maiaibing

Lives in Denmark Copenhagen, Denmark
Joined on Oct 12, 2004

Comments

Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Adobe Lightroom CC 2015.10 and ACR 9.10 now available (65 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jim Evidon: I have found it disappointing if not distressing that Adobe has consistently overlooked the many legacy lenses that most LR users have. There is a whole raft of Leica M mount lenses from Zeiss, CV, and Leica/Leitz that do not appear in their collections of lens profiles. Just because the users of these lenses are considered traditionalist or maybe just old fashioned doesn't mean that they enjoy the laborious and time consuming process of resorting to Adobe's Lens Profiler. Adobe seems to be both blind and deaf or maybe they just can't be bothered.

If color is important to you I'm stunned you are not using color calibration already for perfect colors with every lens/camera combo you own. LR is far prom perfect anyway. 5DS/R profile was utterly horrible.

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 12:53 UTC

100% correct! And do use the Tokyo pronunciation...

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 08:01 UTC as 20th comment
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ran Plett: From my understanding, the APD element needs to be as close to the aperture as possible. I also understand that the element limits light transmission. With that being said, wouldn't it be better to have a drop in filter system where artists can adjust the strength of the effect, or even - dare I say - add shapes like Lensbaby (shudders).

No. It would not work in the same way. Whats' special is that the transmission effect is only active in the out of focus areas. This is also why the effect cannot be done by any software. That's also why the DIY suggestion below does not work. Here it works more like a soft filter. STF is specifically not a soft lens effect - which we can just replicate in post.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 14:23 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

Aroart: Bokeh is so overrated.. I Have a very strong fine art background and started getting getting serious about photography for the past 6 years.. Out of all the elements that make a great photograph bokeh is dead last.. Even photo contest winners rarely win because of, ooohhh look how blurry it is... Subject matter, Light, Composition, Story, will make or break your photograph..

Anyone shooting nature shots will probably disagree as leafy, branchy and grassy backgrounds can sometimes jump out of the scenery and ruin even a great shot.

As for your strong fine art background maybe your memory blurred a little since many painters work with such effects for their background to emphasize their main subject .

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 14:05 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedFox88: My iPhone 7+ does bokeh now too. No need to spend hundreds on just a lens!

My Canon 5DS/R w/135 L cannot replicate a STF lens... Happy to spend $$$ for that option with AF.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 14:01 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

pkcpga: Nice lens but nothing new, I've had the Fuji 56 F1.2 APD lens for a couple years now.

Like it?

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 14:00 UTC
On article Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF bokeh demystified (355 comments in total)
In reply to:

Favorable Exponynt: The only obvious effect is on the highlights. I'd say the back ground blur looks a bit better without the filter. Rendering is also a bit cleaner without the filter. Maybe adobe should make a apodize highlights function in lightroom :p.

One of the advantages of shooting a STF lens that there is no way you can replicate the effect in post processing.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2017 at 13:58 UTC

dpReview hope you include this page in your pending retest of the 5DS/R using a proper RAW conversion so we can get a proper comparison.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2017 at 18:55 UTC as 6th comment
In reply to:

Earthlight: I am now very happy with my decision not to get a 5DsR last year. Give me a 5D4 with this sensor tech, say 28 mp and that is it. It would give very, very high quality 50x75 cm prints from a single frame. Stitch to get gigantic enlargements and panoramas.

I sold my 1DsMkIII in anticipation 6 months ago and have been shooting with a pair of 6D bodies since.

Cannot see myself that 80D is better @100 iso than the 5DS/R from ev+1 to ev+2 nor that it is better than the 5DS/R @ev+5 at same file size?

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2016 at 13:27 UTC
On article Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR (719 comments in total)

Wow 31 people already owned these cameras... and I did not even notice the opening sales? Good I'm with Canon. There has to be a catch since Nikon users are dumping these models so fast.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2016 at 21:14 UTC as 142nd comment
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (242 comments in total)
In reply to:

digidog: >>Working as a travel photographer, I tend to make a custom profile for each location area.

No need, the profiles are illuminant specific. You can build one for daylight, use it all day long, morning noon and late afternoon. This is illustrated (and you can test this yourself) here:

In this video, we’ll look into the creation and use of DNG camera profiles in three raw converters. The video covers:
What are DNG camera profiles, how do they differ from ICC camera profiles.
Misconceptions about DNG camera profiles.
Just when, and why do you need to build custom DNG camera profiles?
How to build custom DNG camera profiles using the X-rite Passport software.
The role of various illuminants on camera sensors and DNG camera profiles.
Dual Illuminant DNG camera profiles.
Examples of usage of DNG camera profiles in Lightroom, ACR, and Iridient Developer.
Low Rez (YouTube):
http://youtu.be/_fikTm8XIt4
High Rez (download):
http://www.digitaldog.net/files/DNG%20Camera%20profile%20video.mov

@digidog we simply do not have the same expectations when it comes to color profiles - so we will never agree on any of this. Enjoy your 5DS/R with the standard Adobe profiles. I'll enjoy mine with custom profiles.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 20:57 UTC
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (242 comments in total)
In reply to:

digidog: >>Working as a travel photographer, I tend to make a custom profile for each location area.

No need, the profiles are illuminant specific. You can build one for daylight, use it all day long, morning noon and late afternoon. This is illustrated (and you can test this yourself) here:

In this video, we’ll look into the creation and use of DNG camera profiles in three raw converters. The video covers:
What are DNG camera profiles, how do they differ from ICC camera profiles.
Misconceptions about DNG camera profiles.
Just when, and why do you need to build custom DNG camera profiles?
How to build custom DNG camera profiles using the X-rite Passport software.
The role of various illuminants on camera sensors and DNG camera profiles.
Dual Illuminant DNG camera profiles.
Examples of usage of DNG camera profiles in Lightroom, ACR, and Iridient Developer.
Low Rez (YouTube):
http://youtu.be/_fikTm8XIt4
High Rez (download):
http://www.digitaldog.net/files/DNG%20Camera%20profile%20video.mov

@digidog you prove nothing - and I will - later - post samples showing very clearly why what you write is either nonsense or because you choose to exclude the impact of color casts.

I proved that's not the case in my video**! Various DNG profiles built in differing locations and times of the day IN daylight produce identical results! Test it yourself.

>>PS: I do not think Eric from Adobe is the best source to quote.

You're kidding right? Do you know who Eric Chan from Adobe is?
No. I know exactly who he is. He is the person claiming that nothing is wrong with Adobe's 5DS/R profile. That's his credentials to me. Being wrong at a high technical level does not make your views more credible.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 15:11 UTC
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (242 comments in total)
In reply to:

digidog: >>Working as a travel photographer, I tend to make a custom profile for each location area.

No need, the profiles are illuminant specific. You can build one for daylight, use it all day long, morning noon and late afternoon. This is illustrated (and you can test this yourself) here:

In this video, we’ll look into the creation and use of DNG camera profiles in three raw converters. The video covers:
What are DNG camera profiles, how do they differ from ICC camera profiles.
Misconceptions about DNG camera profiles.
Just when, and why do you need to build custom DNG camera profiles?
How to build custom DNG camera profiles using the X-rite Passport software.
The role of various illuminants on camera sensors and DNG camera profiles.
Dual Illuminant DNG camera profiles.
Examples of usage of DNG camera profiles in Lightroom, ACR, and Iridient Developer.
Low Rez (YouTube):
http://youtu.be/_fikTm8XIt4
High Rez (download):
http://www.digitaldog.net/files/DNG%20Camera%20profile%20video.mov

@digidog - @VictorEngel is spot on with his comment. In real life light does not have the same spectrum just because there is a theoretical daylight spectral invariance. Environmental issues can have a huge impact - including the obvious issue of reflected color casts from your surroundings. Start going into a forest and try your luck... Now you may be happy with a "good enough" average but frankly then why bother color profiling at all? Just use a standard profile and adjust WB for visual impact - works for the 99% (and nothing wrong with that, people should just know what the trade-off is).

PS: I do not think Eric from Adobe is the best source to quote. At the end of my 5DS/R review http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56919326 I show the very real difference between using Adobe's standard profile and your own. Notice that I come away far better with my own profile with both highlights and shadows - at the same time(!)

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 13:41 UTC
On article Alpha dog: Hands-on with Sony a7R II (1124 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rob: Suddenly, I'm no longer that excited about the upcoming 5D Mark IV update. If the a7R II fulfills all of its promises and 5D Mark IV doesn't include the features I really want, there's a chance I'll be upgrading to the a7R II from my 5D Mark III. Will have to wait and see just how good the PDAF on the a7R II is for subject tracking during AF (for stills and video).

Count me in. On paper lots of reasons to get this caerma. Imagine the 135 zeiss in the dark with image stabilisation! Will of course need to see the reviews proper and will still wait to see the Canon 5DIV (but only if it comes out this year). I hope it will exceed expectations (=match my needs... :-)) Or else my next DSLR will not be a Canon.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 20:56 UTC
On article Benchmark Performance: Nikon D810 review (2000 comments in total)
In reply to:

Parry Johnson: I bought a Fuji S2 in 2002 for over $3000, sold it to a friend in 2006 for $400, and recently sold it again as part of his estate for $79. Resale value should not be a concern in this industry. Usefulness value should. I never expect to get any money back from my camera equipment, but expect it to pay for itself (and then some!) through actual paying clients or through the pure pleasure of the fun of photography.

So, for those well-heeled amateurs, go for it! For those not-so-well-heeled professionals and professional-wannabees-who-have-another-actual-full-time-job like me, euh... maybe, but only if it's really going to "pay off."

@Parry Johnson for some years now I have buying/selling lenses - widening my photographic opportunities while not getting stuck with too much hardware.

So far total resale value has exceeded my total purchase costs.

I have certainly been on the lucky side of Canon's rising lens prices and I also sold a couple of "bundled" lenses which were practically give-aways compared to the cost of the item I actually wanted.

So for me lenses have been a better "investment" - even if it has been more luck than anything else.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2014 at 10:13 UTC
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (242 comments in total)

Interesting. But I think 99% of all DSLR photographers would get even better color correction if they could be bothered to set the camera color temp correctly. No - you can't just rely on doing it in post because you shoot RAW - as you are likely to introduce tonality shifts (not sure about the English term here).

Just saying...

Link | Posted on May 1, 2014 at 20:35 UTC as 26th comment | 1 reply

I think the like/dislike function can be useful. I have seen it work well on another very large forum were feelings often run high - however with a very important twist.

In stead of showing number of likes/dislikes it only shows the "sum" of likes/dislikes. I'm not sure why but it seems to work better in practice than the like/dislike flaming that some times goes on forums. Youtube being a prime example here.

I just realised that there is also a consideration "hiding" entries with a certain number of dislikes - please, no more censorship than we have already...

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2012 at 14:46 UTC as 96th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

maiaibing: Boycot? Against what?

Its their Rock show - they set the rules. If you and others do not want to comply, just stay away. Musicians and other live artists are struggling hard to make their ends meet and to protect themselves from being ripped off in this digital age.

Its like newpapers not wanting to pay for interviews. They end up not having any interviews with rock or film stars. Its not a big deal its just a choice they make. Make your choice and be at peace with your fellow artists.

@JDThomas did you read my post? "Its like newpapers not wanting to pay for interviews". However, lots of magazines do. Some TV-shows do. Lots of people in showbusiness and other artits only give interviews if you pay them.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2012 at 14:36 UTC

Boycot? Against what?

Its their Rock show - they set the rules. If you and others do not want to comply, just stay away. Musicians and other live artists are struggling hard to make their ends meet and to protect themselves from being ripped off in this digital age.

Its like newpapers not wanting to pay for interviews. They end up not having any interviews with rock or film stars. Its not a big deal its just a choice they make. Make your choice and be at peace with your fellow artists.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2012 at 14:47 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Lou Gonzalez: Some people here are complaining about slowness. I had performance issues with LR4 as well. I went digging around for information and Adobe has released an article detailing all of the things you can do to optimize performance. Check it out here: http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html

I was already doing much of this, but the biggest thing that helped me was creating 1:1 previews on import. It takes a while but once they are done LR4 moves much quicker. Give it a try.

Also read these tips and also find that it helps making 1:1 previews from the start. A fast machine will do it at almost the same speed as reduced sized previews.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2012 at 16:06 UTC
Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »