mbot

Joined on Feb 2, 2012

Comments

Total: 67, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

Oh and of course it was all in the interest of a better experience for iPhone users😬

Apple is run by a sodomite, what else did you expect😩

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2017 at 08:35 UTC as 17th comment
On article A fully loaded iMac Pro will cost you $13,200 (578 comments in total)

Apple has delusions of grandeur, it always has. But Apple will gladly bleed any millionaire who has more money than brains.

I can put together the same spec in a PC for half the price.😁

When is Appple gonna cease this absurd charade?

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 06:15 UTC as 71st comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

mbot: Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

Nup, they're all FAKE PHOTOS. Digital manipulation does not equal a photo, it's a forgery, an invented & contrived image made-up of artificial elements after-the-fact. If you wanna be creative with artificial digital trickery inside photo editors, knock yourself out, but don't call it photography.

Composition, lighting/time-of-day/subject matter equal photography. Today's snap-it-&-manipulate-it images are for amateurs and paid tricksters who have clientele.

A true photo is caught on-camera, and only a true photographer has the skills to get it right. Any manipulation after the fact - strictly speaking - makes it a FAKE PHOTO. No ifs or buts about it. Truth is... 99% of people with cameras are not photographers, they are snapsters.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 14:33 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

Sorry Vik, but you're wrong - "(because they all catch what your eye saw;)" < this is the correct methodology. Your bland predictable modern variant is wrong. Many things you're not aware of, but it's pointless trying to correct neophytes and miseducated people.

BTW, different film types (silver halide) from the old days only resulted in different tints and saturation and hues and color-casts, but using these characteristics as a justification to create manipulated 'fake' photos is a crying shame, but obviously you love FAKE PHOTOS!

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2017 at 11:28 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

"tone mapping craze that assault the eyes"

Try "which assaults the eyes"

And as to your wider answer, I'm not referring to things like dust on the sensor, or cameras responding differently (because they all catch what your eye saw;) I'm talking about extensive modifications that make the photo different than the original shot. You need to stop making excuses and stop creating fake photos.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 13:48 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

Fake photos are not my cup of tea. Either you got the shot or you didn't.

Obviously if your clients request modifications, then ok. But masking, brushing, layers, spot removal blah blah is not how I do things.

Modify exposure, color saturation, white balance, dynamic range, noise etc, but the other stuff - NO! Otherwise, strictly speaking, it's a fake photo.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2017 at 09:02 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

I prefer my photo editors to be without such tools. A real photographer gets the shot in camera.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2017 at 05:53 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

"all things that work and improves the final result"

Try removing the S from the end of "improves"

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2017 at 04:02 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

$99 and I'd buy to support them, but DXO and Capture One seem to have tall-poppy syndrome and think they can name it & claim it price-wise.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2017 at 03:59 UTC

Oh no, they forgot to add the pull up antenna

If it were $300 I'd buy it, but clearly they are aiming at nostalgic millionaires.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2017 at 03:56 UTC as 43rd comment

Funny thing is, the FREE RawTherapee app has performance on-par with DXO PhotoLab and Capture One 11. I know, I did side-by-side tests. Capture One 11 at $300 is a ripoff.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 16:39 UTC as 10th comment | 26 replies
On article Sony a7R Mark III review (1234 comments in total)

Without 10bit 4:2:2 video, this camera is useless, especially at such a high price.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2017 at 09:46 UTC as 122nd comment | 7 replies

Microsoft has got some nerve charging the same price as Apple for the same spec. They must think we have stupid written on our forehead😩

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 11:10 UTC as 7th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

janist74: Every second day a "cinematic film" pops up, but I`m not sure what is "cinematic"?
No camera shake, planned/well composed scenes, continuous camera movement or what exactly makes a film "cinematic"?

Actually, you might have noticed that "camera shake" is what makes cinema now. That edgy reality vibe Lol

This world just can't get it right, they can't reinvent the wheel, so they wreck the wheel.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 15:39 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: What's with the pretentious 1.85:1 aspect ratio?? Pathetic!

16:9 is squished enough already. Douches and their pathetic 24p and 1.85:1 - totally amateur.

24p is 100 years old! Garbage from the days of low-tech, what's with these freaks that can't let it go? Oh I forgot, they think it is cinema😩

If you have the antiquated mentality that 24p is cinema, then explain to me why James Cameron shoots at 48p/50p/60p!😁

And what's with these homemade movies where they do super-slow panning? Do they think it makes them look pro? Lol just stupid. But hey, if they don't do slow panning we will see unsightly judder, because it's 24p Lol

4K, 60fps, 10bit, 4:2:2, raw DNG - or go home.

LG V30 does better-quality video BTW. But hey, if you want to pay $1100 for a device that has Apple written on it, be my guest😆

You mean the James Cameron who said "a LITTLE BIT of that UNREALITY?"

I say minimum 48p or go home! Simple.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 15:29 UTC
In reply to:

mbot: What's with the pretentious 1.85:1 aspect ratio?? Pathetic!

16:9 is squished enough already. Douches and their pathetic 24p and 1.85:1 - totally amateur.

24p is 100 years old! Garbage from the days of low-tech, what's with these freaks that can't let it go? Oh I forgot, they think it is cinema😩

If you have the antiquated mentality that 24p is cinema, then explain to me why James Cameron shoots at 48p/50p/60p!😁

And what's with these homemade movies where they do super-slow panning? Do they think it makes them look pro? Lol just stupid. But hey, if they don't do slow panning we will see unsightly judder, because it's 24p Lol

4K, 60fps, 10bit, 4:2:2, raw DNG - or go home.

LG V30 does better-quality video BTW. But hey, if you want to pay $1100 for a device that has Apple written on it, be my guest😆

James Cameron shoots at 48p/50p/60p because he's sick-&-tired of the relic called 24p, and all the motionjudder thereof.

The only reason his movies are displayed in 24p is because movie houses are too idiotic and cheap to upgrade their projectors. We are seeing movies in 24p these days only because pauper theatres don't want to bear the cost of upgrading their equipment.

But because you don't know this fact, you then assume there is something special and magical about 24p😩

James Cameron insists that movie houses upgrade their equipment to display at 60p, and Steve Jackson agrees with him.

The sooner 24p is gone, the better. I'm tired of useless amateurs who think shooting at 24p makes them legit, including bonehead Hollywood producers who strangely can't let go if it for some twisted reason. JUDDER, UGLY JUDDER, NOT NEEDED! Capiche!

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2017 at 03:42 UTC
In reply to:

janist74: Every second day a "cinematic film" pops up, but I`m not sure what is "cinematic"?
No camera shake, planned/well composed scenes, continuous camera movement or what exactly makes a film "cinematic"?

Good actors.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 19:14 UTC

What's with the pretentious 1.85:1 aspect ratio?? Pathetic!

16:9 is squished enough already. Douches and their pathetic 24p and 1.85:1 - totally amateur.

24p is 100 years old! Garbage from the days of low-tech, what's with these freaks that can't let it go? Oh I forgot, they think it is cinema😩

If you have the antiquated mentality that 24p is cinema, then explain to me why James Cameron shoots at 48p/50p/60p!😁

And what's with these homemade movies where they do super-slow panning? Do they think it makes them look pro? Lol just stupid. But hey, if they don't do slow panning we will see unsightly judder, because it's 24p Lol

4K, 60fps, 10bit, 4:2:2, raw DNG - or go home.

LG V30 does better-quality video BTW. But hey, if you want to pay $1100 for a device that has Apple written on it, be my guest😆

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 19:12 UTC as 48th comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Justin Evidon: The fact that I am more excited about my Fuji X-E3 than any of the smartphones that have been released this year says a lot about the state of the industry. I dearly miss the form factor of my old iPhone 4S - that thing was perfection.

And you can buy it. Go to their online store. The release is imminent.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 05:03 UTC
In reply to:

Justin Evidon: The fact that I am more excited about my Fuji X-E3 than any of the smartphones that have been released this year says a lot about the state of the industry. I dearly miss the form factor of my old iPhone 4S - that thing was perfection.

It's 2 years overdue because they had to do testing on every network in the world to ensure compatibility. It has "world phone" status and a fractal antenna.

And they didn't stay stagnant, they had to keep upgrading components to stay abreast of other TOTL phones as time passed, that's why it now has a snapdragon 835

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 05:02 UTC
Total: 67, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »