ProfHankD

ProfHankD

Lives in United States Lexington, United States
Works as a Professor
Has a website at http://aggregate.org/hankd/
Joined on Mar 27, 2008
About me:

Plan: to change the way people think about and use cameras by taking advantage of cameras as computing systems; engineering camera systems to provide new abilities and improved quality.

Comments

Total: 1213, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

TomHudsonVisual: Looks like they had fun doing it but it is conceptually weak as art. It does not convey their one-liner message (the message is actually backward), as there are too many more likely interpretations, which do not reflect well in photographers, I might add. I am most inclined to view this as an adult leggos play session.

Sadly, I have to agree. Linking photographic equipment and the act of shooting to use of actual firearms is a cliche', not very innovative and not a concept I'd like to reinforce. The plain white backgrounds don't help get any message across either. Overall, I'm left feeling a little sad that some nice old equipment that could make art was sacrificed to make this....

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 02:12 UTC
In reply to:

panther fan: Many have stated it already. DXOMark themself said these results are not comparable, because RED likely uses temporal noise reduction on their RAW Files.
This means they unfortunately didn't trick physics.

Although I've never seen anything from RED as a technical publication saying what they do, over 100% QE definitely sounds like a smoking gun for use of temporal enhancements. Catch is, that's absolutely fair -- it's a real improvement in quality of the scene appearance model captured. Hopefully we'll see more things along these lines for still imaging.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 11:35 UTC
In reply to:

panther fan: Many have stated it already. DXOMark themself said these results are not comparable, because RED likely uses temporal noise reduction on their RAW Files.
This means they unfortunately didn't trick physics.

Actually, I have a paper to appear at Electronic Imaging 2017 on a program called TIK, which can convert ordinary video into a time domain continuous format and from that render virtual exposures. A virtual exposure rendered for the exact same time interval as an actual frame generally has notably better DR and SNR. It wouldn't surprise me at all if RED is doing some level of temporal interpolation to enhance their raw frames....

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 04:14 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: At 4:19: Nee-kahn? Is that really how it's supposed to be pronounced?

Wilky: Well, that pretty much matches what I heard in the video: Nee-kahn.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 11:39 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: At 4:19: Nee-kahn? Is that really how it's supposed to be pronounced?

Hmm. Folks seem angry about this... I'm honestly confused. It's a pretty major branding issue to get your name pronounced the way you want. I suppose I also learned to pronounce Nikon from the Paul Simon song "Kodachrome"... but I've talked with various Nikon employees at conferences and heard it pronounced more than one way (although never before with a "kahn" rather than "con" ending... unless I didn't hear what I thought I heard in the video?).

Anyway, this bothers me in the same way it bothers me to know all of us computer engineers call G a "gig" while the Back To The Future movies and some dictionaries cal it a "jig." I don't dare ask how to pronounce Konica. ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 02:37 UTC

At 4:19: Nee-kahn? Is that really how it's supposed to be pronounced?

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 23:28 UTC as 103rd comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

sknai16: The amount of course is never going to be alotted, even if the woman wins the suit. If the company can not show a signed release, they will pay and so they should. The amount will be negotiated, of course. How about 2,5 million?

That number is almost certainly NOT going to be the final award. However, it is pretty common that big numbers are asked when there is evidence of deliberate acts to cause damage. If she explicitly refused to sign and then the photographer used the photos anyway, even inserting "alcoholic items" presumably at the request of Chipotle (which might have been grossly inappropriate in the woman's point of view), that sounds like good evidence of deliberate acts to me....

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 15:02 UTC
In reply to:

rrccad: not bad considering there's been no CA correction which will tend to make these images look more "soft" especially to the extremities.

dpreview.. it would be nice when you are doing some of the samples to show the images with full corrections. same with your studio images. it's a little harder to determine . is this what you can expect (or in some cases .. going by the comments .. some even odder comments).

Considering the size of this lens.. pretty good results for a $500 lens.

They're certainly not good results in terms of CA... and are we sure they haven't been corrected in any way? (Correction is often automatically applied to raws if they have the right EXIF data... I'm too lazy to download the raws and check for myself.) I will say that this lens fits well with Canon's marketing view that mirrorless are a niche below DSLRs....

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 17:17 UTC
On article CES 2017: Hands-on with the Kodak Super 8 (426 comments in total)

Ok. There's obviously a digital sensor in there to make the live view. Do they quietly also record the video from that on the SD card? Seems like they should... if only for checking that you got what you wanted and lining-up shots. They also should return the processed film with the audio on the magnetic stripe (like an old Super8 my dad had).

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2017 at 00:05 UTC as 103rd comment | 2 replies
On article CES 2017: hands-on with the Canon PowerShot G9 X II (193 comments in total)

The pseudo-RX100 Canons continue... and this is more distinctive, but a fixed touch screen doesn't compete well with a flip-up LCD and pop-up EVF. That leaves it to Canon branding/styling and pricing. The pricing at least initially isn't that great. If only it could run CHDK....

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2017 at 11:00 UTC as 47th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm unveils 'Graphite' X-Pro2 and X-T2 (187 comments in total)

Not sure if you prefer black or shiny metal? How about shiny black metal look? Only $200 more. No, thanks.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 10:01 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

ProfHankD: "... that has appeared on the company's forums" -- since when is Magic Lantern a company? It is an independent project developing software to enhance the operation of various Canon EOS cameras, rather like CHDK. Producing DNGs in camera is insignificant (and doesn't make much sense) compared to all the major enhancements in ML.

digidog: You're wrong about Adobe-generated DNGs. They incorporate data that has an unclear & undocumented relationship to the source image and, yes, they really do change the image pixel count, sometimes up, sometimes down (they could argue those pixels don't matter because they are not in the portion of the image that Adobe software renders, but that's a specious argument). I discovered this the hard way when I was building KARWY, and have published and presented on it. Of course, the DNG spec doesn't say you should do any of that... which is why straightforward DNGs pass validation.

As for monopolistic practices, the best known one involves killing Freehand and essentially making files undecodable unless you purchase a more expensive Adobe product.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 22:06 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: "... that has appeared on the company's forums" -- since when is Magic Lantern a company? It is an independent project developing software to enhance the operation of various Canon EOS cameras, rather like CHDK. Producing DNGs in camera is insignificant (and doesn't make much sense) compared to all the major enhancements in ML.

digidog: Adobe has owned TIFF since they purchased Aldus, and Adobe has a long history of monopolistic practices involving control of file formats. However, TIFF/EP is ISO 12234-2, and most proprietary raw formats -- including DNG -- are actually subsets of that. TIFF mostly specifies a file structure; it allows great flexibility to make your own fields. The thing that makes DNG proprietary is the strange and undocumented ways in which Adobe fills-in their DNG fields; for example, Adobe DNG converter will often increase/decrease the recorded number of pixels in a raw! Having a non-Adobe-created DNG pass Adobe's validation does NOT mean it will be rendered the same as a DNG converted by Adobe's DNG converter, but merely that the basic DNG fields are valid.

I feel a lot safer archiving the OEM's proprietary raw than archiving Adobe's current best effort transcoding that into their proprietary DNG.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 17:37 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: "... that has appeared on the company's forums" -- since when is Magic Lantern a company? It is an independent project developing software to enhance the operation of various Canon EOS cameras, rather like CHDK. Producing DNGs in camera is insignificant (and doesn't make much sense) compared to all the major enhancements in ML.

ML, which is truly an open project, gets called a company... while Adobe-controlled DNG is imagined to be an open standard. Sigh.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 03:16 UTC

"... that has appeared on the company's forums" -- since when is Magic Lantern a company? It is an independent project developing software to enhance the operation of various Canon EOS cameras, rather like CHDK. Producing DNGs in camera is insignificant (and doesn't make much sense) compared to all the major enhancements in ML.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 00:32 UTC as 15th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

dtibi: CHDK offered the same several years ago on powershot cameras...
Of course it was unconfortable to use, was way too slow, took about 3 seconds to save a DNG/RAW before dispalying the image on screen.

CHDK DNGs are a huge step up from the "normal" CHDK raw format because normal CHDK raws are JUST the sensor data -- there was no Canon native raw on those cameras and the normal CHDK raws don't have enough info to decode the image without separately entering some additional data that would normally have been in EXIF. BTW, even on the sub-$100 PowerShots, CHDK DNGs give about 1 stop more DR than you can get with JPEG -- and fewer artifacts.

On the other hand, ML is running on cameras that already support Canon native raws, so what's the advantage to DNG? Beyond that, generating a DNG that gets past Adobe's validation is a piece of cake using code freely available... like the code in CHDK or Dave Coffin's Elphel DNG.

The ML folks do a lot of things much more newsworthy than this....

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2017 at 00:24 UTC
On article GearEye is an RFID-based gear management system (45 comments in total)

Fool me once....

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8012110697/f-stop-abandons-kitsentry-kickstarter-doesn-t-offer-backers-refunds

Really not a bad idea, but one that doesn't have a good history so far.

Link | Posted on Dec 30, 2016 at 13:02 UTC as 17th comment

Yeah, never hire the guy who uses a Hastlebad -- they're a real pain to deal with. ;-)

For what it's worth, I do think asking something like "What equipment would you use for our wedding?" is a decent question, but the high-scoring answers would be just about anything for which the follow-up question "Why?" gets a coherent answer.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 13:43 UTC as 148th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

MikeManr: Apple makes camera! Im shocked!

You said this before... two comments down. ;-)

Anyway, don't be too shocked: Apple didn't really "make" those products... and it isn't clear they even played a big role in design of those. Apple's innovation is primarily in marketing, and they are awesomely good at that. The best Apple product you can buy has always been their stock. ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 13:25 UTC

The problem with the QuickTake was that it in no way outperformed the Snappy video digitizer paired with a cheap camcorder. The Casio QV-100 was my first non-tethered digital (from 1996, I think), and it did a variety of things neither a QuickTake nor a camcorder+Snappy could. For example, I even uploaded slides for a conference talk to it and used it to give a formal presentation... although I have to say the Casio .CAM files were a huge pain to deal with!

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 14:49 UTC as 20th comment
Total: 1213, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »