mckracken88

Joined on Nov 5, 2012

Comments

Total: 107, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (447 comments in total)
In reply to:

drjs: Really great article. Very well written and has great depth.

I think what we need to think about isn't what Smart Phone is doing right, but rather what real cameras are doing wrong. All of the computational photography "tricks" can be done on a large sensor camera but all of the traditional camera companies are either unable or unwilling to implement. Everyone is chasing larger sensor, brighter lens, faster AF instead adding useful software programs into the camera.

The future of photography is a combination of software and hardware. The innovation from past few years for smart phone is a perfect argument for this. For as long as traditional photography vendors are unwilling to realize this, smart phone camera will continue to leap forward in results. We as photographers needs to have better understanding of technology and not beholden-ed to our idea what photography should be.

you dont need pics loaded with fake effects if you buy a camera.
you dont need hdr auto stacking (or very rarely) if you buy a camera.

you need only all these smart features if you're too dumb to get to know a camera in half an hour of reading the manual.

but be my guest if youre content with grainy, smeary throwaway pics that are ONLY useable on a phone.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 18:38 UTC
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (447 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: A lot of commentators here seem to be missing the point. Whether you 'like' the images from the Pixel2 or not is not the point. The fact is they greatly exceed the physical parameters of the sensor used in that phone.

If people are going to be tempted into buying dedicated cameras, they will demand some level of visible superiority over what they can do with a phone. That means some similar techniques will have to be available, either in-camera or in post, to stay ahead.

In practice, a lot of this is just focus stacking or HDR stacking, but what is unique is the Pixel2's ability to identify areas of an image intelligently and align the stacked images so precisely. It does a much better job of HDR (the results look quite realistic) than some HDR efforts I have seen, and the 'fake bokeh' is pretty smooth too...

I would like some control over these effects, but there is no doubt that they work. They will work just as well on a D850, in most cases - and with better quality data.

"So the only alternative to a phone is a full-frame camera? "
Most definitely.
In my travels, where i go, my d800 goes. Even up to 22000ft last winter.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 18:28 UTC
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (447 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hyper111: Tech history has shown, the nimble usually overtake the the bigger boys.
During the late 80s. IBM came out with the humble PC, it was n't as powerful as mainframes. Over time, the PC has become more and more powerful. It knocked out the bigger players such as Digital, Sun and HP. In the past people bought mainframes, but who buys that these days?

Even WIndows is under threat from people using lighter and nimbler tablets and phones.

Camera manufacturers are not going to make their compact more smarter, in case it hurts the sales of their CSC and SLR equipment.

I am a great fan of advanced compact cameras.... However, whilst taking photos of New Year's event, my photos were not as good as those taken from people's mobile phones.

yeah.....no.

youre funny. if you seriously compare a mainframe to a personal computer, no matter the time.

Tablets dont sell anymore. After the apple hype train died down. (holy smokes those touch things sucked - gimme a mouse any time)

And phones doing pc work? you must be jokking.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 16:04 UTC
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (447 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: A lot of commentators here seem to be missing the point. Whether you 'like' the images from the Pixel2 or not is not the point. The fact is they greatly exceed the physical parameters of the sensor used in that phone.

If people are going to be tempted into buying dedicated cameras, they will demand some level of visible superiority over what they can do with a phone. That means some similar techniques will have to be available, either in-camera or in post, to stay ahead.

In practice, a lot of this is just focus stacking or HDR stacking, but what is unique is the Pixel2's ability to identify areas of an image intelligently and align the stacked images so precisely. It does a much better job of HDR (the results look quite realistic) than some HDR efforts I have seen, and the 'fake bokeh' is pretty smooth too...

I would like some control over these effects, but there is no doubt that they work. They will work just as well on a D850, in most cases - and with better quality data.

HDR ...is not needed (or close to anyway) with the dynamic range of a D800 for instance. (i did take a few times 2 exposures for a HDR in mind but very rarely used them. Underexpose and lifting shadows did almost always do the trick)

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 15:58 UTC
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (447 comments in total)

I find people shooting anything worthwhile with a phone embarrassing.
Because they care so little how their pics turn out.

they are going to regret looking at those point and click in a few years (on anything else than their phone display)

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2018 at 09:36 UTC as 63rd comment | 2 replies

freakin laughable. Social media gone wrong.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 15:29 UTC as 21st comment
On article Why smartphone cameras are blowing our minds (447 comments in total)

Landscapes with a phone? Is that guy for real? Hahah. (or for that matter any subject where you want details and not a grainy smear)

Also a real photographer (and/or someone who cares enough) will despise fake computational effects and prefer reality.

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2018 at 15:17 UTC as 126th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

mckracken88: "Dad's invested in (and really enjoys) the Apple ecosystem"

Lol. Who else uses 'ecosystem' in connection with taking pictures? Yeah...you can almost smell someone got paid for something.

Relax, hehe. All im just saying is that your 1000 Dollar iturd takes horrible pics.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 14:20 UTC

"Dad's invested in (and really enjoys) the Apple ecosystem"

Lol. Who else uses 'ecosystem' in connection with taking pictures? Yeah...you can almost smell someone got paid for something.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 14:02 UTC as 125th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

dr.noise: Well, if someone's preferences and purpose is to make crappy pictures of beautiful places, then OK it's the right tool for the job. What else is there to say. Portraits are more or less tolerable, I don't know why, but my eyes are bleeding looking at the landscape photos in 100%. Otherwise nice pictures are completely destroyed. I think no more than 30% of original details are preserved. Not saying this as a hater, I didn't even look at any Iphone shots earlier and I expected them to be much better, given all the praise.

Portraits Ok? With artificial background blurring? I dont think so. Not only is the shot of very low quality but it's fake too. (background) The phone people don't even care if it's real or not.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 12:50 UTC
In reply to:

Dominik84: Images look really ok, even on my iMac 27. But for me by far not good enough to leave my camera equipment at home. For me an image is about the subject, the emotion, the light etc. (and the first two photos are really great regarding to this) but honestly I would be very disappointed if I would do such a great journey to a fascinating country and only come home with such Smartphone images. We'll see what the development will do the next years. When it's one day close to the image quality of a 5d IV + 35 1,4 > nice :-)

your eyesight must be very faulty.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 12:16 UTC

PHONE articles: Look my pics look OK on a tiny phone screen! (Or how i was to lazy and didn't care to carry a real camera)

COMMENTS: Always a huge number. (because subject matter is highly controversial - lazy people vs photographers)

PLEASE: Let me filter out your insipid phone news.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 12:15 UTC as 136th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

User3366538285: A couple of years ago, reality hit me on my face: nobody gives a cent about the "quality" of my photos. I post them on Flickr and print some books, but who cares? I carry around my (fantastic FX) SLR and take awesome pics but the only person that admires them is ME. The rest are happy with the low-res pics I send them when I manage to sync my slr to my phone. They totally ignore my "perfect" landscape pics or my efforts on street photography - they go "oooh" and "aaah" on crappy group photos that I could easily take on a $100 phone.

"and take awesome pics but the only person that admires them is ME"

Umm who do you make photos for again? Who gives a damn about other people? Are you for real? This social media stuff is seriously messing with people's heads.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 11:56 UTC
On article Cinematic 4K footage shot with the Apple iPhone X (310 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sranang Boi: You can buy a G80 for far less than that, and get a far better 4K experience.

yes you can do all that and make really crappy photos and digital as heck looking movies!

(all because you're too lazy / and or overweight to carry a real DSLR!)

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 08:06 UTC
On article Cinematic 4K footage shot with the Apple iPhone X (310 comments in total)

Ugh, looks very digital.
AND for the love of the Gods, NO MORE DREAMY KITSCH PIANO TRACK and beauty in sunglasses in your blatant advertisement. kthxbye.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 21:44 UTC as 92nd comment | 5 replies

I pity the fool that takes photos with a phone...

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2017 at 17:10 UTC as 62nd comment | 18 replies

yeah, "gamechanger" is something an apple reviewer would use. But i hate "narrative" more at the moment.
That aside, what is the game and why should it be constantly changed?

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2017 at 18:26 UTC as 87th comment | 6 replies
On article Photo story of the week: Fire and Ice (179 comments in total)

I normally hate reflecting stuff in water, but this time its OK.
A bit over the top maybe...(would like to see untouched photo)

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2017 at 20:13 UTC as 31st comment

Can you smell the real future Jase Charvis??

The next iphone XX will feature fake detail on top of fake bokeh! Phone pics will be even more awesome!!

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 19:05 UTC as 44th comment | 8 replies
On article First iPhone X hands-on field test with sample photos (380 comments in total)

I'd really, really like a news filter - so i dont have to b itch about laughably bad phone pics (and a blatant Apple ad in this case) so often. ;)

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 13:40 UTC as 14th comment | 4 replies
Total: 107, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »