Najinsky

Joined on Feb 21, 2006

Comments

Total: 590, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (371 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ron Poelman: Two thoughts.
.
Another test, another dodgy Sony lens,
why would anyone jump ship to a system that continues to get this sort of press ?
.
Secondly, what is the value of testing unattainable sharpness in the real world ?
It's about time the definition of acceptable was quantified
and made a permanent part of the testing procedure.
I can't see too many of us running around in the field with a macro rail.
It really is time to state "good enough".

This 'real world' clause you keep introducing is presumptuous, lazy and wrong.

There is no 'real world shooting' in this context, in the same way there is no 'real world money'.

Your money is yours and is very different to my money, which is mine. Different requirements, different use cases. Different.

Vastly most shooting scenarios are done with smartphones, so almost by definition, the choice to buy and use specialist cameras means we have our own special use cases.

People like me come to sites like this to inform ourselves to make better choices for our use cases.

I appreciate the work you guys put into all of this, but why relegate it to esoterica and treat your readers like dummies (don't answer that) by adding 'but it's not really important for you guys'.

You need to commit to your own goals. Do the work well, publish accurately and offer an informed opinion.

It's up to me to inform myself better, so I can be the judge of what is important to me.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 13:38 UTC
On article Now we know: Sony a9 is sharper than we thought (371 comments in total)
In reply to:

beavertown: Will the 89% score be modified soon?

Yes, the score should certainly be revised downward as this demonstrates very clearly just how unsuitable the manual focus algorithm is for critical focus work.

It's my main gripe with my A7 (see below) and extremely disappointing to see it is still an issue on the A9.

This shouldn't be a hard thing to get right, all the required components are in place, unless there is something in the design of the focusing actuators/motors making it physically more challenging than it appears.

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 12:56 UTC
In reply to:

piratejabez: Is this a TBT? Is it supposed to be tagged as such?

Nice one Sage!

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2017 at 19:21 UTC
On article Affinity Photo comes to the iPad (40 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: In terms of features and capabilities, this is by far the most capable photo app ever made for iPad, and if everything worked it would be 5 star ++

But not everything works. In fact, it is also probably the most bug-ridden app ever to be released on the App Store.

It's evident they were under massive pressure to launch so they could take advantage of their keynote appearance at the Apple WWDC. It makes sense, it's such a huge exposure opportunity no one could afford to miss.

They probably worked their socks off trying to get this ready, and even though they must know just how buggy this release is, they must have decided they had to launch.

Even with 30% off, it's hard to use the app seriously without feeling like you paid for the privilege to be an alpha tester (it's not up to beta standards).

It's potentially a great app; I'll give them a few days to recover from the launch party and then I'm going to be on their case weekly. There's a hell of a lot of bugs to work through.

999 character limit reached, can't explain all the issues.

Have a browse through the bug forum on their site:

https://affinity.serif.com/forum/index.php?/forum/40-bugs-on-ipad/?prune_day=100&sort_by=Z-A&sort_key=last_post&topicfilter=all

- No explanations in intro made them progressively more complex to follow; skipped it and tried to look at the tutorials.

- Tutorials wouldn't load. Dived in with my own photos.

- Tried Loading raw from my photo library. Didnt get the raw data, but an embedded jpeg from the raw file.

- Tried to call it via Photos app, can't do that, affinity doesn't work as a plug in editor.

- Support blame Apple. Not true, Adobe PSE works just fine with Raw/Photos/Library.

- Workaround is to copy the raw to iCloud first, then open from there. LOL.

- Got a raw loaded. Tried to crop it, but couldn't save as the the save button disappeared when selecting crop! Had to abandon the edit.

- Reloaded file, now the raw development sliders are missing!

Etc, etc...

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 16:11 UTC

"Photomatix Pro 6 is available now for $99 USD for a single-user license. Customers who purchased Photomatix Pro 5 will receive a free upgrade. Earlier versions of Photomatix Pro can be upgraded for $29 USD."

WELL DONE, HDRsoft. This is an all too rare example of how to treat your customers with respect when it comes to an upgrade policy.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 14:11 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply

Great juxtaposition of the enticing with the gross.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2017 at 13:14 UTC as 1st comment
On article Affinity Photo comes to the iPad (40 comments in total)

In terms of features and capabilities, this is by far the most capable photo app ever made for iPad, and if everything worked it would be 5 star ++

But not everything works. In fact, it is also probably the most bug-ridden app ever to be released on the App Store.

It's evident they were under massive pressure to launch so they could take advantage of their keynote appearance at the Apple WWDC. It makes sense, it's such a huge exposure opportunity no one could afford to miss.

They probably worked their socks off trying to get this ready, and even though they must know just how buggy this release is, they must have decided they had to launch.

Even with 30% off, it's hard to use the app seriously without feeling like you paid for the privilege to be an alpha tester (it's not up to beta standards).

It's potentially a great app; I'll give them a few days to recover from the launch party and then I'm going to be on their case weekly. There's a hell of a lot of bugs to work through.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2017 at 10:39 UTC as 3rd comment | 3 replies

What a bizarre case of negative positive discrimination.

If the headline had started "Rare collection of Anna Atkins' cyanotype photos...." then equality would have been achieved. But your headline demotes her from a person with a name to merely a gender.

Of course, the fact she is considered the first female photographer, at a time when females role in society was viewed very differently than it is today, is a relevant part of the story, but trying to contort it into the headline is distracting and hints at COSS (chip-on-shoulder-syndrome).

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 09:14 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
On article Google will no longer develop Nik Collection (389 comments in total)

Good news in Bad news!

For all those people disappointed at losing their preferred raw converter, the good news is Nik was never a raw converter to begin with, so you won't be losing it!

When used stand alone on a raw file, it will first call the operating systems raw converter (Camera raw on Macs, Raw Codec support on Windows systems), the app then works on the processed data.

Likewise, If you use the Modules as plugins, then the host application such as Aperture or Lightroom does the raw conversion and passes it to Nik for further processing.

Confusion comes from the name of the raw pre-sharpen module. This is intended for unsharpened raw conversions. While most raw converters apply some sharpening during demosaicing, some, like Aperture, allow you to fine tune this automatic sharpening. Ideally you should be using something like this to minimise automatic sharpening but retain detail in the conversion. This gives the proper base for raw pre-sharpener to start from.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2017 at 08:51 UTC as 78th comment
In reply to:

Mazenmazen: ... and he's still standing and filming towards the snipers' line of fire.. unless the go pro processor and battery detonated under 45+C°

It's hard to assess precisely, but the way I see it, it looks more like the bullet went through the go-pro from left to right, meaning the sniper was to the front of the vehicle. Ammar goes behind the truck and presumably is now protected by the armored vehicle and continues to record his vlog. He's not waving it around, he's recording himself.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 19:01 UTC

It's hard to get a true sense of this story from this 'snippet'. Here is some additional information:

It is a Canon Europe competition, not Canon UK, the requirement is that you tag your local Canon instagram account, so if you live in UK, @CanonUK is correct, but if you live in Belgium, for example, it would be @CanonBelgium.

Eligible are residents of: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.

Closing date is: 23:59 (CEST) on 28 June 2017.

Max 1 entry pp.

It's 50 words maximum, not at least 50 words as stated here.

A better link with full TaC and prize details is: http://www.canon-europe.com/live-for-the-story/

Some constraints of the prize are pretty naff; £1500 per month allowance to cover tourist rate food and accommodation is harsh, so expect to be living most of the time by couch surfing or hostels.

Good luck!

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 18:16 UTC as 1st comment

I don't understand a word of this..

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 19:04 UTC as 12th comment

Re: "AF Target Spot Metering (E-M1 II only)" - should say E-M5 II

Link | Posted on May 8, 2017 at 15:17 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply

Did anyone click through far enough to see the sample images? Probably the worst digital images I've ever seen. Nothing in focus, flare everywhere, compulsory distortion. This makes no sense at all for photography, totally pointless, but as interactive bling for those with MHLFD (must have latest fashion disorder) I wouldn't bet against it being a roaring success!

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 18:44 UTC as 3rd comment
On article This camera shoots at 5 trillion frames per second (3 comments in total)

Wow. So misleading I'm practically speechless. But of course in reality my speech just slowed down so much it no long had sufficient force to apply pressure to the eardrum so it just looked like I mouthed bullpoopoo without actually making a sound.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 18:23 UTC as 1st comment
On article Updated: Sony a9 samples with Raw support (450 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: It's way past time to stop pushing Adobe Camera Raw processing as any kind of reference standard.

The only standard it represents is that of lowest common denominator.

To achieve that it ignores tons of metadata that the camera supplied software understands and that can be used to produce a much better rendering using the manufacturer supplied raw processor.

I understand it respresents a tricky challenge, but hat doesn't mean it's a challenge that should be shirked.

I'd rather not. I'd rather the industry sorted this mess out. Adobe is not the solution, it's only making the best of a bad situation.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 13:36 UTC
On article Updated: Sony a9 samples with Raw support (450 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: I bought close to a hundred cameras in the last ten years and one of the most accurate colors I've ever seen coming from any camera was from the venerable Sony R1 from 2005. Seeing Sony's colours from more recent models prevent me to buy another Sony digicam, especially at the high price they go for nowadays. Sony lost their magical recipe for colours along the way.

Sony R1 was actually a CMOS sensor, rare for a bridge camera at the time (as was APS-C). In theory CCD or CMOS will have little effect on colour, they just represent different electronic architectures for acquiring the exposure readings.

What will affect colour is the ambient lighting, CFA and Lens coatings. Canon are the only one I've seen publish white papers that describe their colour philosophy and technical approach.

They start with target customer, look at the most common lighting scenarios they expect that customer to be shooting in and the most common subjects they will be shooting, and then design a CFA, IR filter and OLP filter to optimise for those scenarios.

What it boils down to, is Canon sensors are great at capturing skin tones in a wide variety of mixed lighting scenarios, but at the expense of some complex red and blue channel processing.

There is now concern that this is changing due to constant DR criticisms, so soon we may get crap colour from all cameras.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 13:11 UTC
On article Updated: Sony a9 samples with Raw support (450 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: It's way past time to stop pushing Adobe Camera Raw processing as any kind of reference standard.

The only standard it represents is that of lowest common denominator.

To achieve that it ignores tons of metadata that the camera supplied software understands and that can be used to produce a much better rendering using the manufacturer supplied raw processor.

I understand it respresents a tricky challenge, but hat doesn't mean it's a challenge that should be shirked.

Yes, I guess they figure that as it's going to be tested using ACR anyway, they are forgiven for supplying bad software.

But then again, if review sites insisted on using the supplied software to process raws, and marked the camera down for having very bad software, before long the software quality might improve. But when you get a free pass, the incentive to improve it isn't there.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 12:28 UTC
On article Updated: Sony a9 samples with Raw support (450 comments in total)

It's way past time to stop pushing Adobe Camera Raw processing as any kind of reference standard.

The only standard it represents is that of lowest common denominator.

To achieve that it ignores tons of metadata that the camera supplied software understands and that can be used to produce a much better rendering using the manufacturer supplied raw processor.

I understand it respresents a tricky challenge, but hat doesn't mean it's a challenge that should be shirked.

Link | Posted on May 7, 2017 at 11:20 UTC as 82nd comment | 5 replies
On article Fujifilm X-T20 Review (359 comments in total)
In reply to:

Najinsky: Confusion central. Checking out the raw files from the X-Trans 3 cameras just doesn't support what you have been writing about these cameras.

Here's the queen of spades in the comparison scene, XT2, XT20, X100F and GR2.

http://bit.ly/2nPzf2m

The X-T2 looks great. The X-T20 is softer and the X100F is softer still.

The X100F output shows about the same resolution as the 16MP Ricoh GR 2, just uprezzed to 24MP. Clearly the old lens cant match the new sensor, it should have been upgraded for this price point. For sure, the Xtrans 3 output is nicer than Xtrans 2, and that helps a bit, but gold award, at this price, Meh!

Now the XT20 should deliver very similar results to the X-T2 and in the review you say it does, but the raw shown above is clearly softer (eg the ruby). Is it a testing error or something more serious, like the camera being prone to shutter vibration on some shots?

Note, switching from raw to the JPEG does make the XT20 match the XT2. But why is the raw so soft.

Yes. Obviously accuracy in testing and presenting the results is now low on the agenda. Impossible for a raw+jpeg of the very same capture to show such differences. And lack of official response to these questions shows what a low priority it now is. Yet when someone criticises the composition of the sample photos for the the latest sexy camera the DPR photographer has no trouble finding the time to respond.

Sad as it seems, the site is so busy trying to reinvent itself for the future, it doesn't realise how much it is distancing itself from the past that made it relevant.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2017 at 22:52 UTC
Total: 590, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »