Digital Imaging Technician

Digital Imaging Technician

Lives in Sweden Sweden
Joined on Apr 17, 2007

Comments

Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

Puddleglum: Why are they still selling it in the App Store a day later? What a mess.

Jun2: It is possible to continue to use it until a new OS X version comes along (under which the software wont run) or until the user buys a new camera for which there is no updated raw support — but it's certainly not a permanent solution to continue to use Aperture.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2014 at 09:59 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review preview (710 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digital Imaging Technician: So at what focal length does this leave the greatness of f/1.8? I'm mostly interested in what aperture I get at 35mm equivalent. I shoot 98% of my pictures at 35mm and very seldom anything wider than that.

dpmaxwell: f/2.8 was the answer I was looking for :)
Kosmoo: I'm used to full frame, yes. But the aperture will never be f/6 on this camera. It might have the depth of field comparable to f/6, but aperture is aperture – independent of sensor size.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 16:37 UTC
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review preview (710 comments in total)

So at what focal length does this leave the greatness of f/1.8? I'm mostly interested in what aperture I get at 35mm equivalent. I shoot 98% of my pictures at 35mm and very seldom anything wider than that.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 14:00 UTC as 67th comment | 6 replies

I'm telling you, the CC only version of Lightroom is getting closer and closer — regardless what Adobe has told us before...

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 19:22 UTC as 51st comment | 1 reply
On Alien Skin Software's Exposure 6 now available article (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

Digital Imaging Technician: If you'd really like to emulate the tone of a certain film, I think this plugin is based on faulty logic. AFAIK version 6, just as the earlier versions this software, has no idea what the input data might be — so how would it know how to tweak it to? You'd be better off with raw files and Replichrome or VSCO Film for Camera Raw or Lightroom. These use camera profiles for every camera model it supports. What the Replichrome and VSCO lacks however, is grain emulation. They both use the same grain for every film it tries to emulate (using the grain feature of Camera Raw/Lightroom). My solution is to take care of color emulation with Replichrome (and turn off the the grain in Lightroom), interpolate to desired output size and and then add the grain with Exposure to mask possible interpolation artifacts caused by up upressing.

Yes, that is correct.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2014 at 09:25 UTC
On Alien Skin Software's Exposure 6 now available article (22 comments in total)

If you'd really like to emulate the tone of a certain film, I think this plugin is based on faulty logic. AFAIK version 6, just as the earlier versions this software, has no idea what the input data might be — so how would it know how to tweak it to? You'd be better off with raw files and Replichrome or VSCO Film for Camera Raw or Lightroom. These use camera profiles for every camera model it supports. What the Replichrome and VSCO lacks however, is grain emulation. They both use the same grain for every film it tries to emulate (using the grain feature of Camera Raw/Lightroom). My solution is to take care of color emulation with Replichrome (and turn off the the grain in Lightroom), interpolate to desired output size and and then add the grain with Exposure to mask possible interpolation artifacts caused by up upressing.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2014 at 22:41 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
On Sony a6000 Review preview (711 comments in total)

I would buy this if I could get a 35mm equivalent lens with AF that isn't the size of Alaska (read: SEL24F18Z). It's a clue to me that they still don't have such a lens in their lineup.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 10, 2014 at 08:52 UTC as 31st comment
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2381 comments in total)

OK, Dpreview says "Both bodies are made of a magnesium alloy" which makes it sound like they are both identical. The preview from The Camera Store says A7 has a plastic front and some plastic dials.
See video at 3:44: https://youtu.be/bnvgceTEV3c#t=3m44s
Is this true?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 10:43 UTC as 644th comment | 3 replies

The dream is still alive... Just two weeks ago the DigiPod was presented. http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/digipod
I personally don't think there's anything interesting about these ideas if the device isn't full frame. I believe there will be too many technical obstacles. It's probably doomed to be forever vaporware.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 20, 2013 at 15:03 UTC as 84th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Hobbit13: Most mobile phone cameras have a depth of field that is large enough to do most shots in "hyper focal" any way. So I do not see the use for such small sensors.

But it might be useful to capture 3D movies etc.

What I came here to say. The Lytro camera itself was a joke. Yes, if put something at 20 cm distance from the camera you might be able to achieve shallow DOF that you can later control. Forget it if you are taking a portrait of someone 3 meters away.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2013 at 19:51 UTC
On Adobe's Fujifilm X-Trans sensor processing tested article (144 comments in total)
In reply to:

tcab: What about Fuji x100 raw support - doesn't that need improvement too?

Most people can't get x100 raw to look as good as in camera jpeg, which shouldn't really be the case. I've tried it myself and simply gone back to jpeg - it's just too hard fiddling with the raw files.

Has Adobe forgotten the x100 and the x100s?

X100s improvement are included in this update. I've never noticed any difficulties with my X100 files.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2013 at 09:59 UTC
On Adobe's Fujifilm X-Trans sensor processing tested article (144 comments in total)

Great that they have made some improvements. But I must say I'm a bit disappointed. It very much looks like the same mushy watercolor effect (slightly less of it) but with lowered sharpness. This is judging from samples, I have to give it a go in LR.

Lesson learned: just go bayer the next time. I don't think X-trans offers anything that has justified all this trouble.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 26, 2013 at 09:47 UTC as 49th comment | 2 replies
On Sigma shows latest products at Focus on Imaging article (42 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: I wonder if Adobe will make sure that Adobe Camera Raw will open these new Sigma Raw files?

ACR is a lot less of a pain to use with DP2x raws than the difficult and limited Sigma Pro Photo.

When converting DP1, DP2 and SD X3F raw files to DNG, are they still linearized? [ http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/linear.htm ]

Direct link | Posted on Mar 7, 2012 at 14:43 UTC
Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13