falconeyes

falconeyes

Lives in Germany Germany
Has a website at falklumo.blogspot.com
Joined on Apr 28, 2008

Comments

Total: 1541, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony reveals faster, higher-res OLED viewfinder display (378 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: What's so special about a 0.5 type EVF?
A FF camera matte screen would be "1.7" type and brighter than 1000 nits on a sunny day too (with a fast lens). Seems like a long way to go still. Note that an 1.7" screen has 11 times the total brightness for a given surface luminance.

With an EVF in most conditions, the eye has to adapt to an different illumination level (dark like shadows at daylight, bright after dusk). It is unnoticed by most users, but causes eye stress. One of a few reasons why no pro shoots mirrorless all day long.

The comment by @armadino is typical for amateurs, like loud music equals better music ... The many likes is proof.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2018 at 15:32 UTC
On article Sony reveals faster, higher-res OLED viewfinder display (378 comments in total)

What's so special about a 0.5 type EVF?
A FF camera matte screen would be "1.7" type and brighter than 1000 nits on a sunny day too (with a fast lens). Seems like a long way to go still. Note that an 1.7" screen has 11 times the total brightness for a given surface luminance.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2018 at 23:29 UTC as 48th comment | 11 replies

@DPR
This is #13 on the Amazon UK bestseller list for disposable film cameras.
You at least owe us another 12 news flash articles!

Link | Posted on May 29, 2018 at 23:23 UTC as 8th comment
On article Does sensor size still make a difference? (1050 comments in total)
In reply to:

falconeyes: Well, the most computationally advanced and resource-optimized camera for human use uses a 0.85 crop-factor (*) sensor: the human eye ...
___
(*) 1204 sq.mm retina surface on average.

But large sensor cameras need to become smaller, they could be made very compact actually, as mother nature shows us.

Both, humans and cats, have dual retinas, i.e., featuring both rods (for high "iso") and cones (for high "resolution" and "color"). But only cats have rods in the central spot (foveon) too.

My point above was that a sensor surface closer to 1000 sq.mm isn't an arbitrary number. But an evolutionary-optimized best compromise between image quality and resource consumption such as size and power.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2018 at 12:24 UTC
On article Does sensor size still make a difference? (1050 comments in total)

Well, the most computationally advanced and resource-optimized camera for human use uses a 0.85 crop-factor (*) sensor: the human eye ...
___
(*) 1204 sq.mm retina surface on average.

But large sensor cameras need to become smaller, they could be made very compact actually, as mother nature shows us.

Link | Posted on May 28, 2018 at 22:21 UTC as 184th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Tommi K1: They were given by opposite company 4x $10000 checks to be paid "fully". But they received only about $5000 because both side lawyers etc took majority.

I don't know about AUS laws but... The compensation should go the compensation + your legal fees. So they should have got 4x $10 000 + opposite pays your legal fees. So you are NOT cut off from either side legal fees as losing side pays all legal fees.

If you think, spending $50000 for the legal system with $10000 of actual damages isn't insane ...

Link | Posted on May 27, 2018 at 08:40 UTC
In reply to:

KubeKube: Seems a classic "Lose-Lose" scenario. After being notified, the company did everything right to remedy the situation, but apparently the Northrup people decided to see if they can squeze extra juice from an 'opponent' who has already admitted his defeat. The outcome is detailed in the article and the only winners are the lawyers - as usual.

Like cosinaphile says, the Northrups played as fair as possible. It was the opponent who brought lawyers into the game, Tony only wanted to negotiate any kind of appreciation for his work.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 18:46 UTC
In reply to:

Tommi K1: They were given by opposite company 4x $10000 checks to be paid "fully". But they received only about $5000 because both side lawyers etc took majority.

I don't know about AUS laws but... The compensation should go the compensation + your legal fees. So they should have got 4x $10 000 + opposite pays your legal fees. So you are NOT cut off from either side legal fees as losing side pays all legal fees.

Moderate legal fees typically are included in a settlement, outside the US.

However, most non-US courts would consider US-level lawyer fees amoral (which they actually are) and not compensate for them. After all, nobody forced anybody to hire a laywer that expensive. Legal fees are included in the damages and it is up to a court to accept all damages, or part of it, or none.

In my last legal case I had to handle in Germany, legal fees for either side were about 10% of the actual damages, court fees much less even.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 18:37 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: 8k (60p) just dropped to $25k, this is great news!

Still a long way to go to match 4k (<$1k), but we are getting there. 35MP at 60fps is an exciting frontier for all photographers.

I just wished there would be more options pushing 8k forward.

8k is pro photo resolution, that's my point.
There are a number of experience reports how an 8k RED did revolutionize the worlflow of stills photographers.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 10:44 UTC

8k (60p) just dropped to $25k, this is great news!

Still a long way to go to match 4k (<$1k), but we are getting there. 35MP at 60fps is an exciting frontier for all photographers.

I just wished there would be more options pushing 8k forward.

Link | Posted on May 25, 2018 at 00:08 UTC as 10th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Tony Northrup: I don't recognize the lenses or lens mount... so DJI made a custom lens mount multiple custom lenses, and all the communications protocols that go between them, for a customer? That seems like a bit much.

@Tony, I get your point and you are 90% right.

But there is a 10% chance that this enterprise customer ordered thousands of drones which would make such a development plausible. Also, the #contacts matches their Z7 mount, meaning they used an existing protocol. Do such enterprise customers exist? Maybe, think Chinese army ...

Link | Posted on May 24, 2018 at 23:34 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: This article misses the point.

Nikon and Canon, one day must progress beyond the technological barriers imposed by a mirror-based system. Or die trying. They are already late in their trying.

DSLRs currently have a lot of advantages. But those are not to stay.

@Slatts-from-Oz
„Setting effect Off“ is not what will make the VF display at an ambient illumination level. It will still be at standard brightness, just not in a wysiwyg way.

What I mean is a VF ultra bright at a sunny day not requiring my pupil to widen, and ultra dark at night not ruining my night vision. This setting still needs to be invented and needs much higher dynamic range EVF than exist today.

E.g., when shooting people with their faces illuminated by a camp fire, I can clearly compose the scene in an optical VF while in the final image, I need to boost shadows a lot to recover the faces and silhouettes.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 09:22 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: The display technology was originally developed at HP Labs and is described here: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11972 (access requires a subscription).

It uses a structure of diffractive elements to preprocess the backlight. In one paper, the structure appeared to use elements with 8 micron diameter. That‘s too coarse o create a hologram. But thin enough to modulate the dissipation angle of light emerging from a pixel which is 20+ microns.

For more information, cf. Fig.1 in https://media.nature.com/original/nature-assets/nature/journal/v495/n7441/extref/nature11972-s1.pdf (access is free).

I‘d say that the guided-wave modulation is static and pre-manufactured. Which means that the display may have problems with perceived brightness.

Erratum: there would be one grated diffractive element per sub pixel of the display, both of the same size. The grate patterns abd therefore, the diffraction properties are static.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 09:03 UTC

The display technology was originally developed at HP Labs and is described here: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11972 (access requires a subscription).

It uses a structure of diffractive elements to preprocess the backlight. In one paper, the structure appeared to use elements with 8 micron diameter. That‘s too coarse o create a hologram. But thin enough to modulate the dissipation angle of light emerging from a pixel which is 20+ microns.

For more information, cf. Fig.1 in https://media.nature.com/original/nature-assets/nature/journal/v495/n7441/extref/nature11972-s1.pdf (access is free).

I‘d say that the guided-wave modulation is static and pre-manufactured. Which means that the display may have problems with perceived brightness.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 08:34 UTC as 2nd comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Turbguy1: The potentialof this phone is it's "holographic" screen. It claims a"light field" display (which could be very promising for true stereo viewing at any angle or orientation). A little digging reveals that the "secret ingredient" is a nanotechnology back light (made by Leia, Inc) coupled to a standard LCD panel of any resolution. So it's the backlight that performs the stereo magic, and not any kind of lenticular or barrier display. For this to work well, the phone must sense the pupils of the viewer, and adjust the back light (and LCD panel) to suite the condition where each eye sees a different view. That's QUITE a challenge, particularly if the phone is viewed at rotation (held not just portrait, not just landscape, but any angle in between. A true hologram would still provide true stereo viewing at any orientation and at any viewing distance. Will it be better than the "current crop" of stereo displays (King 7S, Doogee Max, SuperD D1, etc)? I guess we must wait a few months.

Except that there is no such thing like a true light field display short to a display generating a nm-scale holographic diffraction pattern. Such a pattern would need 100+ Gigapixel resolution for a smartphone size. There is no such thing, this RED device isn‘t much different from lenticular devices for reasons of physics.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2018 at 07:52 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: This article misses the point.

Nikon and Canon, one day must progress beyond the technological barriers imposed by a mirror-based system. Or die trying. They are already late in their trying.

DSLRs currently have a lot of advantages. But those are not to stay.

I shoot both DSLR and mirrorless. As of today, my reaction time from seeing a scene to grabbing the camera to frame to shoot is WAY lower with a DSLR than mirrorless. I talk sub-second here. A high-end DSLR reacts instantly even after hours of idle time. Also, the viewfinder doesn‘t require my eye to adapt to a different brightness first. But that will change, mirrorless will be able to match one day ...

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 23:07 UTC
In reply to:

Turbguy1: The potentialof this phone is it's "holographic" screen. It claims a"light field" display (which could be very promising for true stereo viewing at any angle or orientation). A little digging reveals that the "secret ingredient" is a nanotechnology back light (made by Leia, Inc) coupled to a standard LCD panel of any resolution. So it's the backlight that performs the stereo magic, and not any kind of lenticular or barrier display. For this to work well, the phone must sense the pupils of the viewer, and adjust the back light (and LCD panel) to suite the condition where each eye sees a different view. That's QUITE a challenge, particularly if the phone is viewed at rotation (held not just portrait, not just landscape, but any angle in between. A true hologram would still provide true stereo viewing at any orientation and at any viewing distance. Will it be better than the "current crop" of stereo displays (King 7S, Doogee Max, SuperD D1, etc)? I guess we must wait a few months.

mopic3d.com , a $30 clear protectice case which doubles as a lenticular display layer. And it does do eye-tracking ...

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 22:45 UTC
In reply to:

Ribbit74: The 3D effect will be a novelty that won't catch on, just like it was for TV's a few years ago. The built-in lenses are so close together that you won't get much parallax at all except for maybe macro shots. And who is going to be able to watch your videos in 3D? Owners of other RED phones?

3D TVs will return. OLED 4k with 3D displays are an incredible experience now (there are only a few models though).

Industry experts (like James Cameron) assume that glasses-free 3D TVs will hit the consumer market and a few studios do prepare for that. RED seems to prepare as well...

Personally, I think 8k TVs will all feature a diffraction layer to enable glasses-free 3D in UHD or HD, depending on #viewers.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 22:23 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: I use a protective 3D shell from mopic3d.com for 30$ (for my regular smart phone). If the RED doesn‘t feature an epic increase in display resolution, the effect will be identical as mopic has already perfected it pretty much. Nice 3D watching experience possible. But nothing ground-breaking.

Of course, the difference wrt an eye-tracking lenticular display like mopic is that RED can switch the diffraction properties to make it work both landscape and portrait (which they call 4-view for two times stereo). Or to switch it off. However, I doubt it will make a difference for landscape stereo content.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 22:19 UTC

I use a protective 3D shell from mopic3d.com for 30$ (for my regular smart phone). If the RED doesn‘t feature an epic increase in display resolution, the effect will be identical as mopic has already perfected it pretty much. Nice 3D watching experience possible. But nothing ground-breaking.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2018 at 21:57 UTC as 4th comment | 5 replies
Total: 1541, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »