Stefan Fuhrmann

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Joined on Sep 5, 2004


Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20
In reply to:

User1836539291: For crying out loud: who is Adobe listening to? Clearly not Lightroom users. Who is actually bothered about import / export times? Really?

I find it so frustrating that Adobe resolutely refuse to do anything about Develop module performance. Please.

Adobe ran a survey about 6-12 months ago, I'd argue they do try to listen to customers (whether they do anything about it, is another matter *cough* subscription *cough*).

However, measuring performance improvements in develop mode on individual images is hard to do, which is why (I guess) dpreview didn't do that.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2018 at 12:11 UTC
In reply to:

photogeek: Next year there will be 2-3 new entrants (currently in development) at a lower price point. On eg Apple platforms as a developer you don’t even need your own RAW converter component: Apple bundles it with the OS and updates it for free. All you really need is image processing and DAM, which you can build on top of that.

Hopefully not at a lower price point. I thought the price for the first Lightroom version was spot on, but the price war with Aperture brought it down to a level where they had to start marketing it towards wider masses, leading to a number of features that pro users probably don't care about, like the awful awful book module. Any competitor being serious about DAM and image processing will have to be able to charge properly for it, but they will be bound by whatever the market was previously brought down to.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2017 at 11:00 UTC

All those that paid for a LR6 subscription, you can see where your money went. Congratulations.
(That also explains the long gap between the first LR6 and this new 'LR7 ' release, the biggest in Lightroom history FWIW)

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 13:22 UTC as 345th comment
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1865 comments in total)

Hey Nikon, do something.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 15:45 UTC as 383rd comment | 2 replies

So, is the W100 exactly the same as the S33, or indeed an update?

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 19:45 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On article Affinity Photo beta now available for Windows (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nobby2016: good..... adobe needs to lose it´s market position some day.

Give them the benefit of the doubt, I'm sure Serif are aware of their own deficiencies. It looks like they have been cranking out excellent software with that entire Affinity series. Adobe won't be able to just buy them, because Serif appear to be a private company. I doubt they'd take up an offer from Adobe.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2016 at 11:36 UTC
In reply to:

Stefan Fuhrmann: I've got 2 of the original lumecubes. I like the amount and quality of light this can provide at that size. I really dislike the bluetooth functionality, absolutely useless for photographers. Doesn't help that the only strobe functionality is essentially the slave mode, which is just not reliable enough.
If they considered some form of radio control so I could hook this up into my trigger, that'd be amazing.

Having said that, it is really good as a continuous/video light.

Hi lumecube, only now seen your reply. Using bluethooth as you describe might be fine in a studio setting, however I tried taking them to event photography. There is no time to fiddle about with a mobile to adjust a light. I also can't run them as continuous light sources there. RF flash triggers are the only viable option.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2016 at 13:50 UTC

Wow, that's by far the most sophisticated UI I've seen for proper Lightroom plugins. Wondering how they did it. Is Adobe opening up their scripting API a bit more after all?

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 10:43 UTC as 13th comment

I've got 2 of the original lumecubes. I like the amount and quality of light this can provide at that size. I really dislike the bluetooth functionality, absolutely useless for photographers. Doesn't help that the only strobe functionality is essentially the slave mode, which is just not reliable enough.
If they considered some form of radio control so I could hook this up into my trigger, that'd be amazing.

Having said that, it is really good as a continuous/video light.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2016 at 21:47 UTC as 5th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

LightCatcherLT: Adobe, please add focus mask in Library mode ;) And stop that b.s. with "update for CC subscribers only". That peaks anger every time I read this and makes me research other alternatives to Lr. I believe I am not alone on this.

LR competition is getting better and better (both in terms of quantity and quality), Adobe can't afford to do subscription only, and I think they know that.

The CC only updates are sufficiently small, I suspect they do actually continue work on a proper LR7 update in the background. Any major updates to performance will need substantial rework, which takes time and can't really be done in minor updates. Some updated processing would be another major version only thing to come. Time will tell...

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 11:21 UTC
On article Benchmark performance: Nikon D810 in-depth review (253 comments in total)
In reply to:

malabito: Great review of the best dslr in the market, and for free. Can someone explain to me why are people complaining?

Because some people use reviews to make a purchasing decision? That review is now so old, the successor is presumably around the corner.

Having said that, it will be a good reference anyway.

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 14:08 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: It was a terrible business decision for them to market and make their products for consumers in the first place. I still don't understand why they didn't push the technology in the security, investigation and surveillance realm.
Instead they ended up making toys for peoples curiosity.

Maybe it was just that the technology didn't have a good application for security/surveillance? Why would those people want to refocus at the cost of resolution?

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 09:39 UTC
In reply to:

RedFox88: The headline made me think it was a patch a fix for their software. This is weak, should be free.

'free' as in a certain amount of money every month

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2015 at 13:55 UTC
In reply to:

Kali108: So the consensus is.."meh"? Really? Hmm. A company provides you with access to observe the realtime working process of very successful photographers with decades of experience... for free... and you criticize them ? You'd prefer a pdf with bullet points? Wow.

Charge too much? Again, really? So, for example, you can get a 3 day workshop for $149 ($99 if purchased during the workshop), please share a better alternative. Please share an alternative for TWICE the PRICE. Photoshop World...$600. Is there an option to view it for free? Nope. CreativeLive sounds pretty freaking generous to *me*. Go take Zack Arias One Light workshop, check out the prices! Maybe Moose Peterson's workshops...check the prices !!!

CreativeLive offers you a full week of content that would cost several thousands of dollars via individual workshops with these individuals...FOR FREE...and you question their motivations and substance?

Ungrateful human beings.

Watching those workshops live for free is indeed a good offer. However, this is different to a workshop you attend in person. Watching it online is just too slow paced. It is good value though!

Now, I would be willing to pay money for this contents, but only if they offered an edited version, so I wouldn't have to spend days taking it all in. I've got more important things to do with my time (like procrastinating on dpreview).

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2013 at 11:05 UTC
In reply to:

VisualFX: I just looked at their main page. The "rebroadcasts" don't start from the beginning and their is too much jibber jabber in their videos, not enough substance. Pure marketing.

I tend to agree here. I did watch several hours recently as they broadcast live, but I can only watch it in the background doing something useful in the meantime (like editing photos), because there is just too much waffling going on. It feels like they need to justify the cost of those videos once they are up for sale for watching later.

I'd actually be happy to pay some money for the information (not nearly as much as they charge for it though), but only if they distilled it down to the interesting 10%. After all, this is what photo clients pay there photographers for as well. You never deliver 3000 photos of a wedding, you find the interesting parts and present them in a digestible way.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2013 at 10:16 UTC
On article Panasonic GX7 First Impressions Review (1200 comments in total)

No, it is not the first:

"We've seen corner-mounted EVFs before, but this is the first built-in unit that articulates upwards"

Minolta have done exactly that many years ago, and you even wrote about that yourself, a tiltable EVF:

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2013 at 12:03 UTC as 352nd comment | 2 replies

No micro AF adjust (I think, not mentioned anywhere, and missing on the 65 as well), so not relevant unfortunately. Also, if Sony wants to push eletronic viewfinders, then they should just avoid the lesser variants and give all models the best technology available.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2012 at 12:10 UTC as 10th comment | 5 replies
On article Lightroom 4 Review (460 comments in total)
In reply to:

PhotoKhan: What a low blow, disrespectful move by Adobe...

I mastered the previous versions well enough as to make an expeditious work flow for my LR Raw conversions. This included carefully evaluated and tested "initial Raw conversion" settings for all the files out of my 1DMKIV.

Now they decided not only to change the Process Version (PV) but actually to also change controls that do different things.

This means that I will now have to (1) re-train from scratch on how to use the software and (2) intensively re-work all my current catalog on previous processed images (...since the review states that the controls differ a LOT...) if I want my photos to be current with the most recent PV.

Even if I skip the reprocessing now, this is something that will inevitably be a problem in the future as I don't see Adobe indefinitely carrying PVs from versions to versions..I mean, only 5 years have past and they are already in their 3rd PV, so sooner or later this problem will arise.


Stay with PV 2010 if you prefer that (which will also leave the control sliders as you know them). Also, don't assume they will stop supporting old PV, unless they say so.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2012 at 13:18 UTC
On article gets mobile (110 comments in total)
In reply to:

SonyA77: Great mobile site but you need iphone app too..

Why? How would that be different from a site optimised for mobile?

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2012 at 13:10 UTC
In reply to:

micahmedia: You missed the only thing I care about: both strip EXIF data, and so, are worthless.

Very important indeed. Haven't checked with Google+, but facebook strips all copyright and author information from the EXIF! That should be intolerable by any pro photographer.

Link | Posted on Feb 12, 2012 at 11:44 UTC
Total: 20, showing: 1 – 20