gordonpritchard

Lives in Canada Canada
Joined on Dec 12, 2007

Comments

Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

The examples appear to show that the content aware fill is just creating the content by cloning the remaining area (watch the rocky beach foreground) - i.e. copy/paste.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 20:17 UTC as 39th comment
On article Nikon D5 real-world low light, high ISO samples (281 comments in total)

Is it my imagination or is it correct that the dynamic range in the RAW files is not very wide? They seem to have blown highlights and plugged shadows in some of the concert shots.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 00:36 UTC as 60th comment | 1 reply
On photo Talk to the hands in the Surreal challenge (16 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Nice, but I would not call it creative. It is a very common trick.

https://www.behance.net/gallery/15481663/Hands-over-face-Trick-Photography

http://ttigran.com/

I originally thought the photo was going to be disqualified.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2016 at 23:11 UTC
On photo Fire & Ice Cube in the Macro - Fire & Ice challenge (3 comments in total)

I tried a few diferent things...this was lighter fluid.

Link | Posted on Mar 9, 2016 at 06:41 UTC as 2nd comment
On photo Melt in the Macro - Fire & Ice challenge (6 comments in total)
In reply to:

tbcass: So far the only one that qualifies. It may win by default.

@tbcass - this is definitely not the only one that qualifies.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 22:22 UTC
On challenge Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface (8 comments in total)
In reply to:

oilpiers: I got disqualified for reportedly not using the sample image. I used it, just changed the orientation, which is something you can do in post processing. I was not allowed to respond to the message, so I am posting it here.

The orientation of #16 was changed - or was your change of orientation quite different?

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 02:20 UTC
On challenge Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface (8 comments in total)

After seeing the winning images I withdrew mine in quiet protest. Never done that for a challenge before but felt that was the only way to protest how this specific challenge was handled.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 02:13 UTC as 1st comment
On photo w i s h in the Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface challenge (3 comments in total)

Really? "God beams" without an atmosphere and with the "light" coming from the wrong direction?

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 01:55 UTC as 3rd comment
On photo Moon_3369933 in the Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface challenge (1 comment in total)

How does this exsample "bring out the detail of the moon surface"? It's a mess.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 01:53 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Moon 001a in the Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface challenge (1 comment in total)

Noise is not detail!

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 01:52 UTC as 1st comment
On photo 3369933 Enhanced DP in the Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface challenge (2 comments in total)

So noisy.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 01:51 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On photo PythonMoon in the Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface challenge (1 comment in total)

So much detail lost in this one.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 01:50 UTC as 1st comment
On challenge Post Processing Skill challenge - Moon Surface (8 comments in total)

Hmmm...let's see, the rule states: "Showcase your post processing skill in bringing out the detail of the moon surface." The winning shot seems to have clearly brought out all the jpeg artifacts that apparently cover the Moon's surface. Amazing.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2016 at 01:48 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

darngooddesign: It would be great to see a comparison between this and B&W images from a color M. Take the same photos with either camera; it would help illustrate the benefits of a dedicated b&w sensor..

Yes, because looking at the studio shot comparison - the jpeg images look soft and lacked detail compared with the color shot. Not impressive at all.
BTW I looked at the B&W Civil Warish fellow and compared it with the Sony a57 and a77ii (just because that's what I use).

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
On article Top 5: Hands-on with Nikon D500 (783 comments in total)

Gee, already 26 people say that they've "had it." Maybe they have a different meaning for the term "had it."

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 20:58 UTC as 132nd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

huyzer: There is a LOT of blocking in areas where there isn't detail. The gradations aren't as detailed, but blocky, in those areas of limited color range that are just an expanse of similar colors.

1) Open both images for the brussel sprouts(?) at 100%.
2) Go to the upper right corner so that the images align easily.
3) Flip back and forth between the two.

You will notice blocking of the color; and the detail/noise, gone.
Especially easy to see in the darker leaf.

For me, I wouldn't want to lose that much information for savings in size.

Flipping between the two images is a perfectly valid way to see where any differences may be.
If you evaluate by just looking at one image and it's JPEGmini version, yes, you may not see a difference. But that, in part, is because humans have a very poor memory for image content when doing that kind of comparison. I would argue that pretty much any JPEG compression except for the most intense will not result in an image that is perceptually different than the original if you just evaluate by looking at the full original image and then looking at the compressed version. So, there's no special value to adding an extra step, and cost, to the workflow.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2015 at 22:47 UTC
In reply to:

huyzer: There is a LOT of blocking in areas where there isn't detail. The gradations aren't as detailed, but blocky, in those areas of limited color range that are just an expanse of similar colors.

1) Open both images for the brussel sprouts(?) at 100%.
2) Go to the upper right corner so that the images align easily.
3) Flip back and forth between the two.

You will notice blocking of the color; and the detail/noise, gone.
Especially easy to see in the darker leaf.

For me, I wouldn't want to lose that much information for savings in size.

On the contrary, Huyzer used a very valid comparison method to isolate where differences, if any, are located and how they compare to the original.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2015 at 23:53 UTC

Just tried the Brussel sprouts shot. Saving the original with PShop at a setting of 7 gave basically the same image size as the JPEGmini - but the PShop jpeg image had fewer artefacts. I.e. PShop did a better compression job - i.e. fewer artefacts - than jJPEGmini did for the same final file size.

So, at least for that image, JPEGmini wasn't performing as claimed. The claims need to be properly tested in a studio with imagery that will show the difference clearly.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2015 at 00:20 UTC as 52nd comment
On article Polaroid Cube+ adds Wi-Fi and two bright new colors (12 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Much more interesting with wifi. Still a bit pricey.

The video quality of the Cube is outstanding especially considering its price point.

Link | Posted on Jun 28, 2015 at 05:24 UTC
Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »