skytripper

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Sep 22, 2011

Comments

Total: 207, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (465 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pandimonium: Buy a new camera and be condemned to buy new software. Such (can't say that word here which is still can't say the word). Most of the time there isn't even a difference in the RAW files except for the header info.

That is a phenomenally stupid statement.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 18:27 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (465 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: Are they *really* supporting CS6 when they update ACR? I thought that ACR was kind of a separate piece of software, that is updated separately from Photoshop.

If that's the case, then it's not so much that they are no longer devoting resources to "support" CS6. It would be more like they are deliberately crippling ACR to not work with CS6, in order to force users into an upgrade they really don't need.

Affinity Publisher is due to be released in 2016. Affinity Designer, an Illustrator equivalent, has been out for awhile and gets pretty good reviews. Affinity Photo, a Photoshop equivalent, has just been released. The situation, although grim, isn't entirely hopeless.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 18:26 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (465 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anduril: Anyone remember the "New Coke" announcement circa 1985?

If Adobe wants to offer "cloud" subscriptions for its products, good for them. But folks who want to own their software, locally on their machines, will revolt by seeking solutions elsewhere -- and there will be many companies lining up to satisfy those desires.

Wishful thinking. Photoshop 1.0 came out in 1990; and in all these years, Photoshop has never had a single serious competitor. Affinity Photo, which just came out, claims to be just that; but it is much too soon to tell whether it will live up to its promise. There are, of course, many other consumer-level image editors, e.g. Pixelmator; but they are tinker toys compared to Photoshop.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 18:22 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (465 comments in total)
In reply to:

backayonder: $9.95 AUD a month for Lightroom and Photoshop less than two mugs of flat white.
Seems a bargain to me. My shelf is littered with worthless copies of Lightroom 1 to 5 and CS versions too.

You can only use CS5 as long as your computer and operating system support it. On the Mac side, OS X El Capitan (due to be released this fall) will be the last version of OS X that supports Adobe CS6. I haven't tried to install CS5 on the current version of OS X (Yosemite); but even if it works, it won't work with OS X 10.12 (or with Macs that ship with 10.12 installed). One might be able to get by using older Macs for a few years, but that is not a sustainable strategy. In the long run, every Photoshop user will eventually have to find a viable substitute or drink the Kool-Aid.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 18:16 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (465 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joed700: What other alternative photo editing software are out there?

The most promising Photoshp alternative at the moment is Affinity Photo, which came out recently. For $50, it's worth checking out.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 18:08 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (465 comments in total)
In reply to:

riveredger: Intuitively, I suspect anyone who thinks $10/month is outrageous is using a pirated copy of it now, or doesn't own it all.

Better take your intuition in for a checkup. I, too, own a licensed copy of Adobe CS6 and object to Adobe's extortion scheme... er, subscription model... in principle.

P.S. I've been buying and using Adobe software since Photoshop 1.0, upgrading every few years at the upgrade price. This worked for me. A lifetime of mandatory monthly payments doesn't.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 18:02 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV Review (1565 comments in total)

I have no doubt that the RX100 IV is a very good performer. For nearly $1000, IT SHOULD BE!

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2015 at 18:17 UTC as 232nd comment | 2 replies

Why in heaven's name would anyone with half a brain want to look at photos of this monster? Truly creepy!

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2015 at 18:21 UTC as 55th comment | 2 replies

Tungsten Norstein said: "...to call this imaginative is to suggest that all work on dpreview is in contrast very unimaginative."

Rarely have I read a statement that is so completely devoid of logic!

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2015 at 18:42 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1289 comments in total)
In reply to:

JaredTarzan: I just popped in to say that I'm actually interested in this camera, and appreciate the "hands on" aspect, as it lets me get a real life idea of how large the camera is (a big deciding factor for me). Thanks DPR!

Everyone else, if you aren't interested in MFT, or this camera. Take a hike. Your need to have a negative comment on everything says more about you than this camera. We get it, it isn't a "full frame" sensor, so its clearly inferior. It's also not Medium format, or Large format. But then, I think we'll be OK.

Also, where's the connection port for an optional USB toaster oven? I agree with your comment 100%. It's a shame that such an excellent website for photo enthusiasts continues to attract the attention of so many compulsive trash-talkers with absolutely nothing of value to contribute.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:57 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1289 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prairie Pal: Shame on Panasonic for not offering a LEFT-HANDED GX8. They clearly don't care about 10% of their customers.

Silly comment. It can't possibly be economically feasible to design and manufacture a second version of any camera to appeal to just 10% of their customers—especially when most left-handed photographers, as far as I know, have no trouble at all using "right-handed" cameras and wouldn't buy a "left-handed" camera anyway. I've a left-handed photographer who has been using conventional cameras for over 50 years with no problem whatsoever.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 18:53 UTC
In reply to:

razadaz: There have been many attempts at undermining the Photoshop dominance but this is the first time I have seen one that can match the speed and agility of Photoshop. For a version one it is a very impressive app. The industry really needs this sort of competition.

The way I see it, there have been no serious attempts until now to actually replace Photoshop. Programs like Pixelmator aim to be "Photoshop Lite" at best. The makers of Affinity Photo deserve alot of credit for venturing where others have feared to tread.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 18:36 UTC
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: I bought Photoshop 1.0 and have upgraded to every version until the subscription became mandatory. I'm not doing subscription.

I wonder what Adobe is thinking now.
They have very expensive software and an unpopular subscription service.
They have provided a fertile soil for competitors to flourish.

I bought Affinity Photo last night; so far I like it a lot.

Like you, I've been using Photoshop since version 1.0. In fact, I worked at Adobe back then. I totally disagree with those who dismiss Affinity Photo because big companies will stick with Photoshop. Of course they will! Affinity Photo has the potential to replace Photoshop for the rest of us. There are many, many highly-skilled Photoshop users who do not earn their living with Photoshop. The term "professional" has many meanings. Adobe has definitely created an opportunity for competitors to flourish, but no one has been up to the challenge until now. I, too, bought Affinity Photo yesterday and fervently hope that it lives up to its promise as Affinity continues to develop it.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 18:30 UTC
In reply to:

WT21: How is this different from Pixelmator?

Pixelmator is fine for the average Joe; but Affinity Photo aims to be a full-fledged Photoshop equivalent, which Pixelmator will never be. Time will tell where Affinity goes with what is now a brand new version 1 program.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 18:17 UTC

Sounds like this means that ordinary citizens will need permission to post their vacation pics online. That's RIDICULOUS!!!

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2015 at 18:41 UTC as 64th comment
On article Readers' Showcase: Raiatea Arcuri (51 comments in total)

Is it just me, or do more and more photographs—especially landscapes—have that over-processed look these days? To me, there's something decidedly artificial-looking about this style of image making.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 19:43 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1265 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pro shooting digital since 92: "enthusiast mirrorless space"?

After testing the NX1 I sold 2 Canon 70D's, a Canon 5D MkII and 9 Canon Lenses Including 4 "L" series.

I was disappointed with soft images from the Canon cameras so I carefully adjusted back focus on all 9 lenses and 3 bodies. Took all day. After all that the images were still only about half as sharp as the NX1. That's the honest truth.

I was really hoping for touch screen, higher res, sharper images, and small FAST lenses suited to APS-C from Canon in the 7D MkII. Ha-none of that happened.

The Samsung has better IQ than ANYTHING Canon currently sells.

After 20+ years shooting Canon I switched to Samsung, improved my capabilities and pocketed some cash! I'd call that ADVANCED PRO VALUE.

Mirror boxes held over from film era? WHY?

Regarding H265 - Samsung has the power to do it. No Canon has enough power yet.

btw the Samsung has BETTER 1080 30p wH265 in 1/9th the FILE SIZE of Canon All-I codec.

Film is dead. Kodak is gone. Is Canon next??

@Papi61: I don't know what I'm talking about WHY—because I don't agree with your brain-dead opinion? Here's one review of the Samsung S6 that is less than enthusiastic:
http://www.zdnet.com/article/htc-and-samsung-android-flagships-disappoint-back-to-the-apple-iphone-6-plus/

Link | Posted on Apr 16, 2015 at 16:50 UTC
On article Samsung NX1 Review (1265 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pro shooting digital since 92: "enthusiast mirrorless space"?

After testing the NX1 I sold 2 Canon 70D's, a Canon 5D MkII and 9 Canon Lenses Including 4 "L" series.

I was disappointed with soft images from the Canon cameras so I carefully adjusted back focus on all 9 lenses and 3 bodies. Took all day. After all that the images were still only about half as sharp as the NX1. That's the honest truth.

I was really hoping for touch screen, higher res, sharper images, and small FAST lenses suited to APS-C from Canon in the 7D MkII. Ha-none of that happened.

The Samsung has better IQ than ANYTHING Canon currently sells.

After 20+ years shooting Canon I switched to Samsung, improved my capabilities and pocketed some cash! I'd call that ADVANCED PRO VALUE.

Mirror boxes held over from film era? WHY?

Regarding H265 - Samsung has the power to do it. No Canon has enough power yet.

btw the Samsung has BETTER 1080 30p wH265 in 1/9th the FILE SIZE of Canon All-I codec.

Film is dead. Kodak is gone. Is Canon next??

@Papi61: I haven't seen the S6, but the Samsung phones I have seen were cheap plastic wonders. Your unqualified enthusiasm for Samsung products sounds like wishful thinking to me.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2015 at 02:45 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 real-world samples (116 comments in total)
In reply to:

(unknown member): Samples in Jpeg show just how much noise reduction is being done at base IS0 (smearing and low fine detail)- not to mention artifacts.. and it just gets worse on higher ISO's.

Add in the fact that you can't adjust sharpness/contrast/saturation/or noise removal on the Jpegs for better out of camera results... and well, might a well use a smartphone to take images if you're just judging on out of camera image quality.

Good that raw is included, but that leaves out all the color profiles and art filters for good looking out of camera Jpegs.

I can adjust sharpness and noise reduction on my ZS10, which is not good at all in low light but otherwise a wonderful little camera. Have these adjustments been removed from later models in the ZS line?

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2015 at 20:23 UTC
In reply to:

Gesture: Sensor manufacturers have concentrated mostly on providing high ISO settings that are not often used, he said, and had neglected low settings in their favor, but Olympus hopes this will change very soon.

Exactly. Do we really need 156,000 ISO.

In my experience, the number one complaint of the average snapshooter is poor low-light performance; so I take issue with your assertion that high-ISO settings are not often used. In the past, they were not often used because the results were too noisy, but this is definitely starting to change. I predict that better low-light image quality will be wildly popular with snapshooters the world over.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2015 at 21:21 UTC
Total: 207, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »