Upritbass

Joined on Aug 13, 2017

Comments

Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13
On article Gear Of The Year 2021: Jordan's Choice - Apple M1 iMac (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nicolas Det: Soldered RAM, soldered SSD, missing important ports (for me), not reparable...

I would prefer a cheaper more flexible PC. Even if it last not so long on battery.

Impressive chip anyway!

How do you solder RAM onto an M1 chip?

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2022 at 15:38 UTC
In reply to:

Craig from Nevada: Lots of good info packed into this video.

It is a very daring undertaking--high risk/high reward effort. I understand there are 344 points of single failure in the first month or so of the mission related to unfurling the mirror and sunscreen. Lots can go wrong.

This type of work government can and should do--an opportunity to change our understanding of the universe. It is a bargain at $10 billion.

> I understand there are 344 points of single failure

This. Along with all of the unproven tech. This thing is just begging to fail. So much risk could have been significantly reduced if they had done small proof-of-concept vehicles. NASA has for a long time had the attitude of, “Let’s build just one and cross our fingers.”

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2021 at 21:11 UTC
In reply to:

DGrinb: I could be terribly wrong, but I feel the Super Resolution on landscapes above just look more "sharpened" to me. Can be done in Lightroom. Nothing shocking really.

It would be more shocking if the tool could "fix" dynamic range or focus issues. That would be shocking....

That’s because they aren’t super-resolved. What they really mean is ‘synthetic’ or ‘simulated’ or even ‘prettier’. But the further I get into my retirement, the less I care about the lies these companies are telling. I won’t be using this stuff, but you folks are welcome to.

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2021 at 17:08 UTC
In reply to:

sherman_levine: Does it work with license plates?

I’ll just let that sit there…

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2021 at 03:10 UTC
In reply to:

Petercatt: So show us actual photos of the same models at matching high resolution, so that we can compare them to the enhanced images and see where fantasy details have been added.

It's the last array of images in the article.

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2021 at 01:07 UTC
In reply to:

sherman_levine: Does it work with license plates?

I guess it's hard to be wrong. Have you been called into a US court as a forensics expert? That stuff would be thrown out so fast it would make your head spin.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2021 at 23:38 UTC
In reply to:

sherman_levine: Does it work with license plates?

In the United States this method is forensically worthless because “it's inferring things from inputs.”, i.e. just making stuff up.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2021 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

Upritbass: This is great for creating a higher resolution synthetic image. It does not, however, create a higher resolution version of the base image. The leopard example shows this very clearly. The synthetic image is of _a_ leopard and looks similar to the low-resolution image, but the reference image exposes the severe errors: the spots are completely wrong, the nose is the wrong size and position, the eyes are wrong, and so on.

Yes, severe errors. From the Google article referenced in this article:
"Super-resolution has many applications that can range from restoring old family portraits to improving medical imaging systems."

Sorry, but I'm not going to trust a doctor who makes life-and-death decisions based on a synthetic image.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2021 at 17:24 UTC

This is great for creating a higher resolution synthetic image. It does not, however, create a higher resolution version of the base image. The leopard example shows this very clearly. The synthetic image is of _a_ leopard and looks similar to the low-resolution image, but the reference image exposes the severe errors: the spots are completely wrong, the nose is the wrong size and position, the eyes are wrong, and so on.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2021 at 15:32 UTC as 95th comment | 10 replies

What I really want to know is how much of this stuff is going to hit the refurb store in 4 weeks…

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2021 at 16:59 UTC as 10th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

BackToNature1: " I take pride that all of these photos in the book were done legally, which is more than you can say for a lot of drone photography that is out there."

Yep!

Except buried halfway in the article when he mentions that he took half of the photos illegally:
‘“You are required to have a naked eye on the drone at all times, per FAA requirements, so she can keep an eye out for helicopters and scan for power lines to meet that requirement, which allows me to focus. She was with me for maybe half of them“

Link | Posted on May 24, 2021 at 15:00 UTC
In reply to:

MacUser2: Disregarding this silly camera skin, this is symptomatic of what is going on with camera sales in general. The vendors are unable to come-up with real improvements and since the market is becoming saturated, they are resorting to gimmicks or oxymoronic improvements, eg higher pixel count combined with insanely high ISO in order to keep their sales up.
The problem is that the lures are working and the fish keep biting!

Wait ... whaddaya mean ‘no longer’?

Link | Posted on Dec 31, 2018 at 19:21 UTC

This is why I didn't bother bringing a telescope or camera to photograph the eclipse. Someone else was going to do far better than I would have, so I decided to just enjoy the experience. Among other things, I was amazed that I could see the prominences with the naked eye!

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2017 at 02:40 UTC as 10th comment
Total: 13, showing: 1 – 13