mobile photography technology, culture and community
www.dpreview.com
graybalanced

graybalanced

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 11, 2009

Comments

Total: 581, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Beyond the table top: 5 mini tripods reviewed article (121 comments in total)

Enjoyed this review since I've been looking for a better travel mini-tripod, although for now I'm sticking with my $30 Slik tabletop tripod and its pan/tilt head.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2015 at 01:41 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

Steve in GA: This move by Adobe makes me wonder how successful their change to the, "creative cloud" business model has been.

If creative cloud were making big bucks for Adobe, would they have offered a second free trial?

@Steve - How is Adobe doing, you ask? As Barry posted, latest earnings beat estimates. And also their stock is now at an all-time high, double what it was in early 2013.

We may have issues with the Creative Cloud, but it does not seem to have hurt Adobe in the least. It may have helped.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 25, 2015 at 21:21 UTC
In reply to:

graybalanced: So, where in North America were you able to see the Northern Lights? DPReview is in Seattle now, right? Was it in that region?

HowaboutRAW - Not sure why you're bugging me about the North America thing. The only, and sole, reason I mentioned NA at all, is because it was a verbatim quote from the article itself. If it's that important to drag Canada and Mexico into it, it looks like you have an issue with the author of the article.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 23:49 UTC
In reply to:

graybalanced: So, where in North America were you able to see the Northern Lights? DPReview is in Seattle now, right? Was it in that region?

Thank you Samuel! Found it on Google Maps. Wow, that's definitely further south than the aurora is typically seen.

HowaboutRAW - If DPreview is able to get aurora photos I was curious how far south they were. Since they are based in the USA I guessed the pics were not taken in Canada and that turned out to be true. Therefore, even though it is a fact that North America includes Canada, in this context, that fact was not very important.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 02:50 UTC

So, where in North America were you able to see the Northern Lights? DPReview is in Seattle now, right? Was it in that region?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 23, 2015 at 23:51 UTC as 30th comment | 12 replies

Absolutely nothing wrong with the principle of the camera...a digital camera optimized for B&W without the compromises needed for color.

The only questions are whether it is the right execution at the right price, and on that point this camera might not make it, definitely not for me, anyway. But if for example Fuji or Panasonic went after this niche with a $500 camera of remarkably excellent optical and B&W tonal quality, and proper performance and ergonomics, I'd probably take a serious look.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 00:17 UTC as 104th comment
In reply to:

tabloid: Unlimited free storage...lol

I think that we've all heard one before.

I wonder what their limit is for 'unlimited'.

The limit is the quality (16MP limit plus recompression).

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2015 at 23:50 UTC
In reply to:

basale: submitting your pictures to this service means you say goodbye to your copyrights. Maybe this should have been mentioned in the original news item.

basale, nothing in the TOS affects copyright. What you posted isn't about copyright, it's about licensing. And if Google does not include that language, your photo can't be copied to the CDN or backed up ("reproduce") nor can gallery thumbnails or phone-sized versions be made ("create derivative works"), nor can it be shown to anyone outside the USA ("worldwide"). In short, no photo hosting service can function without this language.

The problem is that like a lot of other companies, Google is terrible at telling users that usage will be limited to those types of needs. Some companies do a better job of saying "we won't steal your photos."

All photo hosting companies use similar TOS. But has there been a documented case of one of these companies stealing our photos? (The one about Flickr selling user photos doesn't count, because they only sold the ones that were licensed to allow it.)

Direct link | Posted on May 29, 2015 at 23:49 UTC
In reply to:

cdembrey: If Leica had it's own Raw format, the problem would be solved. Simple as that.

The kidz in former Eastern Block countries write the best viruses, get a team from east Germany to write a Leica Raw file. An exclusive camera deserves an exclusive Raw.

We don't need more raw formats. If more cameras would save directly to DNG, we wouldn't have to wait for raw format updates, and DNG would be better tested so that problems like this wouldn't happen as often.

Direct link | Posted on May 26, 2015 at 00:14 UTC
On Getty Images announces Instagram Grant post (30 comments in total)
In reply to:

They call me Hans: Underrepresented community seems kinda vague...is that on purpose?

The Getty page linked to says "emerging voices, outside the mainstream media" if that helps.

It probably wouldn't help for them to be more specific. If they said "underrepresented female photographers" you'd get 500 DPReview posts saying "That's discriminatory, what about underrepresented male photographers?" Probably best that they said it the way they did.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2015 at 23:25 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: The problem with pouring on exposure without clipping the highlights is just that. It's great when you have your D800 on a tripod, mirror locked up, and are meticulously focusing your Zeiss lens. You are crafting the perfect image.

In practice, when doing anything where time is not unlimited, setting the camera to just touch the right without going over will result in the exposure going over, and clipping. At least that's been my experience. Better to expose less and if unavoidable, pull up noisy shadows than try to recover highlights that don't exist.

Of course, I grew up with film, where 400 ASA was fast so I don't use incredibly high ISOs since they're too noisy.

The concerns about clipping are to some extent (pardon the pun) overblown. I've read that the histogram and clipping on most camera LCDs is calculated based on sRGB unless you have changed it to Adobe RGB, which means the histogram on many cameras is conservative either way. This has been true in my experience. If a highlight looks a tiny bit clipped in camera, chances are it is not clipped at all when looking at the raw data in the raw processor.

I agree that to be on the safe side it's a good idea to back off from obvious clipping, but I don't think it's necessary to back off very much because you then start wasting the valuable high bits, which I hope DPReview will talk about in the second article.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 23:49 UTC
In reply to:

graybalanced: Like a lot of giveaways, you must first add this pack to their shopping cart, and then you can't download what's in the shopping cart unless you have or create a VSCO account with your name and email address.

This might matter if you're concerned about leaving behind your contact info for a one-time download.

@Eric Hensel - that was assumed. :)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 23:48 UTC
In reply to:

graybalanced: Like a lot of giveaways, you must first add this pack to their shopping cart, and then you can't download what's in the shopping cart unless you have or create a VSCO account with your name and email address.

This might matter if you're concerned about leaving behind your contact info for a one-time download.

Hey, I'm not bothered so much by requests for just an email address, that's easy to get around. But when VSCO wants you to create an account, that requires a password. First of all, it's more work. Second, it's one more account database that can be hacked (the other day I received a message that someone tried to take over my account in a vendor support forum that I needed only once, but of course I had to create an account just to ask that question.) Not that big a deal for me, but there are lots of people who use the same password everywhere, and they should be mindful of spreading that password around for a one-time download.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2015 at 01:56 UTC

Like a lot of giveaways, you must first add this pack to their shopping cart, and then you can't download what's in the shopping cart unless you have or create a VSCO account with your name and email address.

This might matter if you're concerned about leaving behind your contact info for a one-time download.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 23:31 UTC as 17th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Michael Uschold: For those of you wondering whether you want to get the CC version or upgrade, here are some numbers. This is most relevant for those who already own a desktop version of LR, like to upgrade regularly and cannot or do not want to pay for a PS desktop version.

LR5 came out June 9, 2013, which is 681 days (22.37 months) before LR6 came out. It was only 461 days or 15.14 from LR4 to LR5.

1. CC: LR + PS $9.99/month

2a. Desktop: LR5 to LR6 average cost was $3.53/month ($79 / 22.37)
2b: Desktop: LR4 to LR5 average cost was $5.21/month ($79 / 15.14)
2c: Deskt op: LR4 to LR6 average cost was $4.21/month ($158/ 37.52)

So if having PS is worth $5.78 or so per month ($9.99 - $4.21) and you like small monthly payments, it may be worth considering PS + LR CC.

I generally don't like subscription software, but these numbers kind of surprised me. I don't happen to need PS, but for those that do, price does not seem to be a significant deterant from getting PS + LR CC.

"But you can't change once you are tied to CC catalog and PSD image formats and your skill set."

I don't agree. If save the catalog data back to the images, they're in IPTC format and (a lot of it, like keywords and captions) can be read by non-Adobe applications.

The files themselves, RAW, JPEG, PSD, TIFF, can be read by many applications. Some even edit Photoshop layers.

Most of the Photoshop alternatives mimic Photoshop, same with the Lightroom alternatives, so it isn't that hard to transfer your skill set.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 18:47 UTC
In reply to:

larryis1: I need to get a boxed version so I get the backup disc as well for the upgrade pricing of $79. Anyone know where to purchase a boxed version of the software?

Regards, Larry

The download is the installer, so it's always fresh and intact. It saves you the step of having to copy the installer off the disc to back it up.

If you must have a disc, major photo stores like Adorama and B&H are advertising LR6 box availability now.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 00:14 UTC
In reply to:

KingOfAtlantis: Had a little play around in LR CC since I own the subscription. I usually use Capture One Pro. I must admit, I am very novice at LR but first impressions compared to C1 is that I have far less control and all my options are crammed into a side bar that I have to scroll or close and open tabs. The Ui feels unnecessary. More like a Smart TV start screen instead of an editing workplace. I want to be able to use LR CC well though so I will give it the benefit of the doubt for now. I just hope I can learn these weird shortcuts easily. I really thought, being Adobe, the shortcuts would reflect off Photoshop. Why doesn't C crop, why doesn't cmd 1 zoom 100% etc.

SFXR - load up multiple pics in ACR, then click the little menu button thingy to the right of where it says "Filmstrip". That is a pop-out menu with the new commands on it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 00:12 UTC
In reply to:

Fred K: Doesn't work with Mac OS 10.7.5. Requires OS 10.8 or above. What a pain.

frenchtraveller is correct, the Adobe GPU FAQ says 10.9 or later is required if you want the GPU acceleration.

https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/lightroom-gpu-faq.html

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 00:10 UTC
In reply to:

Sabatia: I started digital imaging more than twenty years ago via scanning slides and film with a high-end dedicated scanner. I loved Adobe because I got so much joy out of creating collages and printing my images on my large-format printers. Now I feel that they've lost their souls, with money being their only reason for existence. I feel sad for Adobe employees.

I think you'll find most people go to work to make money.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

moga: I instaled it on my machine as a trial ( windows 8.1 x64) but it doesn't start. Any idea why?

This seems to be widely reported. The fix is apparently to to to the Creative Cloud desktop app, sign out, and sign back in.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 00:06 UTC
Total: 581, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
About us
Sitemap
Connect