Ultan

Joined on May 11, 2012

Comments

Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Mike CH: News would be - if there was an explanation why the publication was retracted in the first place, respectively a critical examination.

They "explained" that they just didn't feel like reviewing medium format, the workload of reviewing the one such camera that comes out every couple of years was just too high. So they kept that decision secret, instead telling everyone that their 645Z review was "delayed" - for two years - until the Hasselblad came out.

In fact they didn't want to report just how good the 645Z was because it made all the cameras made by DxO's major clients / paid-placement advertisers look second rate.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 12:15 UTC
In reply to:

sdgreen: Why the hell do Panasonic limit their AEB to 1ev? That makes it impossible to take a series of 3 bracketed shots handheld at, say, plus/minus 1.5 ev. Taking 5 shots handheld is not feasible. If they want to sell one more they'll have to remove this ludicrous & thoughtless limitation.

Right. There is no reason to not have whatever EV step size you want and to be able to set any number of shots from 2 to 7. For HDR 2.5 to 5 ev and 2 shots is all I want, one for the highlights and one for the shadows. More shots = more trouble, more potential motion among the frames.

More importantly, no camera manufacturer seems to think of the macro guys and their need for a big stack of shots with evenly spaced focal distance increments between the front and back of the subject, the number of increments inversely proportional to the depth of field. (40 is not unusual on FF). With two different EVs for each focal distance would be nice, too. And 8 pixel-shift shots for each of the above. Oh, and it should bake the final picture in-camera close to as well as I could do it in PS.
40 x 2 x 8 = 640 shots of bracketing, better use electronic shutter :-)

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

Lichtbild: As all hard science achievements, this needs to be taken in context. The text doesn't state how many HPC cores needed to run to upsample a 512x512 image and what time it took. Knowing that one needs 2TB RAM and 5000 cores to run for 60min (figures illustrative) to get this result put the whole thing in a different perspective.

3.3MB trained model, 9 ms to 59 ms on a high-end consumer GPU depending on complexity. Real-time video use will be happening soon.
The initial training took all day on a GPU, but it only has to be done once to get to the current performance.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 03:07 UTC
In reply to:

Ultan: Here's a better one:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.07919
"EnhanceNet: Single Image Super-Resolution Through Automated Texture Synthesis" by Mehdi S. M. Sajjadi, Bernhard Scholkopf and Michael Hirsch of the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, 30 July 2017

They multiply the resolution by 4 (linearly, it appears)and get photorealistic results from having trained their neural net to reconstruct perceptually similar textures to the ones found in its large and diverse training set of photos. This includes high-contrast, sharp features as well as subtle textures. The program size is about 3MB and it is fast, 10-60ms depending on picture complexity. The results are stunning quality, and it should be able to do even better with upcoming application to video.

"Is the software available for download...?"
Fred:
http://webdav.tuebingen.mpg.de/pixel/enhancenet/
(which is a good link to see the results without downloading a PDF as well)
see link: " Pre-trained model (zip)"

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 09:09 UTC

Here's a better one:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.07919
"EnhanceNet: Single Image Super-Resolution Through Automated Texture Synthesis" by Mehdi S. M. Sajjadi, Bernhard Scholkopf and Michael Hirsch of the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, 30 July 2017

They multiply the resolution by 4 (linearly, it appears)and get photorealistic results from having trained their neural net to reconstruct perceptually similar textures to the ones found in its large and diverse training set of photos. This includes high-contrast, sharp features as well as subtle textures. The program size is about 3MB and it is fast, 10-60ms depending on picture complexity. The results are stunning quality, and it should be able to do even better with upcoming application to video.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 22:26 UTC as 10th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

samtheman2014: Reading about him he does appear to be a bit of a sleaze

MShot: "Sleaze is not a crime"

It's worse! it's in poor taste!

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 01:38 UTC
In reply to:

WilliamJ: " his professional interactions with subjects were sexual and explicit in nature but all of the subjects of his work participated consensually."
Even with President Obama ? (cf. http://formatmag.com/features/photography-barack-obama-terry-richardson/ ). My, my, my... that's a proud disclosure !

"Bathhouse" Barry "Obama" is a homosexual. He had sexual assault complaints by men against him as editor of the Harvard Law Review. Not sure about Terry, but his name and the hug shot with Barry are both extremely suspect.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 01:35 UTC
In reply to:

cybertec69: This anti white male nonsense by the feminazis has gone completely overboard, now if you are a white male and try to even look at a female you can be labeled as a sexual predator. What gets me is why none of these women never said anything before the gold digging went into overdrive.

Vogue is now run by a gay Black hairdresser who is purging all the upper-class White women from the magazine for "social justice". Vogue is over. The readership aspires to be upper-class White women, not loathsome scum.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 01:18 UTC

it looks like the side cameras are arranged in portrait mode, each of the 8 left-hand cameras covering part of a pinwheel of slightly overlapped fields view, each a bit over 22.5 degrees, with the right-hand cameras being part of another pinwheel of FOVs going the opposite direction. So the vertical field of view of each side camera will be a bit over 45 degrees, ~45mm equiv., with the top camera filling in without stereo vision over the top up-to-135 degree cone. This should give quite decent resolution for virtually all situations, a stereo cylinder perhaps 6-7k around and 2k high from which 2 4k video streams, one for each eye will be dynamically cropped, often with some loss of resolution around the top or bottom edge.

The overall camera may not be insanely expensive, perhaps as low as $3500, given that the cameras are 1/2.3, lenses are little ~7mm f/11 equiv. primes. The specs note a monster host computer is needed, likely close to $2000, even without the VR goggles, though.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 21:26 UTC as 19th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

NickyB66: Great idea, responsible drone users will have nothing to worry about, just the stupid few 'pilots' out there. FAA/CAA or government agencies need to slap heavy fines and a prison sentence, that way the message gets out.

Not you, lilBuddha, NickyB66 for proposing to "slap heavy fines and a prison sentence" to send a message to any who resist this Orwellian scheme.

You can be sure that this monitoring will not apply to the drones used by the military and police, but will apply to those members of the public keeping an eye on the military and police and will be used to punish those who might expose the authorities' actions.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 12:15 UTC
In reply to:

NickyB66: Great idea, responsible drone users will have nothing to worry about, just the stupid few 'pilots' out there. FAA/CAA or government agencies need to slap heavy fines and a prison sentence, that way the message gets out.

You are a bad person.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 17:58 UTC
In reply to:

retr01976: Forced diversity doesn’t fix the underlying issues, instead it attempts to simply to put a bandaide on things.

The real problem is our education system. For decades our school systems have pushed the idea that females (for example) should be school teachers or nurses. Our inner city schools are poorly managed and underfunded. Our schools need more STEM and creative arts programs. I grew up poor and today I am a very successful IT manager, unfortunately public education failed me and I couldn’t afford college so I took it upon myself to teach myself the skills necessary.

I think college should be free and we don’t need to raise taxes to do it. Corporations could be provided tax exemptions if they donate a portion of their profits to free college education. It’s a win win for everyone as people in our society from all backgrounds become educated and companies in turn have better candidates. We would have lower crime, a more diversified workplace and a more productive society.

@Wintermute
Intelligence has been studied with progressively more advanced methods over the past century. Intelligence measures the difficulty of problems one can answer, which correlates highly with all types of problems. IQ is the best predictor of success not only on tests and in school, but nearly every job, even menial ones. It is moderately correlated with longer life, good looks, better health, more ethical behavior and higher income -- with virtually everything good.

Variations in intelligence are due to genetics to a degree several times larger than is due to environment, such as would be shared within a household. Adoptees resemble their parents' IQs, not their adoptive parents, with which they have no correlation as adults. Intelligence is not raised by training on tests to any measurable degree, though training may increase performance on particular types of problems (usually soon leveling off ), the training does not give better performance on other types of problems.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

Nikonandmore: :
OK so no trolling and no bashing disclaimer before the sticks and bats come my way..

Just a simple image analysis:
- 1,3,5 are ridiculously over-sharpened and over-processed.
- 1,4,5 are basically all noise and soft everywhere.

Yes these are "just" JPGs and yes RAWs will be endlessly better and yes future firmware updates might improve things. But is this a good start for a camera hyped like it's the seconding coming of Christ? I have nothing against Nikon and have exclusively shot Nikon for many years (not anymore) but quite frankly I think a lot of people are somewhat blinded with excitement and not really taking a closer look at the camera's obvious overall mediocre IQ.

Is this camera the life-changing breakthrough fever that seems to have swept the photography world by storm? I don't see it.

Will this camera save Nikon from its downhill? Hopefully, I want them stick around for long time and they make some truly awesome glass & cameras.

Would I ever buy this? Positively not.

Not mediocre. Crap, utter crap. I have done better with 95% of my shots using. a 10-year-old compact camera.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 06:38 UTC
In reply to:

mirthseeker: From a former volunteer firefighter's perspective:
FACT: Aerial support is withdrawn if a drone is sighted near firefighting operations.
FACT: Aerial support is vital for early knock-down of fires in inaccessible terrain, and is a vital part of ongoing wildfire fighting, for suppression, protection of structures, and in emergencies for protection of people. Vital! Hundreds of homes here in Australia have been directly and indirectly saved through water-bombing wildfires in built-up and rural areas.
One idiot with a drone can, and has removed a vital component of modern firefighting processes, whether in USA, Australia, or elsewhere.
Consider whether it might be YOUR family, house or business which was lost because aerial support was unavailable.

Withdrawing aerial firefighting support for a risk that is utterly negligible compared to the existing risk in most cases is just cowardice and the consequences of that cowardice should not be assigned to the drone operator. People have the right to fly over public lands and that right, while balanced by a need to operate safely, is not erased by some power-mad bovine bureaucratic safety-officer who thinks they get to tell everyone where they may go and what they may photograph or they'll let the forest burn down. Safety does not require excluding drones from areas that planes aren't actually in, a few hundred meters away at most, but they make the no-fly area far larger than it needs to be.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2017 at 19:01 UTC
On article Finishing the line: Nikon 28mm F1.4E ED sample gallery (125 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cameracist: "now has 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 58mm, 85mm and 105mm options – it looks pretty complete to us"
...not complete without 40, 70 and 95mm lenses!

Probably a Fuji user. I hear they're into "color science".

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2017 at 19:17 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: Hey Sigma, I wanted your 24-70 2.8 lens but I'm now waiting since months to get anything like a review or a possibility to test it. Now Tamron comes up with a new 24-70 2.8 VC and I will definately wait for this lens as comparision. As you often don't seal your lenses (but Tamron does) I'll tend to the new Tamron instead. Your fault.

@WastingTime: A corporation legally is a person.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 22:51 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (819 comments in total)

I had a great time using the Minolta 7000i in the Costa Rican cloud forest for a couple of months shortly after the camera came out in 1988. Great camera. There was a Nat. Geo photographer there the whole time, but I think I got better shots of the hummingbirds at 1/2000 - 1/4000 in natural sunlight with ASA 800 Fuji film pushed to 3200. Not grainy at all, though it was only standard prints. Amazing place for birds, I wish I had had a longer lens than the Tamron 70-210mm.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 00:49 UTC as 158th comment
In reply to:

james s. kennedy: When I came on active duty in the Air Force in 1958, I was stationed in the Bronx making a base pay of $222.30/month, so the pay rates seem fairly generous. At the time I retired in 1980 as a bird colonel, my pay was about 32K/year. I worked for Boeing for the next 24 years as a software, systems and test engineer. I came to Boeing with 5 degrees in engineering and physics, including 2 masters from MIT.

The pay rates in this article still seem generous, but no mention is made of pensions, healthcare insurance, sick leave, vacations, etc.

But if you love what you are doing..., that makes all the difference in the world. My Air Force pension, thanks to the magic of inflation, is now , more than twice my pay when I retired, and I have nearly free healthcare, via TriCare, not the VA. I see any doctor I want when I want, no copays, no deductibles, no nothing. P.S. The Air Force paid for nearly all my education.

Please feel free to sign up.

I'd like to point up the implication that:
Today's $1000 pay for a self-employed person will buy the same amount of MIT education as $11 cash in hand would buy in 1958, which at the time one could net from less than 15 hours at the $1/hr. minimum wage. That gives the 1958 minimum wage the educational buying power of $67/hr. in 2017.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 13:37 UTC
In reply to:

james s. kennedy: When I came on active duty in the Air Force in 1958, I was stationed in the Bronx making a base pay of $222.30/month, so the pay rates seem fairly generous. At the time I retired in 1980 as a bird colonel, my pay was about 32K/year. I worked for Boeing for the next 24 years as a software, systems and test engineer. I came to Boeing with 5 degrees in engineering and physics, including 2 masters from MIT.

The pay rates in this article still seem generous, but no mention is made of pensions, healthcare insurance, sick leave, vacations, etc.

But if you love what you are doing..., that makes all the difference in the world. My Air Force pension, thanks to the magic of inflation, is now , more than twice my pay when I retired, and I have nearly free healthcare, via TriCare, not the VA. I see any doctor I want when I want, no copays, no deductibles, no nothing. P.S. The Air Force paid for nearly all my education.

Please feel free to sign up.

$1000 today is the equivalent of
$120 in 1958 ($22 if you're buying MIT tuition, was $1100, now $50k)
$354 in 1980 (your $32K = $90K in 2017)

$1000 dollars in salary and benefits cost to an employer gives about $700 in gross pay to an employee, which after tax gives the employee about $540 in spendable money. Since photographers are self-employed, they basically get to spend only half of what they are paid. So a $600 day rate means $300 spending money, the equivalent of $36 in 1958 or $106 in 1980. That's without looking at direct expenses for equipment, travel and lodging. Also, this is the top tier of the profession, only a few million dollars per year is paid to photographers by all the top publications combined, there probably aren't more than a couple of thousand photographers in the world that gross over $100k in such day rates per year and they spend like someone who makes less than half that much, less than US GDP per capita.

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 12:58 UTC
In reply to:

Mr Bolton: IF the drone was really 276 feet in the air, and traveling versus hovering, then it seems like it shouldn't have been shot at. The shooter should reasonably have to pay for the drone, and that should be the end of it.

But this is America, so facts (telemetry data, in this case) don't matter because FREEDOM.

brycesteiner: "I doubt birdshot could come close to travelling 276 feet, especially at a vertical angle."
276 ft vertically has only 133 fps (40.6 m/s) less velocity than the same distance horizontally. The initial velocity is between 900-1200 fps. Horizontally, 276ft is close to the limit under ideal circumstances (full choke, center of tight pattern) for breaking a clay with birdshot, but drones are more delicate than clays. One pellet through any essential trace on a printed circuit will take it out, there are hundreds of pellets and at least a few square inches of drone vitals. Not reliable, but not unlikely, especially over several shots.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2017 at 17:03 UTC
Total: 47, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »