Impressive results. I'm amazed that this could be produced with a phone camera.
I love the warm look, soft shadows, and the single catchlight in the eyes.
I was thinking of going to Kickstarter for my idea of "Room Light", but it seems someone beat me to it...
Hubertus Bigend: This is the most straightforward version of how capitalism has, in the end, always worked: profits privatized, losses socialized. In the so-called 'social web' of the 21st century, socializing losses is just much quicker and much more obvious than it used to be. While Ada backers now pay for what would have been Triggertrap's own enterprise risk in the economy of the 20th century, Triggertrap continues to make profits with their existing products. Nice.
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
ANY investor in something cutting edge, no matter whether it is "crowd funded" or by some other means, is at risk of failure.
"socialising losses" - don't make me laugh.
Boss of Sony: Love these images. If only photography had been invented centuries earlier. Or even millennia earlier. Wouldn't you love to see photos of the pyramids being built, Jesus being crucified, Buddha meditating, medieval villages during the Black Death, primitive humans fighting woolly mammoth, Macchu Picchu in all its glory, mad medieval Europeans burning witches at the stake, etc etc.
Unlike you, I wasn't making it up. A little research on Google will show you that photography in the 1600s very nearly did come about.
Photography was very nearly invented in the 1600s when it was shown silver nitrate darkend by exposure to light, not heat. With the invention of the telescope early in that century driving better lens making, it so nearly all came together. But sadly it didn't.
Flickr - pah. Horrible user interface. I gave up looking at it when it went from a nice list of photos and the info next to each one in a paged format to being a dumb wall of pictures on one page which require forever to load.
"We have reached out to Metz"
No, you didn't. You emailed or rang them and asked them to comment. They aren't living in a tree. They aren't painted on the roof of the Sistine Chapel.
Gee - am I getting sick of this phrase...
Sounds like the work of the Devil...
It's only gold plated - cheap muck.
Give me a camera body carved out of a block of solid 24k gold.
Now that would really be worthy of being hideously wealthy, no brains and no taste.
ljclark: If this was around the first of April instead of around the first of November...
Considering how ugly the Df is anyway, this has got to be one of the best illustrations of "lipstick on a pig".
Pigs are nice and the most intelligent of farmyard animals. Please don't insult pigs by comparing them to this. And a pig certainly would be smart enough not to buy one.
bed bug: I have had the DJI Phantom 2 Vision + for a couple of months now. Thought I would list some positives and negatives.
Positives1. The gimbal works very well producing very stable images (I had the Phantom 2 Vision before and the images are not stable).2. Quite easy to learn how to fly.
Negatives1. I only get around 15minute flight time, maximum.2. There are problems with the video transmitter in the drone such that I am unable to fly the drone via the camera as the link keeps dropping out. I am battling with the service division where I bought it from trying to get this problem sorted out.3. The gimbal/camera unit is very flimsy, in a very minor crash, the camera unit was ripped off the gimbal. Unfortunately both need to be replaced which is around 2/3rds the cost of a new drone (ridiculous!!!).4. The gimbal & camera is one unit, if one is damaged then the whole unit needs replaced.5. DJI serivce is non-existent, I have been trying 2 months to have the camera repaired, cont...
Topples over on landing? Not had that - but I use down throttle to turn it off as the other way with both sticks is prone to causing a topple-over. BTW, it's better to hover it and catch it instead of landing it - easy to do so long as it's not blowing a gale.
I would also not recommend carbon-fibre blades from the reading and viewing I've done. They shatter on impact and there is no real advantage weight-wise - you might get 20 seconds more flight time.
Also, you can tilt the camera with the V2+ by tilting the controller if you switch the app to that mode - no need to take hands off anything.
Shaun Bell: My only comment... Fly away lol! Seems DJI autopilots don't like to stay on lease : )
Only if you don't bother to set up properly. Fly aways are 90% user dumbness.
JackM: Why is the horizon tilted?
This is the one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iTz3Dd2Ecs
The angle can be adjusted by accessing the screw at the rear of the gimbal assembly. There's a video about how to do it on YouTube.
BTW, the article is wrong in several parts - some have already been mentioned. Here's another: rotating the drone is not to calibrate the GPS, it's to calibrate the compass. You only need to do that once so long as you don't move far on subsequent flights from your initial flight starting point.
You'll also find that the controller has a range limit of 400 metres in Europe and 800 metres in the US (there is a potentiometer on the rear that can switch between the regulated power outputs - it is currently set as default to be the lower limit, even in the US). That's due to radio interference regulations.
KAllen: Where you are allowed to shoot with these legally in the UK makes them no real alternative to shooting from an aircraft.Surprisingly it is often more cost effective to shoot commercially from a Cessna.The BBC use a lot of drones to film with, which is fine because they are in control of the area. Joe public will not often have that luxury, which limits their use.Good little toy if you use them far from people and buildings. Limited for anything else.
I think you need to look at YouTube. Not saying it's "legal" per se, but the Blackpool gig is very cool indeed.
Coincidence. I bought this model yesterday. It's brilliant - if you can excuse the camera-phone-quality stills it takes (14 MP doth not a good image make). Video is very good. I wish they'd provided support for a narrow angle camera - the "narrow angle" on this is 85 deg and is really just a crop from the 105 deg original.
I plan to strap on a Panasonic GM1 for stills. A shame they have made it such that it's not easy to carry any extra items. It would have been nice if the gimbal was detachable without having to cut and destroy the "anti drop kit".
They missed a trick with the waypoint mode. They should have allowed orientation for each waypoint. As it currently stands it is useless as you can't perform automatic dolly shots or orbits. It's more a gimmick than a useful tool. I don't see why this can't be done as effectively the drone has no "front" and can fly "forward" in any orientation.
That said, it is a really nice machine and it performs perfectly straight out of the box.
IonPortraits: Fact is, that the monkey can't loose or gain anything from this selfie, but others will. So, the one who can only loose is the actual photographer (without whom this selfie would have never happened!). Therefore, the situation as it is, is not correct. It is just common sense.
Don't be sorry - I was just playing on your typo for the movie name :-)
At least they got it right this time on one thing - no more being forced to have a double flash when the camera is completely in manual mode (making off-camera slaves almost impossible to use).
However, I bet they still haven't fixed the inability to turn off auto-rotation of the image when the camera is rotated on the smartphone app (making face-down or face-up shots a nightmare because the image constantly flips).
PicOne: A bit off topic. But can say a 6 month old baby who accidentally pushes a button on a camera own copyright? I guess I'm asking if it was the fact that an animal took the picture, or whether the issue is that an "author" of a work, in order to claim copyright has to have mental capacity to be aware of what they're doing?
Copyright law, AFAIK, makes no mention of mental capacity. In the case of a baby - well, they'd own the copyright and could make money from the picture when they grow up.
Moral of the story: get a baby to take the selfie, not a monkey.
Rick Kent: I do not believe this photo was actually taken by any monkey but instead by David Slater himself.
Damned if he does and if he doesn't - if he admits he took it himself then he's a liar but keeps copyright. If he maintains the monkey took it then he loses copyright.
I suspect the former. Perhaps he should just let it rest and go and shoot some other things.