Anssi Kumpula

Anssi Kumpula

Lives in Finland Finland
Joined on Jan 19, 2008

Comments

Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10

"Output Sharpening and Noise Reduction were not applied to exported images that were resized to less than 1/3 of the original image size."

Is this a copy-paste mistake? This was supposed to be fixed in 5.2 release already:

"Bugs Corrected in Lightroom 5.2

Output Sharpening and Noise Reduction were not applied to exported images that were resized to less than 1/3 of the original image size."

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2013/09/lightroom-5-2-now-available.html

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2013 at 08:11 UTC as 19th comment

I've heard (not used myself) 41 MP on Lumia make the camera to operate NOT instantly. That's what I've prefer on a mobile device. Would be nice to know how much iPhone 5S benefits with its 8 MP operation QUICKNESS-wise.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2013 at 05:49 UTC as 70th comment | 3 replies
On Lightroom 4 Review article (469 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan4321: Too much fluff, I really just want something to develop the raws in the least amount of time and with the least amount of 'tweaking' required. Book mode, map mode, print-to-whatever mode, all those things are totally lost on people like me and probably 95% of the users out there. This is why a lot of people still use Digital Photo Professional over adobe camera raw for 99% of the photos out there. Make the raw development engine quick and intelligent with as much automatic setting as possible and only then will people like me be willing to pay that much for it.

Exactly. I'd be glad spending less time behind computers.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2012 at 21:30 UTC
In reply to:

Charrick: First of all, I think that this technology has great potential. But it's sad that Adobe somewhat ruined it by using this synthetically blurred photo. That only breeds suspicion. Perhaps the first two photos were truly average blurred photos, but it's harder to take them completely on their word. I hope it's true, though.

One other thing. Did anyone notice the Adobe guy apologizing for the "slow computer". College kids showing each other cool programs might do that, but one of the most technologically oriented companies in the world can probably afford a computer that's at least an above average consumer PC when they're showing off their new software. It seems obviously to me that they got the best computer that money can buy and then apologized for it being slow.

Also, those idiots in the chairs on stage were completely annoying.

With all of this said, if that technology is actually as was demonstrated, it is one of the greatest advances in photo editing in history.

Exactly. If that technology delivers, great. But fooling people and unprofessional presenting is bad.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2011 at 12:00 UTC
In reply to:

Anssi Kumpula: What Adobe did is presenting a non-real world photo that was not real-world photo. Was that a mistake?

I think it was, even if it doesn't make that technology look very promising.

Seems like I can't write. What I meant is Adobe using a non-real world photo in a demo but presenting it as a real world photo and that was a mistake.

The guy in the demo said: "Okay one more comparison. We found this image online. It's random internet photo... it's bad." Which clearly is to claim that photo was genuinely blurred by out-of-focus, camera shake or subject movement.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2011 at 11:57 UTC

What Adobe did is presenting a non-real world photo that was not real-world photo. Was that a mistake?

I think it was, even if it doesn't make that technology look very promising.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2011 at 11:06 UTC as 22nd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

karlviehe: for general purposes, in the rush to ever greater thinness, phone manufacturers have eliminated the possibility of including optical zooms ... say 5 to 7x ..... whch makes the phone only useful for "cocktail" photography ....
The same is true of tablet PCs.
This could easily be corrected.

I don't think lack of zoom lenses affects photography badly. I think it's putting people to think more with their feet. I like that.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 6, 2011 at 12:59 UTC
On Nikon 1 System First Impressions article (248 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greg Lovern: I understand that Nikon is aiming these at compact camera upgraders, but I wonder how many people want a bounce flash unit but don't want a PASM dial.

Greg

And not having sense of depth and smooth backgrounds and foregrounds is what these cameras are not having. I believe many compact camera users find sense of depth in SLR photos flattering to the eye but they won't get that.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 11:17 UTC
On Nikon 1 System First Impressions article (248 comments in total)

Nikon says customer surveys revealed what compact camera users want when they consider upgrading their cameras. I believe those people just don't know what they really want is DEPTH OF FIELD, that comes from larger sensor.

Nikon failed to acknowledge that in their conclusion.

Maybe I'm wrong and CX-size sensor is enough but it sure seems like all too small sensor to give compact camera upgraders the new dimension they might be looking for.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 11:05 UTC as 50th comment | 2 replies
On Photo Tip: Left of Center article (44 comments in total)

I'll argue that Golden Ratio is better rule to follow, though, it's not possible to show up on viewfinder as rule of thirds often is. But anyway you will get better if you composite a little to the center and not exactly to the first third. This is of course just a rule of thumb but anyways good to know because Golden Ratio is more flattering to the eye than Rule of Thirds.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2011 at 19:33 UTC as 20th comment
Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10