brn

brn

Lives in United States AK, United States
Joined on Mar 10, 2003

Comments

Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »

Google,

If you want to do something for photos on Android, how about letting other apps edit and save them?

Thanks for making my favorite editing apps useless.

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2015 at 01:58 UTC as 12th comment
On Lily Camera flies itself and follows its owner article (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

PixelPump: Now a REALLY clever drone, would be one that doesn't follow its owner, but goes ahead of its owner looking back at him or her!

1:05 into their demo video. It will lead the tracker.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2015 at 22:42 UTC

I don't get the hate. Sure, the example is an example of poor technique, but it's a good example for the demonstration.

Who here has never taken a shot with a reflection in it? You don't always have the opportunity to take the shot otherwise. I look forward to being able to reduce such artifacts in my photos.

Direct link | Posted on May 16, 2015 at 22:38 UTC as 2nd comment
On Lily Camera flies itself and follows its owner article (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

particleman78: From what I've read about this drone; I think the biggest problem with this is the lack of object avoidance. It is bound to fly into trees, buildings, poles, or even worse people.

That was my main concern. It appears to work in wide open space. How well does it work with obstacles?

Aside from that, I think it's kinda cool. I'd never own one, because I don't do anything interesting enough, but still cool.

OK, I just got a new idea for this thing. Cops could plant the tracker on a suspect. Lily could follow and film the suspect. :)

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2015 at 23:23 UTC
On Lily Camera flies itself and follows its owner article (148 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightCatcherLT: Seems overpriced and big. Answer to this is kickstarter funded Zano http://www.flyzano.com/

" Answer to this is kickstarter funded"
That's a phrase that always raises red flags with me.

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2015 at 23:14 UTC
On Big Zoom: Nikon Coolpix P900 real-world samples article (153 comments in total)

Warning: not for pixel peepers.

At 1:1, even this ISO100 images look terrible.

Direct link | Posted on May 5, 2015 at 23:38 UTC as 57th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

dash2k8: I'm curious about the claim that this drone doesn't need a gimbal for image stabilization. It would be really amazing if they pulled that off. For now I remain on the extremely skeptical end.

Agreed. I'm not sure I agree with their implication that the lack of a gimbal is a good thing.

Direct link | Posted on May 5, 2015 at 23:33 UTC

I've no desire to make my photos like film-ish.

To each his own.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 23:33 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

KingOfAtlantis: seems like it doesn't support GoPro anymore. Oh well at least it will drive down the price of the Phantom 2

The Engadget article suggests they are likely to support a cameraless (add a GoPro) version.
http://www.engadget.com/2015/04/08/dji-phantom-3-professional-4k-hands-on/

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 02:48 UTC
In reply to:

brn: I'm highly suspicious. If they only support a very limited number camera for RAW files, what are they doing with my files?

If they're not doing anything with my files, why don't they support most RAW files? If you extract a thumbnail from one NEF file, you can extract a thumbnail from all NEF files. They're limiting the number of RAW files they support, because they're analyzing them somehow.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2015 at 22:02 UTC
In reply to:

santamonica812: 12 bucks a year sounds great, even if used only as a third backup options.

I have about 9 TB of photos (RAW + TIFF & PSD). How do I get my photos from my computer to the cloud? Obviously, I can't upload them. . . by my rough calculations, that would take more than 6-8 months of continuous uploads (ie, 24 hours a day)--assuming that my upload speed stayed constant and at the advertised speed (hah!!!). In real life, probably about 18 months of doing this constant uploading, as I'll be using my computer to do other things at the same time.

I assume serious photographers will be uploading RAW and TIFF files, with JPGs used as images for web use only. So, I expect that pros, semi-pros, and serious amateurs will all have backups of 1 TB and higher. I'm not understanding the logistics . . . how are people managing to get such a huge volume of data uploaded in a reasonable time-frame????

At $12 or even $60 per year, their target audience isn't someone with 9TB of files. If it's not practical for you to get all those files up to their storage, they're OK with that.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2015 at 02:14 UTC
In reply to:

teeranui: No RAW support for Olympus???

Don't feel too left out. Most cameras from Nikon, Canon and Sony aren't supported either.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 27, 2015 at 02:09 UTC

I'm highly suspicious. If they only support a very limited number camera for RAW files, what are they doing with my files?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2015 at 22:39 UTC as 50th comment | 5 replies
On Flasher smartphone flash launched on Kickstarter post (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

NiceAussieGuy: I'm not sure that allowing comments is such a good idea, when 90% of the comments are negative of just relavent. Kickstarter has funded some great projects including many that benefit third world countries!

Most of the commends are relevant. They are also negative, but with good reason. Hopefully the feedback will be used constructively.

As to your other point, just because some good has come from kickstarter, doesn't mean a lot of junk hasn't also come from kickstarter.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2015 at 23:32 UTC
On On point: Steve Vaccariello's dance photography article (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: No 10, the last one, is the best.
Very artistic; a break from the previous powerful shots.

I guess we're all a little different. #10 was the only one I didn't like (#4 doesn't count).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2015 at 20:31 UTC
In reply to:

powerbook: 810A ... who cares? We want a D400 !!!!!

Too bad there's not a "No D400 yet" article for you to comment on, but please comment here. /s

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 00:55 UTC
On Gary Fong launches virtual camera tutorial service article (140 comments in total)

The article claims it's fully interactive. Given that description, I'm anticipating you can actually operate some features of the virtual camera. That doesn't appear to be the case. It just seems that each virtual button will simply launch a video.

Also, according to the video segment that I was allowed to see "The AF/MF button is the button you would use to backfocus". That doesn't seem like a good way to lead off when talking about AF/MF. I hope he gets a lot more in depth, but I suspect he merely shows you how to backfocus and not much more.

I'm a bit disappointed that DPReview would promote this via an "article". Let Gary buy an ad.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2015 at 03:58 UTC as 24th comment | 3 replies
On Seattle PI.com showcases its 'pictures of the year' article (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

chewdoggydog: @brn.....don't b a dick.

I'm not being a dick. I seriously don't understand what the photo has going for it. To me, it looks like a misfire. If I'd taken that photo, I'd have deleted it.

I appreciate maxnoy for providing his/her perspective as to why it's a great image. I don't agree (except about the lighting), but I do appreciate maxnoy's response much more than yours.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 00:33 UTC
On Seattle PI.com showcases its 'pictures of the year' article (30 comments in total)

I don't understand how #6 was even up for consideration.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 14, 2014 at 21:04 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Suntan: You can get a billion different, cheap LED flashlights off Amazon/Ebay.

Buy 3 for $10 combined, then JB weld them to a 1/4-20 nut... Boom, this product.

-Suntan

Far from it. 1500 lumens is quite a bit of light. The product is compact. It's adaptable. It comes with the ability to be wirelessly controlled. I think the price is reasonable. You'd pay a lot more than this if it was controllable by a DSLR.
Not sure I get the quad-kit though. They're using some kind of funky math on the pricing there.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 03:19 UTC
Total: 54, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »