Barty L

Barty L

Lives in Australia Adelaide, Australia
Works as a Lobster Deportment Tutor
Joined on Jul 23, 2016
About me:

Blurting out random nonsense since 1965.

Comments

Total: 382, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Cariboou: Look like a Gitzo, without a quality of Gitzo, and a 1/5 of price of Gitzo, Of course Gitzo can work for 30 Years and may be more....

Gitzo pre-dates Manfrotto, but both are part of the Vitec Group. If you open Gitzo.com and Manfrotto.com you will see that both manufacturers use the same icon. They share marketing and design teams - and almost certainly common manufacturing resources. The fact that this Manfrotto "looks like a Gitzo" is neither an accident nor an act of IP appropriation. They are two brands within the same company.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2018 at 23:20 UTC
In reply to:

Cariboou: Look like a Gitzo, without a quality of Gitzo, and a 1/5 of price of Gitzo, Of course Gitzo can work for 30 Years and may be more....

Gitzo is the "premium" line from ... Manfrotto. I have a Manfrotto aluminium 190 that lasted 25 years before one of the legs became slightly 'wobbly'. I have a Manfrotto carbon-fibre 055 which has worked perfectly well for around 8 years now.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2018 at 20:27 UTC
In reply to:

JABB66: You have to go to the camera page address, go to specifications and then still press "full specifications", but finally found it:

F-number (Maximum Aperture)
F3.5 (W) - 6.4 (T)

Or you could just read it off the front of the lens in the image in the story.

Link | Posted on Sep 2, 2018 at 08:28 UTC
In reply to:

sharkcookie: I have been very much against the subscription model but to be fair, when you do the math, $10 a month for 5 years is $600 which is actually pretty reasonable for getting PS and LR including updates for that amount of time.
If I understand correctly, if you stop paying, LR will still open and you have access to all your photos and edits and you can export to TIFF or whatever you want. That's reasonable as well.
One concern I have is how much one can trust Adobe. They said they will never take LR to be subscription only, yet they did. They can do whatever they want in the future because once subscribed to their rental concept we have absolutely zero say or power or ownership. That's a little dangerous IMHO. A computer with a software I own will run for the next 20 years (or more) and I can do everything with my photos that I'm doing now. That's a security I like to have. Not with the subscription model, no matter what Adobe 'promises' right now.

Read the second paragraph again. Read it as many times as it takes you to understand it.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2018 at 22:44 UTC
In reply to:

sharkcookie: I have been very much against the subscription model but to be fair, when you do the math, $10 a month for 5 years is $600 which is actually pretty reasonable for getting PS and LR including updates for that amount of time.
If I understand correctly, if you stop paying, LR will still open and you have access to all your photos and edits and you can export to TIFF or whatever you want. That's reasonable as well.
One concern I have is how much one can trust Adobe. They said they will never take LR to be subscription only, yet they did. They can do whatever they want in the future because once subscribed to their rental concept we have absolutely zero say or power or ownership. That's a little dangerous IMHO. A computer with a software I own will run for the next 20 years (or more) and I can do everything with my photos that I'm doing now. That's a security I like to have. Not with the subscription model, no matter what Adobe 'promises' right now.

Learn to read, it will open up new worlds for you.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2018 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

sharkcookie: I have been very much against the subscription model but to be fair, when you do the math, $10 a month for 5 years is $600 which is actually pretty reasonable for getting PS and LR including updates for that amount of time.
If I understand correctly, if you stop paying, LR will still open and you have access to all your photos and edits and you can export to TIFF or whatever you want. That's reasonable as well.
One concern I have is how much one can trust Adobe. They said they will never take LR to be subscription only, yet they did. They can do whatever they want in the future because once subscribed to their rental concept we have absolutely zero say or power or ownership. That's a little dangerous IMHO. A computer with a software I own will run for the next 20 years (or more) and I can do everything with my photos that I'm doing now. That's a security I like to have. Not with the subscription model, no matter what Adobe 'promises' right now.

My understanding is that you have access to your photos and can export, but you lose any new edit functionality, i.e. you can't 'tweak' existing edits, or import/edit new photos (I could be wrong).

I wouldn't trust Adobe not to get rid of Classic and force all your work to the cloud via CC.

If you want the 'security' of standalone software and local storage & editing, you will have explore alternatives.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2018 at 03:27 UTC

I'm guessing the answer will be "no", but does anyone know if it's possible to update the Camera Raw core at the heart of LR6 (standalone)? Obviously wouldn't get new features, but support for new cameras and lenses would be good.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2018 at 03:23 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Mssimo: Why not just go oil on canvas?

