Najinsky

Joined on Feb 21, 2006

Comments

Total: 910, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Max Iso: Wait, now that phones offer fake bokeh there's no real difference right? I kid i kid. Seriously though, are people really this inept? I used phones before, sometimes for photos, and when i bought my first ever ILC (an A33), it had a far more serious interface and capability.

Never once was i overwhelmed by all the buttons and dials. I wanted something more than my phone could offer and i found it, and subsequently, have kept going from there. I don't get why companies use kiddie gloves, or am i just out of touch with the common consumer?

Lol. That was actually like one that I bought. It was a Yamaha electronic guitar. Instead of strings down the fretboard, it had lines of thin 'string width' individual buttons. The buttons lit up to show you which 'strings' to close on which frets to form the chords.

Sold it when I went travelling as didn't have room to take it and my photo gear, but I intend to get another one day.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 17:58 UTC
In reply to:

CQui: From some eternal beginner photograph point of view, in the end of the film for everyone area, you could have a not too bad camera with minimum configuration, only a dial with portrait/macro/landscape, then a night/day option button, and buy good average film and for a very reasonable price get very nice pictures by only pointing the camera in the right direction and hitting the shutter,
Now, if you don't spend half your vacation budget in a camera, spend 3 weeks in a camera crash course, or spend even more on a smartphone that you don't really need, you don't have these nice enough to be printed pictures.

@rurikw. Probably the new site advert loading feature, it can make the screen jump around after you think it's already finished loading. I'm mis-clicking all the time with it, it's dreadful.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 14:36 UTC
In reply to:

hfjacinto: I’m just not the target audience.

Let's say there are 1B people taking photos. Let's say 995M use smartphone cameras and 5M use 'real cameras'.

The general (industry) target is to move some of those 995M over to the 5M side.

More specific for this concept is those who are scared they don't understand what the dials, icons, logos and numbers mean, and therefore would never contemplate dropping a large chunk of disposable on something they don't understand.

The big threat comes from the ever increasing smartphone image quality and its associated AI.

The use of a good APS-C and prime lens gives this a fighting chance that IQ differences will be noticeable (especially with some guidance on good composition). But the real value-added here is that the chosen raw files will then be competently edited for them automatically.

So there is a real possibility that they will see 'better' images as a result of this process. In a world of images and likes, that probably has value.

It may kindle an interest in photography too.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 09:16 UTC
In reply to:

FodgeandDurn: To everyone coming here just to say '12mp was always good enough for me, I hate this site's focus on technical advancement rather than the craft' - you are on a gear website. dpeview is all about the gear (with an admittedly expanding focus). I don't know how you haven't noticed that already, but since you haven't I hope this is a lightbulb moment. If you are in love with your 8 year old Rebel T1i that is fantastic (as far as I know the great Paul Nicklen was still using a 16mp Canon 1D Mk.4 until last year), but just to re-iterate, this is a gear website, for people who are interested in cameras and technological progress. If you want a site where you and other curmudgeons can gather to post your beautiful 12mp photos, there are plenty out there.

I do.not.understand. the people who regularly come to a site like dpreview to read the latest tech specs and post 'how unnecessary, what happened to the craft rather than caring about specs'. You people are bizarre.

There is room for both. But both means:

1. People who like gear and its advancement.
2. People who like the craft/profession and its advancement .

But they are not mutually exclusive, it seems natural and benefitial to have a foot in both camps.

The ones who there should be no room for are those who use camp 2 soley as a mantra to constantly criticize those with a foot in camp 1, seemingly because they have nothing to say on the subject but do have a burning desire to say it.

These latter kind hang around like a bad fart in a spacesuit.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 08:45 UTC

10 good things about this.

1. Out of sight out of mind. Fear of dials is real, this gets the message across you can start taking photos on a good camera without worrying about it.

2. Free to try (pay only for results). High cost of gear is also an inhibitor. Getting more people trying out good cameras may help the person discover a passion, and help the industry.

3. Composition first. You don't need to travel far from here to find people who got so wrapped up in the controls, they still didn't make it round to composition yet!

4. If I was lending my camera to a stranger, I'd want to protect it well too.

5. If my business model depended on a precise camera/networking configuration, I'd want to prevent tinkering too.

6. Hand the camera to a stranger so you can be in a group shot, you want it in P&S mode.

7. Editing comes as standard, rather than indefinitely postponed.

8. Enforced review and cull, rather than indefinitely postponed.

9. Follow-up potential.

10. Free Coffee!

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 07:07 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Max Iso: Wait, now that phones offer fake bokeh there's no real difference right? I kid i kid. Seriously though, are people really this inept? I used phones before, sometimes for photos, and when i bought my first ever ILC (an A33), it had a far more serious interface and capability.

Never once was i overwhelmed by all the buttons and dials. I wanted something more than my phone could offer and i found it, and subsequently, have kept going from there. I don't get why companies use kiddie gloves, or am i just out of touch with the common consumer?

By definition all of us here took those steps, but how many other first steps did we not take due to hurdles. I still never got around to playing guitar, despite twice having bought one. So much to do, so little time.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

Father Bouvier: DPR already advertised that company a year ago, and every comment here said that was a dumb idea. Now they are doing it again, expecting what? Different opinions?
It's also funny a company like that would be called a start-up. It's more like a start-down, but it's definitely going nowhere. I would also be surprised to hear any investment capital being interested.

Last year they were charging rental for the cameras, they selected your best photos and you only got what they decided were the keepers, the following day.

Now the rental is free, you get to see all your photos (I think, it's not totally clear from the artical) and choose the ones you want and pay for those to be 'expertly processed' into final keeper images.

As a minimum, it shows Relonch are committed to their vision yet willing to respond to critical feedback. That's positive.

There's also some interesting psychology at work here.

The two biggest barriers to entry into 'real cameras' have been removed. The buy-in cost, and the fear of the controls.

When a novice goes through this process, they will likely get some nice keepers. It follows they may then get an interest in why the other shots were not keepers, and if there was something they could have done to change it. The interest is kindled.

This is an interesting approach. I can see camera companies buying into this.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 16:21 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: Can someone please explain the benefit of backside illumination? An unfortunate choice of words :)

Knight, it's unlikely a factor in what you describe.

Cameras are designed so that a certain amount of light will deliver a certain level of captured exposure (brightness). This is done by the camera's ISO implementation, which amplifies the captured exposure to achieve that 'standard' brightness.

In theory, most cameras should deliver the same brightness of captured scene exposure for the same settings (shutter speed, aperture, ISO).

If two cameras deliver different brightness for the scene, the most likely culprit is the camera's metering system being used to assign the settings. The first thing I do when shooting any new camera is to learn its metering system(s).

If two cameras deliver different brightness for the scene using the same settings, they may have implemented different standards for ISO, or there may be a fault in one.

The role BSI plays is that because more light is captured, less amplification is needed, and so less noise becomes amplified to visible levels.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 06:58 UTC
In reply to:

Max Iso: Wait, now that phones offer fake bokeh there's no real difference right? I kid i kid. Seriously though, are people really this inept? I used phones before, sometimes for photos, and when i bought my first ever ILC (an A33), it had a far more serious interface and capability.

Never once was i overwhelmed by all the buttons and dials. I wanted something more than my phone could offer and i found it, and subsequently, have kept going from there. I don't get why companies use kiddie gloves, or am i just out of touch with the common consumer?

Long ago in the UK we had a TV show called the generation game. An expert would be invited to demonstrate a seemingly simple task, say making pancakes.

In one swift movement s/he would deftly tap the eggs onto the side of the bowl, opening cleanly, the contents sliding gently into the bowl and the shells discarded. The other ingredients added, whisked and just the right quanity scooped into the hot pan. With a twist of the wrist, the mixture evenly distributed and with a flick the pancake would somersault out of the pan returning on its flip side for cooking.

Then it was the turn for members of public to attempt to repeat what they had seen. Smashed eggs everywhere, pancakes landing on people's head. Entertaining chaos.

Inept? Maybe, but kinder to recognise the embryonic stage one goes through in any learning process, where you don't know what you don't know.

Photography is huge yet 'real' camera use is declining. There must be a market somewhere, maybe baby steps is not so daft.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 06:31 UTC
In reply to:

Kharan: This project is obviously looked at with derision by most enthusiasts and pros, but Allison does have a good point in her article - the younger generations are far more agreeable to just rent things for short periods instead of owning them. Another characteristic of these people is that they want to dabble in the most incredible, pointless endeavors,especially if they’re outdated.
I think that a truly interesting business niche would be to rent them nice, fully-working medium format systems and lab time, to have them experience the joys of old photography without the hassle of needing to own and care for all that stuff. Include an intro class with Ecuadorian coffee and you’re all set :D
I’d be interested in such a service, especially since MF photography has become impossibly expensive (digital) or difficult (there’s a single remaining lab in my country that processes MF film, and they’re effing expensive).

How is buying a $500 camera free? The whole point of this seems to be not to buy the camera, just keep your best shot and have them processed automatically for a dollar each.

I'm not saying I agree with the concept, although I do think having the photos processed is interesting, as is being encouraged not to keep onto all the junk photos we never get around to deleting.

Obviously it's not being used as an ILC, but it didn't seem honest to call it a compact, the vast majority of which have smaller than APS-C sensors.

On a slightly different tangent, If someone offered this service with a Hassleblad X1D, I'd be first in the queue!

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 21:24 UTC
In reply to:

Kharan: This project is obviously looked at with derision by most enthusiasts and pros, but Allison does have a good point in her article - the younger generations are far more agreeable to just rent things for short periods instead of owning them. Another characteristic of these people is that they want to dabble in the most incredible, pointless endeavors,especially if they’re outdated.
I think that a truly interesting business niche would be to rent them nice, fully-working medium format systems and lab time, to have them experience the joys of old photography without the hassle of needing to own and care for all that stuff. Include an intro class with Ecuadorian coffee and you’re all set :D
I’d be interested in such a service, especially since MF photography has become impossibly expensive (digital) or difficult (there’s a single remaining lab in my country that processes MF film, and they’re effing expensive).

1. You don't rent it.

2. It's a decent APS-C mirrorless camera with a fairly good lens not a compact.

3. The fact you didn't pickup these facts from the article nicely demonstrates exactly why companies like this think there is a growing market out there. I'm becoming increasingly convinced they may be right.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 20:51 UTC
In reply to:

Tonio Loewald: I think Engadget did a much better job of covering these guys at launch:

https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/12/relonch-291-camera-preview-ces-2017/

Yes, it's a good write-up , although clearly some of the problems he encountered were not typical for the intended customers (such as not taking photos because he didn't want to send them over the internet due to NDAs or same day publishing requirements, although it does show some limits of the approach).

It's also worth noting that this DPR story is newer and is talking about an updated service. In comparison this version is very light on details and I'm now left wondering if I have an accurate understanding of the current service.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 20:45 UTC
In reply to:

Kharan: This project is obviously looked at with derision by most enthusiasts and pros, but Allison does have a good point in her article - the younger generations are far more agreeable to just rent things for short periods instead of owning them. Another characteristic of these people is that they want to dabble in the most incredible, pointless endeavors,especially if they’re outdated.
I think that a truly interesting business niche would be to rent them nice, fully-working medium format systems and lab time, to have them experience the joys of old photography without the hassle of needing to own and care for all that stuff. Include an intro class with Ecuadorian coffee and you’re all set :D
I’d be interested in such a service, especially since MF photography has become impossibly expensive (digital) or difficult (there’s a single remaining lab in my country that processes MF film, and they’re effing expensive).

Maybe it will be the last car because it will last. When I had a Lexus, it was 100% reliable for 5 years and the annual servicing fees for those 5 years combined were less that one year of servicing for my previous Range Rover. Lexus was hands down the best car I ever had.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 20:22 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: Can someone please explain the benefit of backside illumination? An unfortunate choice of words :)

There is a lot of tiny circuitry put on a conventional sensor, some of which can block some of the light from hitting the photosensitive diodes that collect the light, meaning less light is gathered.

With BSI, (some of) the circuitry is laid down first, then the wafer is flipped over and its back side used for adding the photosensitive diodes. Without the extra circuitry in the way, more light hits the diodes so it collects more of the available light.

However, the size of the pixel is a relevant factor. Larger pixels don't lose as much light proportionally as smaller pixels do.

Also, becuause of the extra manufacturing steps and lower yields, BSI is more expensive to make, so in general it is only used for sensors will small pixel sizes, where the extra light gathering is sufficient enough to be worth the extra cost.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 17:54 UTC
In reply to:

BobT3218: Looks like Adobe are trying to make their cloud thingy a little more palatable. Not much good for me. I've only got about 5Mbps.

String? Luxury...

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 06:48 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Does this just download or does it sync?

If I shoot 2,000 images a week and store them in the cloud, and after 4 months I have 35,000 images in the cloud, but due to on-the-road situations, 28,000 are also on my computer drive. If I download would it download 35,000 images (including 28,000 duplicates) and the editing XMP's, or is it smart enough to just download 7,000 images and XMPs for all of the edited images (from the set of 35,000)

The product image screen shots show under 400 images being downloaded. Is it just one of those products that works in theory for a small number of images, but then falls apart completely with real world volumes?

I can do many things, but free will and blogs means I don't always have to.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 21:44 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Does this just download or does it sync?

If I shoot 2,000 images a week and store them in the cloud, and after 4 months I have 35,000 images in the cloud, but due to on-the-road situations, 28,000 are also on my computer drive. If I download would it download 35,000 images (including 28,000 duplicates) and the editing XMP's, or is it smart enough to just download 7,000 images and XMPs for all of the edited images (from the set of 35,000)

The product image screen shots show under 400 images being downloaded. Is it just one of those products that works in theory for a small number of images, but then falls apart completely with real world volumes?

I learned about it 1 hour ago by reading this site. Which word in that sentence are you struggling to comprehend? How could I have tried it before discovering it existed?

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 21:13 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Does this just download or does it sync?

If I shoot 2,000 images a week and store them in the cloud, and after 4 months I have 35,000 images in the cloud, but due to on-the-road situations, 28,000 are also on my computer drive. If I download would it download 35,000 images (including 28,000 duplicates) and the editing XMP's, or is it smart enough to just download 7,000 images and XMPs for all of the edited images (from the set of 35,000)

The product image screen shots show under 400 images being downloaded. Is it just one of those products that works in theory for a small number of images, but then falls apart completely with real world volumes?

You think a Photography review site shouldn't be interested in Photoshop and its periphery?

How could I have tried it? I only learned about it an hour ago by reading this site. Maybe I will try it, but that's quite unlikely because for three years I've been trying things involving the words Adobe and Cloud, starting with something called Carousel, and every time it turned out to be a waste of my time.

I don't doubt that one day they may get it right, I've just resigned myself to not being the one to announce that day to the world.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 21:06 UTC
On article Affinity Photo for iPad Review (90 comments in total)
In reply to:

Techconc: This should be a wake up call for Adobe. Then again, with Adobe's subscription model, they likely figure there wouldn't be any additional revenue from developing an iOS version of their full apps.

Adobe is missing the big picture and users will eventually move on to better solutions. I realize that subscriptions work fine with enterprise customers, but they are generally not preferred by consumers and "prosumers". I've already moved on and use Affinity Photo as my primary photo editor. Having it available on the iPad is a major plus, even if that's not my primary platform.

I honestly don't know how Adobe got to be so dominant. Before Photoshop, there was Corel Draw for vector and Paintshop Pro for raster. These were industry leading.

I suspect it was John Knoll's clout that changed things. John worked for Industrial Light and Magic, who were THE name in computer graphics thanks to Star Wars.

John's brother, Thomas, wrote the original code (as a separate venture) that would eventually become Photoshop, but it was John who encouraged him to developed it further.

But before that happened, every Graphic Pro's kit comprised of Corel Draw and Paint Shop Pro. So much so, Corel eventually bought Paint Shop Pro (from JASC) giving them both a raster and vector solution. So so strange Photoshop became dominant.

Corel have many of the better algorithms, but messed up the UI in successive releases, maybe that cost them, but I think it's more likely the tenuous Star Wars tie-in is probably what sealed the fates.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 20:48 UTC
In reply to:

Najinsky: Does this just download or does it sync?

If I shoot 2,000 images a week and store them in the cloud, and after 4 months I have 35,000 images in the cloud, but due to on-the-road situations, 28,000 are also on my computer drive. If I download would it download 35,000 images (including 28,000 duplicates) and the editing XMP's, or is it smart enough to just download 7,000 images and XMPs for all of the edited images (from the set of 35,000)

The product image screen shots show under 400 images being downloaded. Is it just one of those products that works in theory for a small number of images, but then falls apart completely with real world volumes?

Well if I tried everything to see how it works, I would hardly need to be frequenting a review site would I.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 19:24 UTC
Total: 910, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »