Le Kilt

Lives in France South-West, France
Works as a Searching for Light
Joined on Mar 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 512, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Canon will add C-Log to the EOS 5D Mark IV for $99 (439 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mateus1: I finished with Canon when they brought 5DmkII.

The only camera I will be remember is 5D. 6D was a mistake.

5D mkIV is overpriced joke. I am sure it will also be with 6Dmk2.

No back for me to Canon.

LOL, so what are you doing here...?!
There are some nice Nikon and Sony forums for you...

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2017 at 23:37 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Just to be safe, in formal talks (e.g., the Electronic Imaging conference) I have been saying "OOF PSF" (out-of-focus point spread function). ;-)

Actually, I continue to be amazed by how many people in computational photography don't even know the word. I'm also happy you posted this... especially since it seems that I actually was pronouncing "bokeh" correctly. :-)

Love the notion of true blur.
Smearing is only one of the causes of blur. Being OOF is another.

In the photographic world we use bokeh to refer to the OOF blur in the background (most commonly) or foreground, the caracterstics of which vary depending on the lens design.

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2017 at 11:29 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Just to be safe, in formal talks (e.g., the Electronic Imaging conference) I have been saying "OOF PSF" (out-of-focus point spread function). ;-)

Actually, I continue to be amazed by how many people in computational photography don't even know the word. I'm also happy you posted this... especially since it seems that I actually was pronouncing "bokeh" correctly. :-)

No misreading, and agreed, no stupidity evident here :-)
(My post was also aimed at the first message and its subsequent answer)

As for a definition, I would keep things simple, as bokeh is a noun used so that we know which 'blur' we're talking about, anything else needs adjectives or descriptions to quantify or qualify it. Hence many discussions about the "quality of bokeh".

Any ability to predict it must be of great interest to the lens designers.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 13:30 UTC
In reply to:

xiao fei: Regardless of how obnoxious you think the drone is, the appropriate course of action is to record it and or just go inside and call the police instead of shooting firearms into the air. If your rights are being infringed, there is a legal system for that.

We'll soon have legislation demanding a registration number be visible on a drone...
Might be tricky for the very small ones!

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 12:01 UTC
In reply to:

Coletell Bell: Why would anyone choose to fly a drone other than for snooping around? I don't have any sympathy for those who have lost their drones to "enemy action".

Some false generalities also Nicolas. Although most drones have fixed cameras, some can carry cameras that can take much more detailed shots. Even just a Sony RX-100 at 70mm and 24 MPixels will give scary detail... :-/

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 11:52 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Just to be safe, in formal talks (e.g., the Electronic Imaging conference) I have been saying "OOF PSF" (out-of-focus point spread function). ;-)

Actually, I continue to be amazed by how many people in computational photography don't even know the word. I'm also happy you posted this... especially since it seems that I actually was pronouncing "bokeh" correctly. :-)

Yes, OOF PSF connot be bokeh, as bokeh is not a function but an end result... of OOF PSF ;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 11:32 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Oh the wide open MTF of the 11mm shows there will be lots of "bat wing" lights in the corners.

Well, curiously I've been shooting with a 16mm on FF ever since the first 5D came out, and it's brilliant for all the afore-mentioned, hand-held. No problem going wider, I could often use have used it. Of course, I avoid a face in the close foreground, but other objects often add to a great composition!
I have many many low-light hand-held shots taken at 16mm f/2.8 (some printed at ten feet wide), tripod and small aperture being unnesessary, so bring on the 11mm, yeah! ;-)

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 17:22 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS 77D (449 comments in total)
In reply to:

jennajenna: How many focus points canon 77d f8? like when you use it with a 1.4 x III

It will be in the User Guide when it becomes available.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 13:00 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Canon EOS 77D (449 comments in total)
In reply to:

Francis Sawyer: Let us guess: Still no intervalometer for time lapse.

Oh wait, it says, "Built-in interval timer." So Canon finally added something that should have been standard on every camera at every price for the last decade?

Already present in 7DII, 80D and 5DIV, but yes, it was overdue before that.

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 12:44 UTC
In reply to:

jhinkey: Oh the wide open MTF of the 11mm shows there will be lots of "bat wing" lights in the corners.

Hand-held in dark conditions...landscapes, events, interiors...

Link | Posted on Feb 21, 2017 at 08:24 UTC
In reply to:

marc petzold: Wow, now that's a camera what i call "complicated" to use. It must have been very expensive back into it's heyday.

It does have a lovely setting in the middle of the shutter speeds, "SNAP"!
That setting is the ancestor of point-and-shoots!

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 12:37 UTC
In reply to:

Erik Ohlson: So interesting, but it's obvious that the young lady hasn't a clue about what most of the functions actually do.

Interesting 'extinction meter'.

Camera is so tiny, case so big - a Leica was a better deal, IMHO ;-)

Strange reaction, seeing that she describes all of the different functions accurately.
The only thing she left out was the rotating disc on the DOF scale.
She did well!

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 12:20 UTC
In reply to:

wootpile: Marvelous piece of steam punk-ish gear. I wouldn't mind having one! Too bad she had to touch the film and leave a smudge all over it. Not that it will matter much since the film probably isn't any good any more.. but it devalues the whole package. Get educated, girl!

You mean when she touches the green envelope that the film is in? If she was touching the bare film it would already be expose to light and ruined!
Get educated!

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2017 at 11:56 UTC

What, no wifi or GPS ???

More seriously, fabulous camera, lots of thought and work went into making that, lots of attention te detail and different options. I would love to put one of the films through it and see what results you get.
I did that with a 1936 Super Ikonta, and got good results, here it will depend on how well the film has survived :-)

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2017 at 12:54 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

pkcpga: By the sound of it, the company needed a very high number of original orders to make this start up work since the company charged too little based on realistic costs verse first round presumed manufacturing costs. If you read about lily it sound like they really needed to charge double for this product to really ever hit the market or another 15 million in investments without producing more products. So first orders would be a loss leader. Worst part is they seem to mean well and want to refund original preorder sponsors but not sure how that will work since lily started with 15 million presumably spent for research, ads, prototypes and employees, hence the need for bankruptcy. So even if they haven't touched the 34 million from sponsor orders, lily had to pay whatever company collected this money a fee, most likely around 5%, than a credit card fee 2-3%, than a return credit card fee 1-2%. So not sure where that 3-3.5 million will come from, also by the sound of it they may have other debtors to pay off as well. So I think a full refund would be overly optimistic. The risk of start up or go fund me company investing or product buying. At least this was a new company, I hate seeing go fund me's from existing large companies, just so they don't have to risk their own money for a new product.

Sounds like different conditions to here in France, I've never seen any charge on a cancelled sale here.
I think the Lily was being pre-sold on Amazon, it would be interesting to know who the 34M of sales where made through...

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 01:37 UTC
In reply to:

pkcpga: By the sound of it, the company needed a very high number of original orders to make this start up work since the company charged too little based on realistic costs verse first round presumed manufacturing costs. If you read about lily it sound like they really needed to charge double for this product to really ever hit the market or another 15 million in investments without producing more products. So first orders would be a loss leader. Worst part is they seem to mean well and want to refund original preorder sponsors but not sure how that will work since lily started with 15 million presumably spent for research, ads, prototypes and employees, hence the need for bankruptcy. So even if they haven't touched the 34 million from sponsor orders, lily had to pay whatever company collected this money a fee, most likely around 5%, than a credit card fee 2-3%, than a return credit card fee 1-2%. So not sure where that 3-3.5 million will come from, also by the sound of it they may have other debtors to pay off as well. So I think a full refund would be overly optimistic. The risk of start up or go fund me company investing or product buying. At least this was a new company, I hate seeing go fund me's from existing large companies, just so they don't have to risk their own money for a new product.

The 34M are pre-orders, so not really from sponsors but just enthusiastic buyers. This money would be a straight-forward credit card transaction, for which I beleive there is no charge at all if sale is cancelled and refunded.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 00:55 UTC
In reply to:

brycesteiner: I would bet not all the funds will be sent back to those with preorders. There should be no problem getting this started with that kind of funding.

I crowd-funded a singer, and the product was exactly what was promised.
I crowd-funded a photographer, and the product was exactly what was promised.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 00:41 UTC
In reply to:

W5JCK: Hmmm, another crowdfunding ripoff. I think the vast majority of crowdfunding projects are nothing more than ways for crooks to make a good salary for a few years then fold up leaving the investors high and dry. I have absolutely no sympathy for the investors. A moron who invests in a scam that is clearly a scam gets what they deserve. If inventors don't have the wherewithal to obtain legitimate funding from financial institutions, much less even create a decent business plan, then only morons will invest with them.

P.S. Crowdfunding? What, where, which crowdfunding company...?!

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 00:12 UTC
In reply to:

WT21: I stopped with "crowd funding" big projects a while ago. Never got any return from any of them

What crowd-funding was used here...?

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 00:11 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: And the answer is - don't be sucked into crowd-funding!

Exactly what crowd-funding do you think was used for the Lily ?

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 00:07 UTC
Total: 512, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »