PixelJ

Joined on Feb 10, 2014

Comments

Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article How does anamorphic photography work? (199 comments in total)

I find it pretty annoying when some of these newer streaming shows go wider than 16:9 on video that was specifically shot for the TV market, even going so far as to include black bars at the top and bottom.

With the advent of 8K TVs being pushed, I would really like it if they designed a new blu-ray specification that provided a small screen cropped 4K image, along with a wider and taller 8K image providing peripheral details. So if you had a 120" wall sized screen that filled your peripheral vision you could get more immersive edge details outside the normal framing rather than just more detailed 8K closeup of head and nostrils.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2020 at 03:49 UTC as 31st comment | 1 reply

The DJi Phantom 3 has screw on propellers just like a nut on a bolt. Are the newer drones different in some way?

Link | Posted on May 18, 2020 at 01:35 UTC as 76th comment

What no sample 280 MP image to look at?

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2020 at 17:52 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Silken: I wonder if Geoff and Gilly's mom chose the same peanut butter as Jeff and Jill's mom?

Maybe you aren't putting enough emphasis on the A in aeronautics. If you say it right you can definitely hear the A sound used in NASA. Just because an E gets smashed in there right after doesn't mean you need to use it in the acronym. Same goes with the A in administration.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 07:55 UTC
In reply to:

beavertown: Affinity's programs are professional grade with amazing prices, sure they can't do as much as Photoshop and Illustrator (not even close - i.e.: no Actions in Affinity Photo, no DXF export in Affinity Designer, Auto Trace etc ), but their programs are intuitive to use with modern interfaces while Adobe's are dated in comparison, as long as they keep catching up, it is a dangerous company to Adobe.

Affinity Photo Macros are akin to Photoshop's Actions.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 07:32 UTC
In reply to:

Hunter_C: I am confused.
How do you set your AP interface to be like the ones in the pics? Is it like Lights Out in Lightroom?
I'm still using the Beta version......

I think you are just seeing a cropped image, not the full interface. Any panel can be popped out by dragging it with the mouse.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 07:30 UTC
In reply to:

Nicolaso: Love Affinity Photo which I find even more intuitive than Photoshop.
Have been using Affinity Publisher since beta 1 and find its features just mind blowing especially how very little bugs there are...

But most of all Serif is a graspable company with actual people almost replying instantly, being incredibly friendly and helpful!

Honestly I have no clue how all this can be that affordable!

It does make you wonder why Adobe thinks they need to charge so much per app. Either Adobe is price gouging because they feel like people don't have a choice, or perhaps Serif is just barely making ends meet in an effort to build market share faster.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2020 at 07:26 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: Now that this is settled, can we all agree that Doc Brown and Marty McFly established the correct pronunciation of the "giga-" prefix in both 1955 and 1985?

So, what 64 "jigabyte" card should I order for my camera?

Samsung's Pro cards.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2020 at 07:47 UTC
In reply to:

Chris Epler: This was resolved AGES ago:

https://www.cnn.com/2013/05/22/tech/web/pronounce-gif/index.html

It's so easy to spot those that weren't in web hosting from the beginning...

-- JIF'ing since the 80's

I'm pretty sure the rule with acronyms is you try to use the sound from the word each letter represents.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2020 at 07:44 UTC
In reply to:

Hugo808: Flickr can be excellent, you can discover some fascinating work from around the world. I was looking up old Russian rangefinders (can't remember why) and found a page of local scenes and gatherings by a photographer in Siberia. It was great to see somebody else's life like that.

Would I pay for it? A bit yes perhaps, but not the current Pro fee, it's too much because I'm far from a pro and I can get my curiousity fix elsewhere.

So, do people here use it mostly to show off or for research purposes?

Moon landings, yep. I don't think people claiming it was fake realize just how much extra video footage (hours and hours) and how many photos were shot. All before computers could handle such an effect.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2019 at 23:06 UTC

It still fascinates me how the atmosphere stays in such sharply defined bands of differing colors flowing around the planet for decades on end.

And I really want to know if the red spot is caused by some kind of physical structure underneath the clouds. A large depression perhaps.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2019 at 19:24 UTC as 24th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Dendrobium: Unethical business practice like this should be exposed and condemned until they fixed their s*** and apologized to their customer.

Like those cell phone companies who used to take a fully functional camera phone and cripple the USB port or Bluetooth system so the photos could only be exported by texting (which they charged individually for).

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2019 at 01:36 UTC
In reply to:

JakeJY: This is why people hate cloud services. They can change their terms on a whim and you are SOL if there is no offline alternative.

On the other hand, I do trust what the company says is true. They aren't making money on the hardware anymore, so providing the cloud service for free basically is a huge money loser, and if they didn't take these steps the other alternative was likely just to shut down the service completely.

One would think they they could provide an export utility that could write a folder full of regular photos from each image sensor so people could experiment with their own stitching.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2019 at 01:29 UTC
In reply to:

Gmon750: Lesson... "free" is never truly free.

It's why I don't ever store my photographs on these free sites, only to later start charging users when they feel they have you by the gonads.

I do believe business have (and should) charge upfront for a service they know is going to cost them. I run my own business and I know that business cannot survive on free services. I'd of respected them more for that.

But to dangle a carrot in front of their customers, invest in a hugely expensive product and "free" services, only to pull the rug out from under them later down the road is disingenuous at the least, and (should be) borderline illegal at the most.

Agreed. Every free "cloud" tool should be as an accessory to your local method that can do the same thing, but perhaps with less convenience.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2019 at 22:55 UTC
In reply to:

James A.: I can barely comprehend 8K video let alone 16K HDR! This is great for movie theatres and high end motion picture production. Not sure if I'll need 16k home videos. LOL!

16K will be good for cameras.

It won't be worth the effort for monitors though. Maybe if we change how we think about monitors. If you do a wall sized monitor in your house or office with the ability to draw out resizable displays anywhere on that wall, 16K would be ideal. Or maybe in a wall sized advertising panel where people could walk up right next to it.

For traditional movie watching though it is nearly pointless. No matter what the screen size, you would never see a benefit to a 16K image if you were sitting where you could see the entire screen.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2019 at 06:31 UTC
In reply to:

onlyfreeman: When Bill Gates said 64K is all we need, he was talking about display resolution but nobody understood it at the time. Bring on the 64K cables!

Well if we are talking about 16:9 then 230,400,000,000 pixels.

That's over 230 trillion pixels or 230 Gigapixels.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2019 at 06:18 UTC

This may be artifact of manufacturers wanting different tiers of "quality" even though the cost of physical hardware in $500 cameras is nearly the same as their $1,500 cameras.

They have to find artificial ways to keep value in the $1,500 products.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2019 at 18:17 UTC as 40th comment | 1 reply
On article Comparative review: The best pocket printer of 2019 (131 comments in total)

2" x 3" and especially 1.8" x 2.4" is just too small to be worth having a dedicated printer for it.

I would like to see a portable battery powered printer like these capable of doing a 3" x 5" print. They might have something worth buying at that size. From an engineering stance, surely they could keep the same thickness, but increase the widths to something like a 7" tablet.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2019 at 18:32 UTC as 33rd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

M Chambers: Isn't this like attaching a motor to your bicycle? It defeats the purpose of both a bicycle and a motorcycle.

King Penguin -

The equivalent to what your mother was doing:
http://www.ohgizmo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Gizmon-Clip-on-Lenses-500x289.jpg

The equivalent of this adapter:
http://www.bobbledybooks.com/assets/Screen-Shot-2014-03-27-at-8.06.44-PM.jpg

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2018 at 22:29 UTC
In reply to:

JosephScha: A few days before Sony's announcement Panasonic had a different take on global shutter that didn't get cited as news here. Here's their press release:
http://news.panasonic.com/global/press/data/2016/02/en160203-6/en160203-6.html

Was planing on asking about this as well. Sony's 1MP announcement vs Panasonics 33MP sensor. I wonder which news is the bigger deal?

http://news.panasonic.com/global/press/data/2018/02/en180214-2/en180214-2.html

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2018 at 05:01 UTC
Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »