TimT999

Joined on Aug 11, 2011

Comments

Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Apple revamps MacBook Pro lineup, adds 'Touch Bar' (871 comments in total)

It's such a surprise to read the DP comments. So many folks who know exactly what's wrong with the new Apple laptops. ... But none of the commenters (including myself) have used these new machines. We don't know how fast these laptops are. Don't know how well integrated the new touch bar functionality and the OS are.

The folks who harp about this or that being missing don't get how Apple works, their all-around approach. These machines are gonna hit the sweet spot for most photographer users. And the fact that the new 13" model is about the same size and weight as the 13" Air (but with retina display and all that power) is particularly appealing to photographers like me who travel.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2016 at 06:22 UTC as 51st comment | 19 replies

With no clue as the source of all this film, I don't see much reason for excitement. If someone had done a sampling of film dropped off for processing for the entirety of the 1950s, 99% would have been crap except to the family that was doing the development.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2016 at 16:21 UTC as 26th comment

I love the Fujifilm approach. A quality APS-C chip, great choice of lenses, and a great size for travel. And if they just had a model with slightly higher resolution, I would get one for my second camera.
But 16MB isn't quite enough for photos that I need to print, esp. if the image needs any cropping. I'm hoping they eventually raise the resolution just a bit.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 15:09 UTC as 49th comment | 3 replies

Reading over the comments, you get the clear sense that most folks already know that the Pro will never be a serious editing tool for photos. That's basically how Lars answers the question of his title.

And anyone who has done any product development knows that Lars is right. The Pro isn't a serious editing tool -- because it's not out till November. And any Pro software is still vaporware.

That's the classic tech commentator mistake. They look at product specs and think they understand the final product. But Apple plays the long game; they know the Pro is just a baby.

Apple's gonna sell a ton of these to corporate, to current design customers, to anyone with the money. Apple's already talking to IBM and Adobe about the long term roadmap for this product.

Adobe doesn't care if DP commentators love the Surface. Adobe looks at future product sales projections (Surface, Pro, etc.) They know the Pro's going to be a money tree. They're throwing developers at this new platform Now.

Link | Posted on Oct 3, 2015 at 19:50 UTC as 36th comment
In reply to:

TimT999: The reviewer keeps saying that the lens is soft at the long end. But looking at the sharpness chart, it's in the 1300-1400 range even at 50mm -- in other words for over 3/4 of the zoom range. Sharpness only improves slightly if you go to f-8.
By contrast, Tamron, Canon or Nikon 70-200 lenses come in at between 2000-2500 lines of resolution (at the same f-stop). And their 24-70 lenses all hit that same range.
That's a significant difference in IQ. For stuff you'll be showing on a web site, the softness isn't a problem. But if your images will be sold or printed, this lens just won't work.

Dave, you say I'm making a "pointless observation" because the lens will only be for casual snapshots. Thanks. But in your desire to put me down, I think you've missed what I'm really getting at, the context.

If DP Review had said the lens is only for casual use, I wouldn't have added my 2 cents. Furthermore, the reviewer says that the softness issue only comes into play at 200-300mm. That's factually incorrect. It's actually there from 50mm.

The deeper problem is too many DP reviews don't define where a piece of equipment fits along the continuum from camera phone up to the professional level. That's info we need to balance out the pros and cons.

Too often, DP reviewers avoid giving that context. As a result some commenters believe a piece of low end gear stacks up against the high price stuff. There's nothing wrong with making a tradeoff in gear based on lightness or price. But let's not pretend apples are oranges. And please don't denigrate someone else's comments, it's rude.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2015 at 17:59 UTC

The reviewer keeps saying that the lens is soft at the long end. But looking at the sharpness chart, it's in the 1300-1400 range even at 50mm -- in other words for over 3/4 of the zoom range. Sharpness only improves slightly if you go to f-8.
By contrast, Tamron, Canon or Nikon 70-200 lenses come in at between 2000-2500 lines of resolution (at the same f-stop). And their 24-70 lenses all hit that same range.
That's a significant difference in IQ. For stuff you'll be showing on a web site, the softness isn't a problem. But if your images will be sold or printed, this lens just won't work.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2015 at 15:52 UTC as 48th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

TimT999: How disappointing. The article brings up a valid point, that paparazzi will do a bunch of creepy things to get pictures. And any photographer who takes people pictures is impacted by this issue because more and more people get overly defensive if a camera is around.

So that's the issue. But 90% of the comments here are about whether the British Royal Family is the scum of the earth or not. Use your brains people. Think about the deeper issue instead of giving us a knee-jerk response that says nothing about photography and isn't even insightful about the Windsors.

Bakhtyar, if you had read my post more closely, you'd realize I'm not angry. I'm disappointed that folks can't do more than push a political agenda.

This isn't a political site Bakhtyar. It's for photography. I agree that each of us has the right to say whatever we want. But my point is that posts that talk about Gandhi or the life span of aboriginal people may make you feel like you are striking a blow against injustice, but you're approach is so off topic, it turns folks off and hurts your cause.

And your post isn't even providing insight on the topic you seem to care about. You assume that the readers have no idea of what happened to the native people in Australia, Canada and the US. Wrong. I've spent a lot of time on reservations here in the US and am writing a book that will bring more $$$ into the ones in Arizona.

So if you preach, do it with a small bit of insight. Say something that's thoughtful if you can't respect that this site is for photographers.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2015 at 21:58 UTC

How disappointing. The article brings up a valid point, that paparazzi will do a bunch of creepy things to get pictures. And any photographer who takes people pictures is impacted by this issue because more and more people get overly defensive if a camera is around.

So that's the issue. But 90% of the comments here are about whether the British Royal Family is the scum of the earth or not. Use your brains people. Think about the deeper issue instead of giving us a knee-jerk response that says nothing about photography and isn't even insightful about the Windsors.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2015 at 18:25 UTC as 54th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

jaykumarr: I will never behave like such a paparazzi. It is unacceptable, serious security problem and dangerous for the baby. But,
As an Indian, I envy they are able to rob innocent masses of India, charge 48% as tax from Indian farmers and take everything to Britain without spending a penny in India. I envy no other country questioned them. I envy they could setup Gandhi as a shield from patriotic freedom fighters. I envy how they used Gandhi to send Indian soldiers to fight and die against Germans. I envy how they sucked bloods of farmers of every nation, how they killed 500 harmless people in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre and praised Reginald Edward Harry Dyer as a war hero, but they could portray Hitler as daemon. I envy the British royal family people are bald except for prince George. I envy they have become more searched family after alleged killing of princes Diana. I envy British papers didn't care about them while they cared about hair style of Beckham.

If you want to get on a soapbox, try to choose an article with some vague relationship to your agenda. This article is about photographers doing creepy stuff to get pictures. The kid and his parents had absolutely nothing to do with Gandhi or anything else in your post.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2015 at 18:14 UTC
In reply to:

TimT999: Just got the $79 update after digging around on the web site and not seeing any mention of an upgrade for current V5 users.

I even did the live chat with someone there -- she denied there was any upgrade except for folks who bought a month ago. Finally I called the sales line and they let me do the upgrade after putting me through a sales pitch for CC. Classic Adobe.

Suzanne, I just called the general sales number for the Adobe site.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2015 at 21:05 UTC

Just got the $79 update after digging around on the web site and not seeing any mention of an upgrade for current V5 users.

I even did the live chat with someone there -- she denied there was any upgrade except for folks who bought a month ago. Finally I called the sales line and they let me do the upgrade after putting me through a sales pitch for CC. Classic Adobe.

Link | Posted on Apr 21, 2015 at 20:59 UTC as 102nd comment | 5 replies

Excellent analysis, Jeff. I was also a fan of Aperture. The adjustment brushes were a particular favorite.

LR 5 is definitely a huge improvement in functionality over Aperture 3 and I'm glad I made the move. It's got great functionality. The only glaring weakness for me is that's patch tools aren't nearly as good as what you find in the new version of Photoshop.

LR has a ton of tools but you'll need to a few intermediate LR classes to get to power user level. Adobe just doesn't have the usability chops as Apple.

I think that Apple Photo is the best choice for folks who just want the core adjustments. And knowing Apple, they'll continue to enhance and tackle several of the items on your missing list. But for the average guy who takes shots for their vacation, Lightroom would be an exercise in futility.

For any photographer who makes post-production a major part of their workflow, something like Lightroom is the way to go.

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2015 at 16:51 UTC as 202nd comment
In reply to:

Thorgrem: Great field test. Seems like m4/3 is up to the task of shooting such a difficult to shoot sport.

I'm impressed with the frame rate and continuos focusing. But there really isn't much subject separation even in the f2.8 shots. In sports photography, you can have incredibly cluttered environments and narrowing the DOF is essential. So I'm surprised that the video review never mentioned that issue.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 15:18 UTC
In reply to:

JJ10: What is the point of this news item if it is restricted to one country only. I thought this was meant to be an international site. Why cant I watch this simple promo video here in Australia?

There seems to be way to much restriction on this site of late.

I don't mind the font choice as much as the fact that it is white on black. That has a nice artsy look in a headline but is a bad choice if you're reading an entire review.

Link | Posted on Aug 6, 2014 at 17:25 UTC
On article Readers' showcase: Landscape photography (90 comments in total)

DP, it's nice you have a "full screen" mode, even though it's not that much bigger for some of these shots. But for most photo web sites I know, you can scroll through the pics while in that display mode. Making users go back to the tiny display between each shot is bad usability.

I don't mean to complain, but these shots deserve to be displayed properly.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2014 at 13:45 UTC as 39th comment
On article Apple to cease development of Aperture (425 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: Instead of lamenting, congratulate your mums, dads, sisters, brothers, girlfriends, and yourself for helping Apple make the iPhone the most popular camera ever. It is as expensive as a real camera, and with a plan, the cost is high even as buying pro DLSR gear. But it is sooo convenient, so easy to use, you need no knowledge of photography, and it does it all for you, you do instant Facebook updates, right?
Now the most popular camera's maker has introduced its own developer substance for its negatives, that does it all of you, they way they like — whether you like it or not.
You didn't want have a real camera with you because it was so "inconvenient"? Now you are given no real photo software too and the most inconvenient of all news. Let's clap to ourselves, for we have been sooo smart.

I don't quite get your attempts at sarcasm, Zvonimir. The iPhone (and all the other smart phones out there) don't claim to be DSLR level gear -- any I've never heard anyone say these phones have that kind of photographic firepower.

A smartphone is a pocket computer, that makes calls, does email, messaging, video and yes, takes snapshots. And the huge cost you mention is mostly for access to a 4G network -- that money goes to the provider. So if we're going to get on a soapbox, let's attack the service providers for charging so much and locking folks into a 2 year phone plan.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 04:07 UTC
On article Apple to cease development of Aperture (425 comments in total)

I'm a bit disappointed that Apple took so long to admit that it was moving all its resources over to their Photo app, but I'm not too surprised. Aperture 3 came out ages ago and it didn't make sense for them to have parallel development of a consumer and pro photo app. That said, I've always preferred the Aperture approach to usability.

Apple has always tried to keep focused on their core strengths rather than spread resources too thin. That's why you have only a handful of Apple phone choices rather than the 40-odd that Samsung sells.

I just hope that Adobe doesn't move Lightroom users over to the monthly rental model they use for Photoshop.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2014 at 03:53 UTC as 71st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

TimT999: The level of copying that's going on with the Mi Pad and all DP can say is "aimed at Apple's iPad Mini. " Let's at least be honest here, this is a level of theft that probably won't be allowed outside China.

Fairly common in China of course. You go into any big market area in Beijing or Shanghai and the booths are full of knock-offs of international brands. You can get a great price on a real, authentic "Rolex" that falls apart after a month.

I assume the hardware for the Mi Pad isn't that level of cheap crap. But the real issue is the software interface. If it's standard Android, it could very well take market share away from Samsung. The Mi Pad could definitely undercut their tablets.

I don't think it competes as much with Apple regardless of Mi Pad's flagrant copying. Many of the folks in China who have the money for Apple won't want to own a brand that screams knock-off.

Will, I have no problem with someone who buys a product that imitates another company's product. You like the original company's design and want to save some bucks, then go for the cheap version.

But in a forum like this, people should be able to share ideas without being called names. I'm not a "snob." You know nothing about how I've lived my life. Calling someone who disagrees with you a name just tells others that you're willing to trash others just to win an argument.

I also didn't say "everything" out of China is a knock-off. But clearing many folks on this site can see some shameless imitation going on. And anyone who's lived there knows that too many companies there do cheap knockoffs. That's a fact.

As a product manager, I care about creating something good. My company spends hours and hours sweating the details. And I know what its like to have someone else steal the idea instead of doing the work themselves. So please, stop the name calling, Will. It cheapens you.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2014 at 16:41 UTC
Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »