Richard Costin

Lives in United Kingdom Kent, United Kingdom
Works as a Wildlife Photographer
Has a website at www.richardcostin.com
Joined on Aug 17, 2010

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: That "long exposure photo mode" picture looks like crap. This feature is about as ridiculous as Photoshop Elements 2018's "open closed eyes" feature which is absolutely ridiculous.

lol

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2018 at 16:29 UTC
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: That "long exposure photo mode" picture looks like crap. This feature is about as ridiculous as Photoshop Elements 2018's "open closed eyes" feature which is absolutely ridiculous.

It's a beta preview and let's be honest, it doesn't look crap. Perfectly serviceable for a photo from a phone. Calm down.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2018 at 07:50 UTC
In reply to:

Imager of: A firmware update from Nikon? Wow! Usually a new camera would be needed! 🤣

@matthew, I'll file that under "damned if you do, damned if you don't".

Link | Posted on May 29, 2018 at 10:35 UTC
On article Does sensor size still make a difference? (1053 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: I am completely against software tweaks of any kind. Only the native performance without them will give the best quality the system is capable of. Agreed that if the adjustment is small side effects will be insignificant but the purist approach is what I always will select. And for that reason, I am glad I made the move to full frame when I upgraded from a Nikon D300 to the D610.

I do not consider this an issue only for cameras but also for lenses. So many these days are far too big and heavy. I have been told by an expert that the reason is that they are designed with computers. Just look at the Nikon AIS series, many of which are still available today. Some, but not all of them, are just as good as more modern designs but tiny by comparison. I hate EVFs, love OVFs but even if that were not the case changing to a Sony mirrorless full frame would be pointless for me. I would save about 200g with the body but still mostly have to put up with big and heavy glass.

By the time an image reaches your memory card (even in raw, albeit to a much lesser degree) it has been through a myriad of software manipulation already. The difference is these ones happen under the hood and are set in stone by the engineers.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2018 at 10:26 UTC
In reply to:

Sergeg: Technically superb, but visually rather repetitive and therefore boring.
Why do technical tests often lack inspiration? I've tested many film stocks, cameras and lenses over the years and wrote up reviews.
My primary objective was always to make them visually exciting.

Because (assuming a technical test is all you are concerned with) it would waste time and introduce more variables.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2018 at 09:49 UTC

Whilst I can understand how some people do not like the cloud for anything (I see it as an extension/addition to local storage rather than an absolute binary choice) I don't quite understand people's need to deride a condescend to those who choose to use it. Each to their own and we should all be grateful as to the myriad of choices we have, there is something for everyone and that's a wonderful thing. Put your arguments forward for either of course, discussion keeps things interesting and that's how we all learn but these short sentence dismissal posts get dull very quickly without offering any value.

The level of redundancy the big cloud players offer is far in excess of what you (myself included) are likely to cook up locally and that extends far beyond simply having the data stored in several locations. Whatever you do, offsite backup in one form or another for at least you most precious data is essential. Cover yourself as much as possible.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2018 at 08:16 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

Manzur Fahim: The update is kinda strange for me. I updated to LR 7.3, and now I have the dehaze control just below clarity, but I do not have the camera profiles up top. It is still at the bottom and it does not have Adobe color etc. Just the same old adobe standard and others. No grid options to view either. Uninstalled and installed again but no luck. No preset conversion is happening either. Tone curve panel changed to a bigger one, but no luck with profiles.

Hi Manzur. Curious! I'd definitely get onto support then perhaps. Could you share a screenshot of your basic panel?

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2018 at 10:07 UTC
In reply to:

miksto: For all the whiners around that complained "subscription removes incentive to innovate" we see throughout the last year some of the most significant product developments by Adobe proving the whiners wrong. And it does make sense. Incentive is in keeping your product relevant so that more people stay on subscription. Subscription or not the basic dynamics of being paid for staying relevant to your user base is still there. People come and people go based on relevance
Well done Adobe!

We see arrival of AI to the scene making things better and more is to come, performance improvements and great new features. It is not often that I find all new features useful FOR ME rather than not useful but with Adobe over the last year it is totally the case for me.

I believe it is simply the vocal minority that complain time after time simply out of habit now when any LR news is put out there.

Absolutely fine if you don't like the subscription system, it's not for everybody by the looks of it and if not, I can understand your disappointment perpetual is no longer an option.

If people are so over lightroom now and have moved on that's great, but we don't need to hear about it every single time there is an update released. Just enjoy C1, OnOne or whatever you chose and move on. Taking photos, processing them and sharing your work, that is what it's all about.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2018 at 08:12 UTC
In reply to:

NDT0001: The fans on my Macbook pro retina 2013 now go crazy whenever i run this Lightroom version. This has never happened before... They run at what seems like 80-90% and are VERY loud. Previous versions of LR, they remained silent.

This latest round of updates (including 7.2) drives multiple cores harder for speed improvements which will heat up your systems more too (especially on export of multiple images and preview generations now).

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2018 at 07:43 UTC
In reply to:

Manzur Fahim: The update is kinda strange for me. I updated to LR 7.3, and now I have the dehaze control just below clarity, but I do not have the camera profiles up top. It is still at the bottom and it does not have Adobe color etc. Just the same old adobe standard and others. No grid options to view either. Uninstalled and installed again but no luck. No preset conversion is happening either. Tone curve panel changed to a bigger one, but no luck with profiles.

If you are running the latest update there should be four small squares at the top right of the basic panel, click to see the profiles. You may need to click the little lightning icon in the histogram to update to the latest process version?

If you go help->system info the first line confirms which version you are currently running.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2018 at 07:42 UTC
In reply to:

Ian: This is about 10 years overdue, give or take

@RedFox88
It was only a few aspects of the raw rendering engine they used from Raw Shooter.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 11:15 UTC
In reply to:

RedFox88: So they fix their program after it goes pay per month. Greedy bastards.

If you are on the annual subscription I believe the software only needs to 'check in' online once every 99 days to keep working.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 11:12 UTC
In reply to:

George Zip: How about simple faster rendering of images for culling. It is basically unusable for 1000,s of photos for sports and events shooters. I had to add photo mechanic just for this feature... PM is pretty much instant, I fail to get why the worlds largest imaging software vendor can not even get close to this.

Have you tried the new embedded preview mode introduced with v7.0?

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2018 at 20:06 UTC
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: NIKON... wake the fug up!... FIRE your research and development team for making a $12,000 lens that less than 1% of your camera owners will purchase... and make thousands of reasonably priced lenses that both Nikon camera users (and Sony camera users with adapters) will purchase. Want to alienate your camera buyers and turn your dwindeling fan base to other camera manufacturers?... keep doing what your doing and continue to lose your financial aszes.

Game? Was just a question to see which lenses you were missing.
I guess it all depends on your definition of cost friendly partially.

The 70-200 covers a lot of that use and the newer models are especially sharp (as was the original, it just vignetted somewhat). You of course have the 105 1.4 (although yes that is a pricey one) but it will last for years.

Sure they can, and probably will bring out/update some additional models, just getting a little weary of everyone claiming to know how Nikon should be running their company and that they will go out of business if they don't do something rather specific. Sort of similar the comment equivalent of click bait with all the capitals and full stops. There has never been a better time to be a photographer in terms of the available equipment both expensive and cheap, all the off brand lenses have upped their game too in terms of quality; there is something for everyone.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2018 at 13:26 UTC
In reply to:

Charrick1: So many GREAT ideas that NEVER go anywhere. What ever happened to that "de-blur" technology of years ago?

Yeah, within limits it's pretty handy!
Can only do so much though.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2018 at 15:01 UTC
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: NIKON... wake the fug up!... FIRE your research and development team for making a $12,000 lens that less than 1% of your camera owners will purchase... and make thousands of reasonably priced lenses that both Nikon camera users (and Sony camera users with adapters) will purchase. Want to alienate your camera buyers and turn your dwindeling fan base to other camera manufacturers?... keep doing what your doing and continue to lose your financial aszes.

R&D invariably starts at the top and the fruits work their way down the tree.
What lenses would you specifically like to see that has got you so worked up?

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2018 at 13:17 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: You would be crazy as a professional photographer to store your most valued asset from your firm into the cloud stored at Adobe servers.

Once you go full cloud based as a photographer Adobe has you by the balls. They can up the (already crazy) prise for storage. You do not have access to your files once you don't pay them their monthly 'hostage' fee. It is slow to upload and download gigabytes of storage files and it is hosted in the US of A which have the worst privacy policy in the world.

No thank you Adobe I will pass and so should those who live from their photography.

Don't give your most valued asset away to Adobe!!!
Don't let yourself get lured into this cunning 'plan'.
You will be held hostage by Adobe.

The files will be ordered into folders by the data in the metadata.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2017 at 09:49 UTC
In reply to:

Charrick1: So many GREAT ideas that NEVER go anywhere. What ever happened to that "de-blur" technology of years ago?

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/reduce-camera-shake-induced-blurring.html

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 12:55 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: You would be crazy as a professional photographer to store your most valued asset from your firm into the cloud stored at Adobe servers.

Once you go full cloud based as a photographer Adobe has you by the balls. They can up the (already crazy) prise for storage. You do not have access to your files once you don't pay them their monthly 'hostage' fee. It is slow to upload and download gigabytes of storage files and it is hosted in the US of A which have the worst privacy policy in the world.

No thank you Adobe I will pass and so should those who live from their photography.

Don't give your most valued asset away to Adobe!!!
Don't let yourself get lured into this cunning 'plan'.
You will be held hostage by Adobe.

Yes you do, it states quite clearly in the announcement that you have a full year from when your subscription ends to download your originals to your local storage of choice.

"You do not have access to your files once you don't pay them their monthly 'hostage' fee. "

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 07:41 UTC
On article OWC's Thunderbolt 3 Dock adds 13 ports to your MacBook (150 comments in total)
In reply to:

ewelch: If Apple listened to all the whiners, we'd all be still using Firewire. If Apple didn't force people and vendors to adopt USB on the original iMac, we'd probably all still be stuck with legacy ports from the 90s.

There is pain in progress. And when Apple does it, the payoff is big. So criticize all you want. It will be forgotten in two years. Whiners.

Kind of true, but those changes were made when there were real benefits to be had. USB was already well penetrated in the user space, floppies were genuinely awful and outdated and optical media was on the way out also.

A slightly faster port that 95% of the market doesn't have peripherals for isn't an valuable improvement just to shave a few useless mm of the laptop. Hard drives won't saturate the bandwidth, no one has 8 5k screens to drive. Laptop could have been about the same size with normal ports on the left, future ports on the right (for example) and everyone would have been a winner.

For most people this admittedly beautiful, elegant laptop range will become a desk soup of dongles and cables. Also, the new swanky 13" pro has the more or less same 2ghz i7 CPU as my 2012 MacBook air. A new gen version of it I presume but that'll mostly resolve to slightly better battery life.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 09:13 UTC
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »