meanwhile

meanwhile

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Nov 14, 2009

Comments

Total: 600, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »
In reply to:

spitfire31: As an owner of (a license for) Exposure 7, I was surprised and disappointed to discover that, when I entered my license code for Exposure 7 (I had the automatic upgrade from Exposure 6 to 7, btw), there was no free download at all but a 99 bucks price tag.

I don't see much difference between Exposure 7 and Exposure X, except for the RAW developing, and my preferred RAW editors are CR and LR anyway, so I'll pass on this one.

How many free upgrades were you expecting?

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2015 at 16:45 UTC

Wonderful, this is how all lenses should be built.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2015 at 09:57 UTC as 48th comment
On article Apple launches battery case for iPhone 6 & 6s (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

Michael Ma: I'd love to hear Jony Ive describe the seamless curves of this monstrosity.

I think Jony is drunk and crying in his office over this one being released.

Link | Posted on Dec 9, 2015 at 03:12 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works. No more bragging about how they can work miracles in post-processing.

It doesn't.

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2015 at 04:39 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works. No more bragging about how they can work miracles in post-processing.

"Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works. No more bragging about how they can work miracles in post-processing."

Maybe what you wrote isn't what you meant. What that says to me is (and your other comments backed it up):

"This will mean that RAW processing is now no longer needed, and I'll be able to get results just as good from JPEG. Yah!"

Link | Posted on Dec 5, 2015 at 00:03 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works. No more bragging about how they can work miracles in post-processing.

"Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works"

"I never said it was"

OK. I'll leave you to it.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2015 at 23:55 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works. No more bragging about how they can work miracles in post-processing.

No, you don't actually know what it is, how to use it, or what it is for. You really don't. It's certainly nothing to do with the filesizes of JPEGs.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2015 at 20:43 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works. No more bragging about how they can work miracles in post-processing.

I'm not sure you even know what RAW is.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2015 at 06:58 UTC
In reply to:

Timbukto: Let me guess...patent pending? If the output is standard jpeg...and it works in all standard jpeg browsers and devices...it IS standard jpeg. JpegMini is a *brand* and is a jpeg *encoder* but not a unique *format*. This is no different from various flavors of Mp3 encoders with LAME being the best and open source. There used to be other variant mp3 encoders that costed money and well isn't that weird...they don't exist any more and I can't even remember their name.

In addition it is highly doubtful that there is truly any unique patentable technique applied in this standard format that any other unbranded run of the mill jpeg encoder cannot also apply.

It may be very well that JpegMini is a good encoder but that will require more thorough analysis than this marketing bit.

Also the bits about it using 'perceptual' encoding as unique is hogwash as the jpeg standard is all about perceptual encoding just like MP3 is all about perceptual encoding. Silly to claim this is the only one.

"Most people who care about preserving quality will shoot RAW, and most people who shoot jpeg would not want an additional conversion step!"

I'm on a slowish ADSL2 connection, and like to back up everything online in multiple places. I just threw my fullsize JPEG backups at JPEGmini and it saved nearly 15GB. That's a couple of days uploading.

So not using within my RAW workflow, but as final storage for backups, I can see a use.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 22:39 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Nose to the grindstone RAW, sweating, labouring Hercules's will feel soooo bad if this works. No more bragging about how they can work miracles in post-processing.

What does this have to do with RAW?

(BTW, is it RAW, or Raw? Is it an acronym? Camera menus tend to use RAW for some reason ...)

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 22:29 UTC
In reply to:

JamesD28: After a close, thorough inspection with extra attention to fine details, I have concluded that people will complain about anything.

How dare you! I have flagged your comment as inappropriate. Hrumph. (sorry DPR)

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

meanwhile: I don't understand the people who name products.

Why, in 2015, when there are an entire range of products already called the A7 (made by a competitor in the same markets as you), would you call a new product the A7?

Markets. Electronics, cell phones, etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 03:26 UTC

I don't understand the people who name products.

Why, in 2015, when there are an entire range of products already called the A7 (made by a competitor in the same markets as you), would you call a new product the A7?

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2015 at 01:02 UTC as 5th comment | 3 replies
On article Apple iPhone 6s Plus camera review (160 comments in total)

This certainly looks like step back. Odd.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2015 at 01:08 UTC as 43rd comment

Luma curve is great, and curves as a local adjustment finally. Linking brushes is a time-saver (makes the eraser the same settings as your current brush). Really like the new contrast engine.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2015 at 22:30 UTC as 25th comment
On article Panasonic's Post Focus feature arrives November 25 (218 comments in total)
In reply to:

smithling: Can this be used for focus stacking in-camera?

According to the rumor sites (I know, I know) focus stacking will be available later on, probably in the next models.

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2015 at 23:22 UTC
Total: 600, showing: 141 – 160
« First‹ Previous678910Next ›Last »