WalPhoto

Joined on May 9, 2013

Comments

Total: 147, showing: 141 – 147
« First‹ Previous5678Next ›Last »
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (245 comments in total)
In reply to:

WalPhoto: The information is partially incorrect - you can NOT create "a general" profile for all lightening situations combining the ICC profiles! This is not "my opinion", this is the fact color correction works. The ICC includes a mathematical matrix transformation from one color space (the concrete colors, how they came) to another color space (how they should have come). So, let's say you light a scene with a strong blueish light, e.g. flash, say with a blueish filter, to have the example even better understandable. Now you create the ICC: it will transform all the blue-cast colors to be more yellowish. This will DESTROY any image when applied to a total different lightening, say yellowish (candle light)! And interpolating those 2 extremes cancels their original reason for creation. I was running an ICC profiling service a few years ago, so I understand it a bit. Peace, Andrej

No.. as the profile you create is meant do undo the CURRENT light. A lot of comments here are wrong, but I can't save the world :o).. The folks are happy as-is and won't get it, it's ok, I had also a few years owning spectrometer and playing with calibrating printers/cameras. Once more: the ICC profile is ALWAYS for ONE concrete situation - e.g. "this flash in this room with these walls reflecting the light". If anything changes, the ICC will influence the otherwise-behaving color-mismatch in a wrong way. Just imagine one medicine for one illness - you can't average all the medicines together to get THE ONE, as it would neutralize itself - however, under the SAME conditions, the metering-calculation done many times improves the final ICC profile, but just for this one very concrete situation. Just my two cents ;-).. Cheers from Switzerland.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 18:36 UTC
On article Get more accurate color with camera calibration (245 comments in total)

The information is partially incorrect - you can NOT create "a general" profile for all lightening situations combining the ICC profiles! This is not "my opinion", this is the fact color correction works. The ICC includes a mathematical matrix transformation from one color space (the concrete colors, how they came) to another color space (how they should have come). So, let's say you light a scene with a strong blueish light, e.g. flash, say with a blueish filter, to have the example even better understandable. Now you create the ICC: it will transform all the blue-cast colors to be more yellowish. This will DESTROY any image when applied to a total different lightening, say yellowish (candle light)! And interpolating those 2 extremes cancels their original reason for creation. I was running an ICC profiling service a few years ago, so I understand it a bit. Peace, Andrej

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2014 at 13:11 UTC as 29th comment | 4 replies

Although this is just a weak Nikon-marketing, this guy wrote some of the best lightning-techniques books I've ever read :o). Thx for sharing and cheers from Switzerland to Joe!

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2014 at 08:58 UTC as 12th comment
On article Integrating the Apple MacBook Air into a pro workflow (346 comments in total)

A year ago, I thought to get an Air or MBP - I've got the Air finally, 13" with 500GB SSD / 8GB RAM. I'm using this machine to develop enterprise SW for quite big clients (am working at TeleCom as senior architect). Let me tell you this: my Air is FASTER than our $'$$$.00USD/monthly server!! I have no idea what they've done to the HW, but our QC Dell Book is 5x slower than server: which is a bit slower than my Air.. I'm developing a specialized data-pump, importing and processing a few million records in one pass - read: running SQL Server 2012 ENT, Visual Studio ENT 2013, WinDbg, Query Profiler, Fiddler, LINQ Pad etc.. - all in parallel, with no bottlenecks. I love this machine; it rolls much faster than my outdated MBP i/DC or my iMac i7/QC/16 with a mechanical drive. You just can't compare this to anything but the most expensive HP Blade server with SAN, which is pretty crazy. I wouldn't have believed this as well, but trust me, it's my daily job ;-). And photos? Heh ;-D!..

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2014 at 16:42 UTC as 20th comment
On article Adobe leaks 'Lightroom Mobile' app (209 comments in total)

Editing photos on your mobile is a totally BS. BUT: Having access to - and being able to view - your (edited please!) images, would rock! I was thinking about developing an app to access at leas the preview-cache and present it from the mobile; thanks God I didn't invest time here :-D.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2014 at 16:31 UTC as 58th comment | 2 replies
On article Nikon Df Review (1623 comments in total)

May be I'm wrong, but the DPR was more photo-centric, now it's gadget-centric somehow. Don't want to insult anybody, but a great part of the content is smart-phones like and less about the photography-like aspects. There are a lot of quite respectable web sites qualifying Df 'gold' like - DPR is a good complement to them for me, deeply technical; but how it comes it didn't get any award here? It's not about the 'award' anyway, but the DPR-message. I interpret it as a changing paradigm of DPR; to explain: check youtube and have a look at Df in action against D4 - totally different animals, very nice yet different. Now it depends on your preferences/paradigm/needs, which one you give what 'award' - and that's what I mean, DPR is the 'D4-like' direction. It's ok and correct, yet not compatible with all of us ;-). I'm shooting/developing pictures more than 35 years now, had a lot of devices and thinking about Canon->Nikon switch some day - and checking the Nikon terrain a bit sometimes.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2014 at 08:41 UTC as 99th comment

After reading hours and trying to put it all together - the real conclusion is:
- CS: Adobe MUST improve the product and you MAY spend a few hundreds $ every two years for it
- CC: Adobe MAY improve the product and you MUST spend a few hundreds $ every year

=> CC costs at least twice as much and may not improve; all the other theories/explanations are just trying to hide this reality.

Adobe's approach to divide the customers into "enterprise graphic studios, needing PS and willing pay more without getting more" and "simple minded photographers, where LR is enough and PS is a useless luxury" is just rude and false. A lot of gadgets these days come with PS plug-ins - Vacom/scanners/printers/RIPs.. Myself: CS6 is a specialized tool, allowing me do those tasks not possible in LR or to print to the Epson's 3880 bundled RIP (implemented as a CS6 plug-in) or to retouch with Vacom tablet.

RIP in CS goes RIP for CS. A company which renders CS a no-go could render also LR a no-go pretty soon.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 07:21 UTC as 594th comment
Total: 147, showing: 141 – 147
« First‹ Previous5678Next ›Last »