BigShooter: People still use Instagram?
Troll all you want BigShooter, but I follow a few pro photographers on Instagram and they get a lot of constructive interaction and promotion out of their postings and comment conversations with their tens of thousands of Instagram followers.
I was an Instagram skeptic until I actually looked at it. I still don't post much, but I'm impressed by how some photographers use it to promote their work. Many upload without applying the cheesy filters; they're there to build a community and a market, not to be a hipster.
fmian: Have they made the resolution 1080 yet as well?
You're about six weeks behind the news:http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/6/8899807/instagram-1080p-pictures-photo-upload
Donald Klopper: Easily... enough space... lifetime... casual photographer...
The calcs to see whether it's true are interesting though. 16TB is a LOT.
BUT with this kind of space I'll always shoot RAW + Jpeg + bracketing in burst. And lots of video. In 4k. You'll fill up anything that way. Then you need to back it up...
Sure, sure, read/writes per cell is important. That is why they use leveling algorithms to minimize cell wear by spreading it out across the entire drive as much as possible. That is how the long lifetimes are achieved.
Hard drives are still useful on the desktop. I've got a lot of them. But today, mobile devices far outsell desktops, and in my laptop, phone, and tablet that are subject to shock and stresses during transport, my data is much safer on solid state storage than it ever could be on spinning mechanical disks.
More facts: The type of memory used in SSDs is usually much more robust and higher quality than used in consumer flash, especially USB stick flash drives which are the bottom of the barrel.
Always secure your camera. Don't take safety for granite...
BattleBrat: How is this any different than the 3d wallpapers available on android? They are multi layer images that simulate 3d using parallax! Is this another case of Apple patenting something that is not theirs?https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=opotech.starfieldLWP&hl=en
There are a lot of ways to do this. 2D layers, segmented images (as the Apple patent describes), depth maps (which is what the second illustration looks like), actual 3D objects...
What combination of the above does the Android technique use? As long as the Apple technique uses a different combination, it may be that nobody is copying anybody. You called them "multi layer images" but Apple talks about "regions or layers" and "segments of the input images."
Also, iOS also has 3D wallpapers, and this is clearly not that.
HowaboutRAW, it seems like you aren't bothering to read what I write. You want to know when errors start happening, I already quoted when errors started happening ("it took over 700TB to induce the first failures"). You say SSD writes are limited to "10s of thousands of uses," when the research says the real limit may not be reached until "...about 240x as much writing as a typical consumer SSD would need to endure over its lifetime." I am writing that again because you didn't seem to read it the first time.
Also, you are showing more errors in your understanding of HDD vs SSD. You said "I'm sure SSDs are just fine as dead storage." But what researchers are finding the opposite: While SSDs are demonstrably more reliable in daily usage, it is in dead storage where SSD data retention has been questioned. You have it backwards.
You might want to start paying attention to the research...
HowaboutRAW, did you read the link I posted? The "limited writes" has been shown to be a complete non-issue in that test. The sheer volume of data you would have to write to an SSD to reach the limit where one of today's common SSDs would die, is many times in excess of what you would be capable of achieving no matter how hard you tried in an ordinary, or even reasonably extraordinary, usage pattern.
That was the entire point of the article.
"Errors didn't strike the Samsung 840 Series until after 300TB of writes, and it took over 700TB to induce the first failures. The fact that the 840 Pro exceeded 2.4PB is nothing short of amazing..." The common, affordable Samsung 840 Pro refused to die until after "...about 240x as much writing as a typical consumer SSD would need to endure over its lifetime."
SSDs and HDDs can both die, but when you look at the realistic and not imagined causes of drive death, HDDs are much more at risk.
Angrymagpie: I personally use Aperture to keep all my RAW images, and LR to process them. I often wonder if the Aperture does some sort of automatic lens distortion correction with these updates. For instance,the RAW files seen on the Aperture do not look as distorted as seen on LR (unprocessed). It becomes really clear with high distortion lenses like the FE28/2. Any thought? Thanks
This is just a theory since I don't use Aperture, but for some cameras Lightroom uses hidden profiles that are not exposed like its normal lens profiles are. Those hidden profiles are usually for cameras that do lens corrections in camera because the lens has intentional severe distortions to achieve a compact size.
I'm wondering if Aperture uses some form of the same kind of hidden lens correction, that it applies even if Aperture itself has no UI for it.
nathantw: Wow. Look at those prices. Yikes!
I used my last tripod for 20 years and everyone on this forum, including me, would probably call that tripod a consumer piece of crap (because it was). I recently got a decent carbon fiber tripod and it's built so much better I wonder why I didn't buy it years ago...a $700 tripod used for 20 years is less than $3 a month.
misha marinsky4: Popular Photography used to do this. For example, March 1981, pages 108, 120, and 121.
Also, keep in mind that a digital camera in reality is a computer with a lens. If it breaks after two years, it's not worth fixing. 99% of the chips will be obsolete.
It's possible to build you a camera that has the equivalent performance of the A7R II with a wide range of user-replaceable parts that can be upgraded in the future to prevent obsolescence. And the only tool you will need are standard home screwdrivers and wrenches, no more adhesives and fiddly little micro-screws.
It would only cost many times more than the $3200 of the A7R II, and it would come with a wheeled carrying case that you can easily tow with your car.
I guess that camera learned some Bruce Lee moves in China...able to break a granite slab in one blow with only its bare lens hood
HowaboutRAW, where is the data for your claim? Recent tests have shown that consumer SSDs are now reliable enough that you will want to upgrade to a newer/bigger drive long before the SSD dies.
@nerd2, when I go back into the archive to republish or re-exhibit older photos, I often redevelop the raw and am very pleased at how newer raw software improves the result. Better color, better highlights and shadows, sharper, lower noise... There is time to do it when it's worth it, and there are definite rewards in doing so.
The file size issue is one everyone will have to face whether you shoot raw or not. Megapixel counts continue to grow, so if you aren't having to store 30MB raw files right now because you shoot JPEG, you'll still be editing 30MB JPEG files eventually as megapixel counts go up.
Lawrencew: Tough. Don't like it? Then renounce your titles and live anonymously.
The only way that solution would work if it was still possible, in today's society, to live anonymously. The base issue here is personal privacy no matter how rich and famous...or poor and unknown...you are.
Danny: Just give me old school special fx, somehow all this computer stuff doesn't do much good. Like the old Star Wars movies, all done with scale models and matte-paintings for backgrounds, somehow it just feels more real and less over-the-top. As for Mad Max, I still think Mad Max II is awesome.
Alex is right. It isn't that you don't like CGI, you only don't like bad CGI. Because you never noticed all the great CGI.
Non-CGI effects do not always win, for the same reason. Remember all of those pre-CGI science fiction movies with optical effects that you literally laughed at because it looked so bad. Much of the reason that the original Star Trek series was digitally remastered is because the "good old practical effects" looked like complete fecal matter on a modern HD screen.
The Squire: DO any pro photogs make use of green-screen for otherwise traditional still portraits? Or is it unnecessary because for stills it's easy enough to deal with the background in PS?
I recently read about an art project that made use of discarded photographic studio backdrops. The reason the artist was swimming in these cast-off photo backgrounds was allegedly that photo portrait studios don't use them anymore. They changed to green screens because it's a more practical way to achieve the backgrounds that today's portrait clients ask for, like for senior portraits.
String: OMG, they used Adobe LR! How on earth did they ever fit a CC subscription into the budget? Why wouldn't they use Gimp??? (sarcasm off)
Sorry, just a little sarcasm considering the incredible amount of posts on this site calling Adobe the ultimate evil for going to a subscription based model.
You forgot to include the shocking revelation that iPhone 6 footage was used in the same Hollywood production as an Arri Alexa, since Apple products are only for fanboys with low IQs and even lower standards.
(Yes, I'm being sarcastic too)
Corel plug-ins for Adobe...if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, I guess...
TonyCu: This is a huge improvement!
"Available light is any damn light that is available!" - W. Eugene Smith
Steve in GA: These pictures (I would hesitate to call them photos) are interesting, and some are beautiful. And, I would certainly classify these pictures as, "art".
But, to me these pics stray from portraying things as they are, and instead show things as the artist interprets them. Again to me, that's not really photography. That's art that just happens to be made using an expensive electronic box, software and finely ground glass.
Maybe my opinions about art are one of the reasons I don't own a Picasso. (Well, of course, there's also the deal about the money.)
Steve in GA, what I said was not directed at you and was obviously theoretical, since I said "either/or". Second, I haven't taken any of those courses. It will hopefully be a relief to you that your post was inaccurate on both counts.