User7440441409

Lives in USA
Works as a Not a photographer
Has a website at https://flic.kr/ps/2ixoT1
Joined on Nov 17, 2014

Comments

Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15
In reply to:

mr.izo: please, elaborate this figures. original article mentions 6% of sale shortage, where then this 40% comes from, which division and period we're talking here, profits as a whole, mothly period, quartet, year etc etc? so much bs this days..

40% drop in profit on 6% drop in revenue projected for the year, 50% drop in profit on 10% drop in revenue likely to be reported for the 1H. At least that's how I read it.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2019 at 21:20 UTC

Acts very much like a very high framerate frame differential algo (think global shutter with redundancy removal done upstream). I wonder if the receptor sites are polled or are truly async as the latter might make scaling to higher resolutions very difficult.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2019 at 21:42 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

chida: Steve Jobs would have definitely made a more simple and better design than this one! This is looking too complex! For such a giant power packed machine, at least 1 TB SSD was absolute necessity!

If you can store your media on a 1TB SSD, this isn't the machine for you. Base drive is for the OS only, serious users will stack multiple TB of thunderbolt storage plus SAN.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2019 at 12:57 UTC

Not impressed by the shot the photog ended up getting. Had he been using an A9 he could have gotten a shot of the ball in flight right before it pegged the camera ;)

Link | Posted on May 29, 2019 at 21:49 UTC as 66th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

thx1138: Says a lot about America's pathetic legal system this even had to go to appeal. The District of Vriginia ruling was a disgrace.

One could also argue that it says a lot about America's strong legal system that a misruling can be overturned as a matter of course. No system is perfect so a system that understands that and has provisions for dealing with it seems to be far from "pathetic".

Link | Posted on May 1, 2019 at 17:51 UTC
In reply to:

telawrence: Hardly a surprise. The new mirrorless from Canon and Nikon aren't much better then their DSLR equivalents and lenses are still large. In some cases, the lenses are a lot larger. Photography is obviously heading towards being a niche hobby. The time when most parents got a camera once they had kids is long gone, and the profits have gone too, along with point and shoot cameras. What will be left is going to be small. Most of my friends just use their phones, and the odd one will see a photographer if they want a professional shot. What we really need is a smart phone in a DSLR. If you can take a great shot, and send it to social media, then the camera companies might get millennials to use cameras again.

There are android based cameras (and I think cellular/wifi/social media integration going forward is a given), but despite that, I don't think that will revive ILC sales. Even given your parents example, today's new parents have no need to purchase anything new now as they have a good enough camera and good enough camcorder sitting in their pockets. The driving force is really the ubiquity of the device, no "honey, go grab the camera" required.

So I agree, photography with an ILC/dedicated camera will continue to be the realm of pro's and a shrinking number of hobbyist and honestly I don't see anything happening that will slow (let alone reverse) that trend.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2019 at 22:03 UTC
In reply to:

DotCom Editor: The billions spent annually on data security are a waste of money. It has been shown numerous times that any system can be hacked into — government, retail, manufacturing, transportation, etc. Even security company RSA itself suffered a major breach several years ago.

I've long proposed that organizations cut spending on security to near zero and instead encrypt everything. Let the bad guys have all the data they want; just render it unuseable. But, you've got to encrypt absolutely everything.

This strategy was impractical years ago due to the processing overhead of encryption, decryption, and re-encryption as data is created, modified, and stored, That argument has largely dissipated with today's powerful processors and multi-gigabit transmission speeds. Industry analysts, CIOs, and security executives now agree that this approach has considerable merit, though none will say so publicly. No security exec will ever admit on the record that security is essentially useless.

I may be being pedantic but isn't encryption just one aspect of security? If a company decides to pay the expense of doing the software changes necessary to encrypt/decrypt at every process/host entry/exit point, aren't you spending money on "security"?

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2019 at 17:03 UTC
In reply to:

MirrorLessHater: hollywood studios are screwed.

I would think that folks like actors are the one's that are in trouble. The studios themselves will simply pivot to take advantage of the tech.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2019 at 20:21 UTC
In reply to:

SirPeepsalot: Are these claimed to be real-time achievable at reasonable fps on a commodity (even if high-end) hardware ? Because touting game engines with pre-rendered scenes that would otherwise run at 640x480@0.5fps is very 1998.

@peeps, long ago someone very wise said to dismiss a technology or competitor simply due to hardware limitations is a fatal decision. So what that it can't be done real time now, just like 4K video could not be decoded realtime by anything remotely resembling commodity in 1998 but is easily done by $200 tv's and $50 streaming devices today. It's a glimpse of what's to come.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2019 at 20:19 UTC
In reply to:

Zoc: Unbelievably stupid comments here. This video was shot on iPhones; probably mostly watched on iPhones or competing smartphones. If any of you geezers were a few decades younger and had ever held an iPhone, you’d notice that they’re easier to hold with the long dimension oriented vertically. That’s why this video was shot vertically.

Seems pretty clear to me that the phones are vertical for good reason. First is spacing, vertical phones can be closer together. Second, many/most of the effects they were capturing involved vertical movement so better to use the longest edge of the camera vertically.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2019 at 18:25 UTC
In reply to:

aeren: First;
"...These kinds of things are a strength compared to our competitors."

Then;
"...I don’t care about competitors, I care about the customers. If customers need more functionality, or more quality, we’ll try to do it."

Sorry man, I don't buy this populism. Everyone does and has to care competitors.

Obviously he cares about competitors, the point is one can take two approaches to product design

A) what features do our competitors have that we don't
B) what features make this a better product for the intended market

Using the smartphone space as an example, for years manufacturers like Samsung marched almost exclusively in A (and to an extent they still do). Look at their ads today, they are focused on show what they can do that Apple can't. Apple on the other hand focuses on B. Look at their commercials, they almost exclusively focus on what the phone can do for you. Obviously in both cases there is some matter of the other approach as well, but it's a matter of "what is our business philosophy".

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2018 at 16:16 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (766 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kostaseg: Sony uses A9 as a Trojan Horse. Nikon & Canon will not die from this camera. They are in danger of financially collapsing because they will lose the piece of the cheap and medium range DSLR, which that is brings the money. Without this piece they can't survive financially.
Sony A9 and A7 are awesome cameras. But if I need to use lenses at size and weight similar with FX Nikon & Canon, doesn't help me the small size of a mirrorless foul frame body. So if I want something small and light, I prefer an Olympus MFT.

Nikon and Canon have to remove the mirror on them aps-c cameras and can use the existing lenses on them without adaptor. That's enough to keep them alive 20 years more.

@daniel, actually from my own personal experience, I see more and more people with DSLR (including mirrorless ILC) cameras about. The market is bifurcating, smartphones taking the low/mid ground and DSLR taking the mid/high ground. It's the point and shoot that getting slaughtered out there with smartphones killing them from below and lowend DSLR's (and cameras like the A6000) killing them from above. I've run across a ton of folks totting Nikons/Canon's around that have no idea how to use them but bought them because they knew they needed/wanted something "more" and the camera shop person told them to get a DSLR.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 01:15 UTC
On article Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review (2163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Thermidor: It's an oxymoron to claim USB charging is convenient and inconvenient at the same time. If you're running multiple batteries, you'll get an external charger anyway. And to be very fair, USB charging the FW-50 battery is a LOT faster than using an external charger. By USB, I can get full charge in slightly over an hour versus about 3 with a dedicated charger.

I know ideally the camera should support USB charging AND come with a dedicated external charger, but I don't see any manufacturers doing this. So if I had to compromise, I'd rather my camera come with USB charging than not.

I'd take internal charging ANY day for two reasons. First, is that if you have internal charging, you can always buy an external charger (or two). If your camera doesn't support internal charging, then external is your only option. Second, it's actually feasible to carry one of those external battery packs and charge a battery on the go. Of course I'd greatly prefer to not to have to carry 2-4 batteries with me if I'm going to be shooting all day, but that's a different discussion ...

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 21:17 UTC
On article Nikon releases D500 4K UHD sample video (203 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: How many of you guys actually have 4k monitors ?

Personally I assumed that @nicolaiecostel was asking for a reason similar to what I was thinking (shoot, I can't really make a good judgement about 4K quality because I don't have a 4K monitor to view it on). If that's the case, then really it's about being able to tell if folks are truly critiquing it's 4K abilities or are they actually critiquing what it's 4K sampled down to 1080p looks like.

At least I hope that's where they were going with the question since the alternative (arguing the value of shooting 4K today) is a silly argument to be having.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 21:40 UTC

too bad the guitarist wasn't in focus, great expression.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 23:25 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15