April 18, 2014, 02:40:28 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - DFM

Pages: [1] 2 3
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom Mobile Version Official
« on: April 09, 2014, 10:17:41 AM »
Indeed it is, but in the iDevice world it's simpler to get into an app's sandbox via the Internet. Bouncing through iTunes or an ad-hoc LAN, iOS does like to 'optimize' files whether you want it to or not. This is an early stage of development, lots of things including 'local' sync methods are possible in future versions, it all depends on what users ask for. http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family is the place to make your suggestions and complaints, both equally welcome.

While I know you didn't design the product, sending all the data through the Adobe network is quite silly if you ask me.

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom Mobile Version Official
« on: April 09, 2014, 06:51:51 AM »
There will always be arguments about whether the consumer products (Lr, Elements, etc) will go 'subscription only' in future, and Adobe can't do more than to say there are no plans. There really aren't, it's not something the target customers would accept. Maybe in 30 years when the entire concept of 'installing' something is dead and buried the idea will be forced upon us all, so Adobe cannot say "never".

Right now with LR Mobile version 1, all the data flows through Adobe's network, and there's a lot of it. I do understand people are angry about having to subscribe to get the app working (personally I didn't think it was a good idea), but it's not ad-funded and there are real costs to keep the thing operational. By all means complain about it, Adobe do take note of feedback. That's what people like me are here for - I don't mind being shouted at.

..and when I'm shooting on location I run Lr5 on a Surface Pro; quite frankly it's much better. I can shoot tethered, develop stuff and hand off the final results to a client while they're watching. I'd also suggest using a small laptop in the same way; the Surface is overpriced for what it is but I got the thing for testing, and forgot to give it back.. ;)

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom Mobile Version Official
« on: April 08, 2014, 08:00:59 AM »
No, sorry. Lr Mobile is only available for customers with an active subscription (CC or the PS/Lr Photography Program). Perpetual licenses of Lightroom cannot sync with it.

Not available as standalone app  :(

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS 7D Firmware 2.0.5 Now Available
« on: December 12, 2013, 03:24:09 AM »
Warning - The 2.0.5 firmware update is NOT compatible with Magic Lantern. It won't boot from a ML-enabled card at all. You can downgrade back to 2.0.3 easily enough, but if you're a ML user don't go near this patch.

Lenses / Re: Any Old Gem Macro Lenses?
« on: October 30, 2013, 10:12:49 AM »
Extension tubes only change the focus distance (shortening the minimum at the cost of preventing an infinity focus). Subjects can look bigger because you can get closer, but the perspective will suffer too. Teleconverters increase magnification and flatten perspective but don't significantly change the focus distance (there is a tiny change, maybe on a 400mm lens your MFD will increase by 20cm or so). Combining the two on a long telephoto you can get physically closer to your subject than the lens itself would usually permit, increasing the magnification without messing with the tele's perspective distortion (or lack thereof). You don't have to be crammed right up against the subject anymore, I tend to use a thinner extension tube so the lens will focus at a couple of feet at "infinity", so it should be giving the best image quality and I don't get shadows or scare the critters. Cranking a lens all the way to MFD is never a good idea.

Image quality won't be as good as with a dedicated macro, but an f/2.8 400mm macro lens is going to cost you a fair amount more. Although you lose a lot of light, for fieldwork all the bits do other things so there's less to hump up the side of a mountain.

So you're saying that using extension tubes will not only increase the focus distance, but the magnification/focal length as well? If that's true, then lets say I'm at 80mm on my lens. How many sized ones would i need to get to 150mm?

Lenses / Re: Any Old Gem Macro Lenses?
« on: October 30, 2013, 08:04:20 AM »
If you're trying to get closer, macro extension rings are often the better option over bellows these days. The variability of bellows was important in the film days with primes, when getting the subject to fill the negative was all-important. A zoom lens and three extension rings will give you the same degree of adjustment, but in all but the super-cheap versions they'll also pass the electrical contacts through. Even when you're shooting manual it's handy to get the right EXIF data on file.

Going the other way, pairing teleconverters with a macro setup will increase the subject distance but you'll take a big hit on exposure. You can go to town and put TCs and extension tubes together on a 200mm telephoto, and you'll be snapping flies from 6ft away. Probably need a tripod for that though  ;)

There's a profile in the Downloader app for EF8-15 f/4L on either a 7D or 5D-II body.

Fisheyes and UWAs are a nightmare as everyone has a different view on what "correction" means. Do you want to completely-eliminate the barrel distortion and end up with a highly-cropped and stretched image, or just fix the vignette and CA?

Lens profiles in Lr and Camera Raw are tied to both the body and the lens, plus they exist in two versions (JPEG and RAW). You'll only see the automatic combinations that match your particular photos. In general Adobe's bundled pack of profiles only considers brand matches (Sigma lenses on Sigma bodies, etc.) so mixed combinations or setups with TCs or extension tubes are usually something the user community will create and share through the Lens Profile Downloader app. There are thousands of possible combinations out there, and to be frank Adobe doesn't have the time nor the resources to test everything.

Users can vote and comment on the profiles submitted to LPD so you can see the good ones - some people are extremely precise about their work and build very high quality profiles, but with any community resource there'll be some contributors who get it wrong. Of course there's nothing to stop a lens manufacturer themselves from contributing.

Ref the USB dock: Lens profiles only correct for the physical characteristics of the lens elements; they don't care about the firmware or if the image is in focus, so reprogramming a lens with a USB dock won't have any effect - unless you were to somehow hack the EXIF data and change the lens identity.

Lenses / Re: Which lenses to buy for filming
« on: August 17, 2013, 07:49:12 AM »
Optical stabilization (OS) in a lens uses motors to shift the position of one of the inner elements, in response to signals from accelerometers (the same as the sensors in your cellphone that know which way to rotate the screen) and tries to keep the image projected onto the sensor as still as possible, even if the camera itself is wobbling about a bit - such as when you're hand-holding it. It's designed for still photography at slow shutter speeds. In video work it creates a whole other set of problems, as you will have two possible scenarios:

  • The camera is on a tripod - OS must be turned off or it will tend to start adding motion where there isn't any.
  • You're shooting handheld or on a stabilizer rig, and you will pan the camera. Now the OS has a problem because it will start off trying to keep the image still, but will rapidly hit the limits of adjustment and suddenly snap back into the center. Instead of a natural 'handheld' feel to the shot, it will be still...still.. still.. BOINGGGGG.... still... still.... and it looks terrible.

A lot of good advice already about lens choices, but so far nobody's actually asked what you will be shooting, and how. A fast EF-S 50mm (or full-frame EF 35mm on your crop body) will give a field of view roughly the same as your eyeball, so for example you can shoot a full-length scene from about 20 feet away. If you're capturing wide landscapes, home interiors, or working in small venues (e.g. filming a local band in a bar) then it's much too narrow a field of view, and you'd be looking at something around 16mm to 20mm. As a general-purpose lens on my crop bodies I use a Sigma 17-50 2.8 DC (outside of your budget but worth scouting for a second-hand one). It has OS for stills and a constant aperture. Some people get addicted to vintage glass (I have a growing collection, on a 5dIII an old Pentax 50/1.4 is hard to beat) but I wouldn't suggest it for a newcomer as there's a lot of dud glass on the used market, you really need to know how to service them yourself to get rid of the dust and fungus.

Bear in mind as well that normal Canon 'stills' lenses never have a mechanical aperture ring, so you must always change it using the command dial on the body. That's necessary for shooting in Tv or P mode, a little fiddly for video but not terribly so. Dedicated video lenses, on the other hand, only have a mechanical aperture - you cannot set it from the body, so you can only shoot in Av or M. Most also have a 'declicked' aperture ring that allows you to choose any position, not just the numbered f-stops. That's useful for video as people like varying the aperture as they shoot to adapt for lighting changes, but it's assumed you would be fitting a set of rails and a follow-focus system to keep it under control. It's possible to shoot stills with a video lens but it's a hassle.

The T3i/600D has a very important feature for video which can drastically affect lens choice. Normal video will have a lot of moire and aliasing (jaggy lines and color patterns on diagonals and finely-textured objects); that's just the price you pay for shooting video on a Canon DSLR - but the T3i can switch to 3x 'crop video' mode - it zooms in by 3x but the moire goes away completely. This gives a huge improvement in quality and still shoots in full-HD, but the extremely narrow field of view means you have to work with an ultra-wide-angle lens so the cropped region from the center isn't just showing someone's left nostril. If you install Magic Lantern to shoot raw video on the T3i (not in HD but decent enough) that will also crop the sensor. All this means with video it's easier to start with an ultra-wide and make it into a longer lens "electronically", than fit a standard 50 prime and have to stand half a block away.

My best suggestion - if you're not sure which lenses will suit you best, don't buy anything. Rent one for a weekend or borrow one from a friend, see how it feels, try something else next time. If (with respect) you don't have any friends with a shelf groaning with L glass, check out things like photowalks where you can spend an afternoon with a bunch of like-minded people and their backpacks  ;)

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 5
« on: August 14, 2013, 12:37:21 PM »
No. It's Windows 7/SP1 or Windows 8 (or OS X 10.7+) only.


Hi guys,

can we utilize LR 5 with Windows Vista 64 Bits ?


Software & Accessories / Re: Canon EOS 7D RAW Video?
« on: August 11, 2013, 09:10:44 AM »
ML now has continuous RAW video on the 7D  ;D ;D ;D

Max resolution in non-crop mode is 1152x622 at 24p or 30p, and 1152x464 at 60p*. It's aliased as you'd expect from line-skipping, but it's not too bad. You need a 1000x card to get the maximums, but people are getting 1152x576 continuous with a 400x Transcend and on a Sandisk Extreme 60mb/s mine's barely breaking a sweat.

*Note that the 7D builds don't have frame rate override, so 24p = 23.976 etc.

Using 5x crop mode (press the LiveView zoom button) you can remove the aliasing, at the expense of a very narrow FoV (a 50mm lens gives you about 100mm width at 1 metre). 10x crop mode doesn't work at all.

All this is still well below the max possible write speed of the 7D so the limitation at this point is in memory-wrangling. Full-HD is not an option for non-crop mode as the sensor data just isn't there, but in 5x crop mode you can in theory hit 2520x1200 (nobody's got that to work continuously - yet!)

Get the raw_rec enabled ML files from http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=3974.msg65694#msg65694

Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 5
« on: August 10, 2013, 07:12:57 AM »
'A bit' is somewhat of an understatement  ;D

The typical SQL records for a Lr development are less than 100kb. A PSD file based on a DSLR raw image can be 100mb+. Smart objects are not references to the original file on disc, they're copies embedded into the PSD file so they're vulnerable to corruption every time the PSD is re-saved. If you work in Lr and need total security against loss of your developed images you only have to keep one 'permanent' backup of the raw file, then routine mirrors of the LRCAT database (which is small enough to backup online). I do commercial stuff that can never be repeated, so I'm paranoid about backups:

  • CR2s from the cards go as-is to an external drive (using TeraCopy), then they're imported from the cards to my workstation in Lr as DNGs, only when everything's verified will the cards be reused.
  • The external drives go off-site. I've only needed to pull copies once, when an SSD in the workstation threw a hissy fit - but if the office is eaten by Godzilla I can be up and running in an hour.
  • The LRCAT databases are synced to the cloud every evening (using a batch script). Lr makes local backups automatically.

To highlight the fact that you're never touching the originals, in Lr5 you can work on developments even if they're not available - it'll take whatever you do to the Smart Previews and re-apply it to the original images when you mount the DNG/CR2 files again. When I'm shooting for a previous client I'll take their LRCAT (and the folder of Smart Previews) in case we need to browse the old stuff for reference - a catalog with 10,000+ images will fit on a USB stick. Also means I can play about with any of my photos in the airport lounge (anything to distract me from the free jelly beans ;) ).

Of course there are thousands of things you can do in Photoshop that you can't do in Lr, but I'd never suggest using Ps as a default tool for developing raw files unless you have terabytes of storage laying about. Using ACR outside of Ps is another option (e.g. via Bridge) as it'll write an XMP sidecar file instead of a database record, but managing all those sidecars is a real pain and you don't get to use all of the presets and plugins from Lr.

Well, all being said...if you're doing things "non-destructively" in Photoshop, you're working with your RAW images as smart objects, and aren't making any changes directly to them there either. It eats up a bit more space ...

There's a particular issue with ball-heads in checked luggage for some countries - if the X-ray shows a dense spherical object with a lump sticking out the side, the hamsters behind the carousels tend to think of Wile-E-Coyote's ACME bombs and will open your bag to investigate without contacting you first. For a colleague who flew through Berlin last month, that resulted in a nice letter inside the case to say it had been "checked and found to be safe", and a drill hole in the ball-head.

Always go through the special baggage channel so you can be on hand if they break out the power tools  ::)

Software & Accessories / Re: Canon EOS 7D RAW Video?
« on: August 09, 2013, 05:39:26 AM »
The first builds were complicated as we had to compile the source from dailies scattered about on various sites, now everything is handled by EOSCard - if you can update your firmware with the camera menu and have a CF card reader, you can install ML (yes, OS X users have a couple more hoops to go through b/c EOSCard is Windows-only).

The biggest risk is if you interrupt the firmware update process, that's the cause of most "brick" reports but even that is usually fixable. You have to be really pushing things to do any permanent damage (in theory some of the super-high-bitrate video modes could overheat the chips, and there's a theoretical issue with dual-ISO affecting the buffers but nobody's seen it happen). Is it as stable as Canon's firmware? No, hence the 'alpha' tag - but realistically the bits that work are working fine, and the bits that aren't (such as continuous RAW) are not enabled in the builds that most users will be downloading. A few modules come and go as they're fine-tuned (ETTR, etc), but the core stuff like zebras and histograms are as reliable on the 7D now as they are on the other bodies. If you only want to shoot raw video it's not in any way ready for you yet and I wouldn't bother installing it. If you're shooting stills or H.264, even something like peaking or the Magic Zoom window could be a game-changer.

If you don't want to risk setting the autoboot flag, you can still use the original alpha 2 .FIR file, and 'update' your firmware each time you turn the camera on. That version does not make any permanent changes to the camera whatsoever.

I've been using ML-7D on commercial shoots for months, never had a problem. If ML itself errors out, remove the battery. Even with the bootflag set, if you want to go back to vanilla Canon firmware at any time just use a non-bootable CF card without the ML files on.

Autoboot was solved on the 7D a couple of weeks ago and is now very simple.

I guess we have pretty different ideas about what 'very simple' means.  That post is from yesterday, a more detailed and helpful one is here:  http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7464.0

Its prefaced by "this is a guide only for if you want the VERY EXPERIMENTAL and POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS autoboot version of the beta 2".  Partly bum covering of course, but not complete hyperbole.

Things are progressing quickly and theres some very promising stuff happening, but also it means levels of testing in the wild are going to be much lower.   


Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 5
« on: August 09, 2013, 05:15:24 AM »
LR5 has brushable healing and cloning tools so you're no longer limited to a circular dot - but it will always be slower than Photoshop because the processing you apply in Lr is *not* changing the pixels in the original image. Adjustments are applied 'live' every time the photo is displayed. If you're removing a couple of scratches you won't notice, but cleaning up a mass of dust bunnies or a flock of birds and things will slow down.

It's important for new customers to remember this - fundamentally Lr is a catalog system, not a photo editor. Users get confused that images have to be 'imported' before anything can happen and it won't just browse through folders like Photoshop or DPP, but that's the entire point - it doesn't edit the photo files on disc, it builds a database of what you want changed; then exports or prints a copy when you're ready. If you process your photos in another application (DPP, Photoshop, etc) then Lr's database may still have value as a way to organize and search for your content, but if you prefer to keep things in a disc folder structure so they can be quickly-grabbed into other software it may not. To be frank, Lr prefers you to develop and touch up your raw files entirely within Lr, and only resort to a bounce through a 'conventional' editing program if absolutely necessary. To preserve the original file, Lr will make a copy on disc when it's sent for external editing, so you'll end up with two copies in the database (and two files on disc).

Think of it as Camera Raw with an SQLlite database bolted on the front that remembers what you did with the sliders, and resets them each time you view that photo. The advantage is that your original CR2/DNG files aren't at risk of corruption or overwriting, the payoff is that everything is 'virtual' until you export a copy. There's no "Save" menu in Lightroom!

Pages: [1] 2 3