You can keep your fancy pigments and canvas. I'll stick with petroglyphs thanks.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2018 at 21:45 UTC

Does it mine bitcoin?

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2018 at 21:25 UTC as 33rd comment
In reply to:

Petak: Why not go full dagerotype?

Real men use woodcut.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2018 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: After reading this article, I believe people can be forgiven if they drop conventional cameras and start shooting with smartphones. These complexities can turn the simple pleasure of photographing into a drag.
Just learn the rule of reprocity and forget the rest. Otherwise you'll end up missing the times when photographing was fun.

To your list of qualities we can now add "fragile". Perhaps you would be happier if your commentary was co-located with your photography - safely hidden from any possibility of critique.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2018 at 21:22 UTC
In reply to:

ray-ray: What I take away after reading this article is "the more i learn, the more I find out I don't know". This could all be so stressful if I allowed it, but for that the majority of cameras still have an Automatic setting.

Knowing that you don't know everything is one of the more useful things to know.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2018 at 08:28 UTC
In reply to:

bolt2014: OH poop! I think I'm to go back to shooting film because I'm too stupid to understand all this !

Fair enough. But some respondents further down have written similar things and don't appear to be joking. I understand why someone might be exasperated if they think they are being 'forced' to learn something they don't want to, but it's an opportunity not a directive.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2018 at 00:57 UTC
In reply to:

Aroart: Wow, does all this info change the fact that you should only bump up your ISO to gather more light if changing your shutter speed, aperture is not an option.. and the higher your ISO the more grain will be in your image...

It was never a fact that increasing ISO gathers more light. The light received at the sensor at the time of capture is all the light you are ever going to gather. Post-sensor signal amplification or scaling affects the values written to the file, but they never increase the amount of light gathered.

Increasing output image brightness by increasing ISO will result in a noisy image if doing that causes you to 'underexpose' (gather less light).

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2018 at 00:36 UTC
In reply to:

bolt2014: OH poop! I think I'm to go back to shooting film because I'm too stupid to understand all this !

There is no 'requirement' to understand it. If you are happy with the quality of the image files you produce in the absence of understanding, then just keep doing what you're doing. The article provides a tool that can be used to minimise image noise - if that didn't concern you prior to the publication of the article, it needn't concern you now.

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2018 at 00:21 UTC
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: After reading this article, I believe people can be forgiven if they drop conventional cameras and start shooting with smartphones. These complexities can turn the simple pleasure of photographing into a drag.
Just learn the rule of reprocity and forget the rest. Otherwise you'll end up missing the times when photographing was fun.

Scared, wilfully ignorant and petty.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 22:22 UTC
In reply to:

Alp Oguz: Raw histogram may be the most wanted feature for years ... what can be the reason for camera manufacturers not giving this basic tool to us?

I think it is probably a simple matter of there not being enough demand for it.

This site attracts photo-enthusiasts. We buy "better" more capable cameras than most. Most of the cameras we buy have the capability of shooting RAW, yet there are still lots of enthusiasts that prefer to shoot JPEG for various reasons. I imagine that the overwhelming majority of ILC owners who do not fall into the enthusiast category shoot JPEG.

Even among professionals I would think that the high-output photographers such as Sports shooters and many wedding photographers would also shoot exclusively JPEG or perhaps JPEG+RAW, with the RAWs only being processed if the JPEG is way off. So there simply isn't the demand. It could also be that it's not as simple as we think.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 21:53 UTC
In reply to:

hikerdoc: Thanks, Richard (and BobN2). Not too proud to admit I don’t fully understand exactly what ISO is, what is happening, or how to accurately explain it.
D

Me neither, and I love that articles like this provide another prompt and another opportunity for just a little bit more to sink in.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 11:14 UTC
In reply to:

Alp Oguz: Raw histogram may be the most wanted feature for years ... what can be the reason for camera manufacturers not giving this basic tool to us?

I fudge it by pushing exposure until the 'blinkies' tell me I'm just starting to clip highlights. Because I know the highlight warnings derive from an 8-bit representation of the image I know I have a few more bits to work with (a miserly 12 in my camera's case) then I know that even if I actually lose some data it's likely to be confined to specular highlights or some small area I can live with.

But it would be useful and appreciated for the camera to just tell me and not make me guess at an appropriate 'offset'.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 11:12 UTC
In reply to:

David 247: Very interesting. I love it when I learn something new. And I've been taking photos for over 50 years so this is new. Now I am thinking how I can familiarize and use this information in my photography.

A simple, positive response from someone unafraid to learn something, and not offended or exasperated by the opportunity to do so. Thank you.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2018 at 11:07 UTC
Total: 382, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »