Michael Ma

Michael Ma

Lives in United States San Diego, United States
Works as a Multimedia Professional
Has a website at http://rawxmp.com
Joined on Jan 18, 2005

Comments

Total: 234, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Samples overall look a generation or two behind the latest smartphones. Sacrifice that for refocus, dof, 3d....maybe worth it for some, not worth it for others.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2014 at 03:29 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies

Instead of shrinking the sensor size to a fraction of what it is now, why not just put a 4x4 array of existing 1/3.2" sensors? Wouldn't that be cheaper than building your own sensor from scratch?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 28, 2014 at 22:25 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

sierranvin: Sorry Kris, but to my assessment your image is just a dorky first pass HDR rendition. None of the reverence, subtlety or deeper thoughts the Japanese ponder about Fujiyama come across from this exposure with its boorish frontal assault coloration that appears to have simply popped out of Nik or Photomatix!
Reinforces my impression that the general public has taste like flies around the HDR phenomenon - and we all know what flies like to land on quickest!

I agree that when I first saw the image, the post-processing seemed...not optimal. Blue shadows...image lacking overall contrast.

But, looking at the overwhelming positive comments on reddit, and looking at his flickr and seeing that he's actually very good with color and post processing, I chalked it up to something maybe I might not get, but other people are connecting with emotionally.

If he had photoshopped it a little better to your tastes, would it have been more successful on reddit, or less? It's hard to capture lightning in a bottle.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 22:57 UTC
In reply to:

bford: How can people online get access to your full resolution image if you don't post it online? Anyone with an obviously desirable image that posts the full resolution version online is a fool.

He posted a 3.5MP image from a 16MP camera.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 22:34 UTC

I saw the reddit thread as it was happening.

I don't think it was pointed out on reddit that he had a website. And although the website has a shop, it only gives you the dimensions of the image and the price. There should be information they are getting a quality high resolution print that they're going to be able to frame. Usually people note what kind of paper and an explanation how much care goes into each print.

Lots of missed opportunities. Something to keep in mind for next time.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 15:33 UTC as 47th comment
In reply to:

Michael Ma: Amazing concept. Although, just skimming through these, I think your time would be better invested in something like Lynda.com for online learning. I don't disagree with the importance of a degree and having to go through a system getting one but Professors, although they do certainly possess valuable information that you want and need, don't necessarily make good teachers or presenters. If you've ever taught, a big part of the lesson plan is figuring out how to fill the 50 minutes or 80 minutes, which often results in a lot of endless droning of slides and creative ways to fill time.

Why not a carefully crafted 15 minute lecture that inspires and moves, and a few key takeaway concepts? Some students would complain that they are not getting their money's worth.

That carefully crafted 15 minute lecture may take 40 hours of research, planning, and prep. Instead you can just put 30 slides together and wing it based on your knowledge, and hopefully some of what you say will be absorbed.

Paul Storm, you should learn to read before you hit reply.

What you don't get is, professors, instead of trying to explain the *why* in a concise, complete, and prepared message with a few powerful examples, professors tend to fill time with weak examples and crudely prepared lectures.

Also, you should really watch the video lectures in this article you seem to be defending before making such a bold statement. As far as lectures go, they are a model example of what I'm talking about, and don't represent at all what you are saying.

Also, are you saying Lynda.com only has how to, and never discuss the "why" of photography? I'm guessing you haven't seen much of Lynda's content either.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 04:47 UTC

Amazing concept. Although, just skimming through these, I think your time would be better invested in something like Lynda.com for online learning. I don't disagree with the importance of a degree and having to go through a system getting one but Professors, although they do certainly possess valuable information that you want and need, don't necessarily make good teachers or presenters. If you've ever taught, a big part of the lesson plan is figuring out how to fill the 50 minutes or 80 minutes, which often results in a lot of endless droning of slides and creative ways to fill time.

Why not a carefully crafted 15 minute lecture that inspires and moves, and a few key takeaway concepts? Some students would complain that they are not getting their money's worth.

That carefully crafted 15 minute lecture may take 40 hours of research, planning, and prep. Instead you can just put 30 slides together and wing it based on your knowledge, and hopefully some of what you say will be absorbed.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 01:18 UTC as 9th comment | 15 replies

The concept has potential, but needs a lot of work. Honestly, it would be a lot more interesting if you just shot it on a white background with a flash. Flash may be limited to 1/250s, but that's only how long the shutter is open. The flash of light only lasts a few thousandths of a second, which would produce non-blurry results.

If you're going to shoot outdoors, maybe try to work with colors that complement each other. (Visiting Adobe Kuler for guidance).

Also, the background is distracting. Go for a shallow DOF which would turn your background into more of a watercolor canvas rather than a background full of attention-stealing objects in the background.

Also, learn to work in RAW and enhance colors by using the sliders for HSL. The colors in the paint are unnecessarily flat.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 20:03 UTC as 35th comment | 4 replies
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (423 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Ma: I wonder if this has anything to do with OS X marketshare being on the decline across the board in 2014 (5-8%, all in the red). Should OS X users be concerned?

Check out the stats for yourself by google searching "OS X marketshare 2014".

What's next, are they going to dump Final Cut Pro and give you a more consumer friendly NLE and let Adobe handle the pro market?

You can read it however you like but OS X growth doubled since 2007 to 2014 from 3% to 6%. But from 2012 to 2014, there has been no growth. It has been on a plateau for 2 years. As of May, it's looking like there's a trend of decline according to StatCounter (the source of this article) and other sources. It's great that Windows fell below 90% but that doesn't seem to be helping OS X any. They are probably moving to something to something like iOS, Android, or Chromebook.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 15:42 UTC
On Apple to cease development of Aperture article (423 comments in total)

I wonder if this has anything to do with OS X marketshare being on the decline across the board in 2014 (5-8%, all in the red). Should OS X users be concerned?

Check out the stats for yourself by google searching "OS X marketshare 2014".

What's next, are they going to dump Final Cut Pro and give you a more consumer friendly NLE and let Adobe handle the pro market?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 21:15 UTC as 94th comment | 2 replies

Nice ACR work. Photos look surprisingly sharp. I was expecting something more like Lomo camera with light leaks.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2014 at 16:28 UTC as 32nd comment
In reply to:

phototouille: As far as I am concerned, Google is pretty bad at selecting a photog so this should be exactly the right system. Kind of like a Yelp for photographers. I just hope they get enough traction.

That's true. Google searching is a terrible system for finding a photographer (the 10 who understands SEO the best will get 87% of the spotlight from the entire world), but probably also the most commonly used aside from recommendations from people you know.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2014 at 06:48 UTC
On Huawei announces octa-core Honor 6 post (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

quiquae: A common complaint from camera neophytes when they use high-end compacts or DSLRs is "This camera doesn't focus!", when they actually mean "The DoF is too thin and I don't know how to stop down!".

It seems that handset manufacturers are going after faster aperture, which is good if you know what you are doing, but I wonder if the DoF is deep enough to keep the general population happy?

I have seen this complaint in the samsung galaxy forums and undoubtably they've seen a rise in complaints that their previous phone was faster to focus or has problems focusing. The cameras take longer to focus because of the shallower dof and the slightly longer minimum focus distance. They're adding phase detection (galaxy S5) and laser assisted (LG G3) focus to combat this problem rather than go back to slower lenses with a shallower DOF.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2014 at 04:15 UTC

2 facts you should be aware of first. Noise cleans up incredibly well for the A7S for stills. For video, the noise reduction is done in body, and it does an amazing job.

With that said, for stills, the results look nearly identical to the A7R for ISO 25600 and lower. I'm surprised. It's like it's using the same sensor, just a different processor.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 22, 2014 at 21:36 UTC as 78th comment
On Adobe Lightroom Mobile now available for iPhone post (20 comments in total)

Without raw support, this is mostly pointless. Maybe the iPhone 6 will shoot in RAW?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2014 at 17:53 UTC as 1st comment
On Air Stylus turns your iPad into a graphics tablet post (58 comments in total)
In reply to:

DenisBBergeron: Oh look mama something that transform a ipad in a samsung note !

These stylus solutions on an iPad will always have a noticeable delay. Get a tablet with wacom digitizer instead, such as the Note tablet, or wait for Apple to officially support it.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 21, 2014 at 17:38 UTC
In reply to:

ArminH: I would love to buy PS CC - But I'll NEVER rent it!

@bigfatron I think exactly what you are wanting may be coming. Considering that Adobe CC has completely separated Adobe CC 2014 and they run independently, they may be readying a purchase option. They'll probably leave in the online authentication though, which won't be a big deal. Who has a up-to-date (spec wise) computer, but don't connect to the Internet? They probably don't know Adobe CC even exists.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 22:57 UTC

Found something interesting with ACR 8.5 and the Panasonic GH4. The GH4 has a thumbnail embedded in the RW2 file, and you get a preview thumbnail in Windows x64. GH3....still just Photoshop icons. Thank you Panasonic.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 20, 2014 at 15:42 UTC as 8th comment

I get the sense that everything cool that this device does, you can get the newer Androids to do it when the apps become available.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 16:52 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies
On Adobe CC Announcements: What you need to know article (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: nope

still the same old rental garbage

(and the pricing if you do video and other stuff too, is rarely bad above and beyond the horror of the rental model)

Adobe must be desperate to now try to play it as permanent $10.

Adobe should really listen to people who want to buy it rather than rent. Charge $999 up front, then $200 every 2 years for upgrades. Some people actually want to pay this rather than $10/month. The difference is if they don't pay the $200 upgrade fee, they should be able to use CC for as long as they want without the latest upgrades. The customers would be happy. And just to prove it has nothing to do with people wanting to pirate software, they should leave the always-online requirement for license verification in place. Who has a computer (that can run the latest photoshop) but can't connect to the Internet at least once in 30 days? Probably no one. They probably don't even know Photoshop CC exists because they don't read the news on the Internet. The Internet requirement is really a non-issue.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 19, 2014 at 16:44 UTC
Total: 234, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »