25: In 1932, just picked a date, the motion picture director would have the lens puller change focus on the car head lights and then pull focus on the man and women. Just do it slowly. Years latter some one transfers this motion picture to DVD. Now that it is digital, the footage was shoot in 1932, it would look like what these guys are doing, why is this earth stopping news. Kate Hepburn was hot when you could do this with a movie camera.
yet to get that effect you had to use a ton of gear and wait for decades to allow 'normal' users to see it.
With Lytro you've removed the technology barrier between photographer and consumer.
Charles Hull: I'm amazed at how many posters agree with this ban. I can understand controls, but a flat out ban seems very unreasonable to me. Drone photography is an entirely new field opening up, with the chance of photo and video views we've never seen before. As a photographer it is concerning to me that this new media is banned from such scenic areas. Controls might include having a permit for a given day and time, a license that demonstrates basic capability to operate a drone safely, rules to protect wildlife, and noise and size limits for the drones. Yes, I appreciate and enjoy the National Parks and wilderness areas; but this ban seems offensive.
The only reason I would disagree with *this* ban would be that it ought to make freaking common sense that you don't make loud noises and otherwise introduce unnatural elements to an area that is meant to preserve nature.
Whatever happened to respecting the little wild life we've got left on earth in our "civilized" western society ?
0MitchAG: Who carries spare batteries for their phone???
I do ...
Expat Nomad: Interesting research.
Begs the question though, in terms of smartphone use, why are phone makers under-designing battery capacity?
5 years ago, you had phones that lasted 7-9 days on a single charge. My arcane BB still lasts 3-4 under pretty heavy use.
I'd be more interested in gains in energy improvements (for example like those in miniaturization for medical devices) that allowed me to charge my battery less.
simple answer : because people don't care.The average user really doesn't mind that he has to recharge, because he has learned to cope with the reduced effective capacity.Each and everone of us has gotten into the habit of using the charger the moment we drop our phone anyhwere.
thejef: I thought Nano Capacitors would have already replaced the battery. In a perfect world a nano capacitor would charge instantly, have no memory effects, are the same physical size as conventional batteries and last forever. They were developed by MIT but have yet to see the light of day for consumers.
I think most people are underestimating how much effort it takes to apply the lessons learned in labratory setting to the real world of mass production.
Plus part of the problem is that consumers appear to be satisfied with having to recharge their phones after a few hours of use. If we hadn't accepted that we might have seen more progress.
Scottelly: I think it's funny that it's called the Red Dragon. What? Is it a serial killer? lol
At least it wasn't named "Smaug" ...
Daedbird: And a supercomputer farm can process data fast than my laptop, but that means nothing to me.
Wake me up when RED builds those consumer cameras I think they talked about.
that will happen.Keep in mind that we already have consumer cameras that would have been considered "pro" and "stupidly expensive" a mere decade ago.
peevee1: They did not obtain real raw and processed it with their own DxO software. They got red proprietary video stream and processed it with RED software, which could have done whatever it wanted, including interframe noise reduction. Lame.
and you really think that the 'raw' output of normal cameras isn't "processed" ?It is just a digital file format. There is not a single guarantee that it is "unprocessed".
technic: nice idea, but the LED lighting looks like a weak point. High quality LED lighting (with good color and sufficient brightness) is expensive, and having a heavy duty battery or power supply will make it no longer 'portable'.
If you just need a softbox / photo tent there are plenty to chose from on Ebay around this price level; including larger and more practical sizes.
It's only "weak" when compared to pro level equipment.To the average smart phone user it's going to be a revelation ...
Suntan: Couldn't a guy just grab one of those folded up doughnut boxes from the pastry section?
that's probably what they did until their friends starting asking how they got their cool shots and they saw the possibility of earning a bit of money ...
Island Golfer: $27 for folded paper?! I wonder how much they want for the shipping? What are these guys smoking? And, they put the entire design on their site. Anyone can simply make it themselves out of cheap white poster board and contact cement.
a lot of this kind of stuff is "easy" if you've got the time and skill to build it.It's been proven over and over that people will pay for convenience.Heck ... just consider the fact that a lot of people prefer to use P-mode or a smarter equivalent instead of fiddling with aperture and shutter speed.
Deleted pending purge: There are so many people unable to snap off a sensible street photo even with the latest tech available, and here we see what can be done with old glass and a bit of duct tape. One can rarely see a better example of the basic truth in photography: it was, it is, and alway will be 90% author and 10% equipment.
and another basic truth : ductape fixes everything
Owen: I think the one that wasn't done, that stands out in my mind, is a still taken from the Kennedy assassination where his wife Jackie is reaching back to help the Secret Service to get onboard the Limo.
Lego is as much fun for grown ups as it is for kidsThey even have a series of architecture (plus matching prices) that definitely puts the boxes out of range of mere kids.
Kids pretend a lot of stuff that isn't "fun" when you start to think about it.*bang* you're dead ...
justin23: assuming of course it comes to your device... I love my android phone but OS updates take forever to reach the phone after android has been released.
Except that app is native to 4.4Meaning : it may not be possible to install it in earlier versions. It will depend on the minimum Android version requirement for that app. I seriously doubt Android 2.x systems will get it.//--The fact that Google allows that much tweaking of their OS makes it a platform issue.If Google enforced and enabled faster updates we would have less fragmentation and a more stable environment.Of course that would mean that hardware companies would have nothing left to compete.
vladimir vanek: gopro killer? :D you must be kidding, guys. at least you're very funny in your conclusions. :)and "...the aerodynamic iON camera line features a number of significant industry firsts, including Wi-Fi connectivity..." - well, I'm not sure what industry do you mean. is your date set correctly? hello, it's 2013! :)
yeah, the Garmin Virb Elite also has Wifithey even have a built-in screen and GPS.Contour has similar features to the iOn and some kind of wireless interface.It's pretty much standard on a decent action cam.
Bob Janes: ..but isn't it just fantastic that this sort of stuff is even possible?
If there's a flaw, we'll find it.call it crap, tell them where to shove itflame, flame, baby;)
chiumeister: puzzling why folks continue to use $10 filters on expensive lenses.
As if a high price tag automagically makes them better ...
designdef: Ultra-thin, ultra-cheap filters existed long before this lens was designed. So why didn't Canon design for the 'worst case' scenario'?
one really has to wonder indeed.It surely must be possible to add enough spacing between lens and filter to prevent issues with all but the most weird filters?
Then again ... they do insist on different diameter filters with no recognizable 'standard' either.Why can I switch lenses, but not filters on the same bloody thing?
hiro_pro: i am always surprised at the negativity in the comments section of these reviews. i am guessing that no one here post processes their DSLR images? really?
these are quick and dirty cheap tools for cheap cameras (cell phones). they allow us to take a picture, adjust it to capture the feeling of the scene and post it without having to go home and down load the image to our computer.
to those of you who think this stuff looks like cr*p you should go back and scan some of your old film images. you will be a little humbler about how far cellphone photography has come.
the only difference between these filters and the ones used in Photoshop is that the latter cost more.So obviously those must be better, right ? ;)
UnderDriven: The key issue here is that this was a photo of a work of art, not some buildings on a street. The artist deserves to be compensated if someone else is making a profit from his work. This also applies to photographers who are the creators of the art work (not taking a photo of someone else's art).
As to whether the government should own the rights to monuments, if the contract was written in their favor they would own the rights. However, if the government makes contracts which does not give them the rights, too bad. In any case, had the government negotiated with the correct copyright holder up front they would have had to pay a lot less--again, they blew it and they have to pay.
The photographer didn't do anything wrong. The real culprit was Mr. Lecky of Cooper-Lecky Architects who claimed to own the copyright. None of this would have happened if he had not falsely claimed ownership. He should be sued, but greed is probably not sufficient grounds, unfortunately...
I wonder what would happen the moment someone classified a building as 'art'.Would Google have to remove it from Google Maps and/or pay money to the architect ?
A cow isn't compensated despite the fact that both the farmer and restaurant profit from its product.So why should an artist be treated any different ?Let them milk artists. A true artist will simply create more art.