October 23, 2014, 04:38:37 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 - Lawliet

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28
Canon General / Re: Does "Banding" exist
« on: October 17, 2014, 11:44:34 AM »

Is this banding on the sensor, or like, in the image above, is it the LCD screen on back of camera, or even that pricey monitor that only handles 8-bits per channel
Run a statistical analysis of the values in the .cr2 and you see the banding numerically. Absolutely no subjective or defice dependent component.
Also: if it where an artefact of the output channel image manipulation wouldn't work on it.
Just food for thought
No, not at all.


how many have used flash (even more shot with a speed higher than 1/250?)

How many doesn't matter - want to fill the shadows in even one picture with some distance to the subject?

But if you want to think about numbers it's the same idea as the "they took sports pictures w/o autofocus"-fallacy. Rather ask: How many opportunities were missed because of technical limitations?


 Flash Sync Speed: HSS is supported on many cameras/flashes combinations

HSS eats power like crazy. You loose three quarters just for turning it on, and then the output stays constant in relation to the ambient light.
The leaf shutter otoh sets the target aperture, giving you a 4-5 stop advantage. Contrasting to HSS you also benefit from ISOs above base sensitivity. You couldn't replicate that with 600RTs because the control system can't handle as many units as that would require. Not to mention the logistic challenges, or the implications when not relying only on speedlights.
You'd need at least 100kg worth of speedlights  and batteries to match a single, easily backpack transportable, Move1200 - just for perspective. And that doesn't include stands or clamps. For B1s it works out similarily.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Variable Diffusion Focusing Screen
« on: October 16, 2014, 07:58:36 AM »

Yeah! But it is much easier to just do this to a wall with the same effect over one whole area.
You're not constrained to shade the wall uniformly - the more elaborte ones allow for sectional control, basicly a grayscale matrix display.
Even with an EVF or live view screen this is tough. but with an in camera DSLR focussing screen...?
Take the focus mask from a Phase One and feed it into the display's control input.
Just WOW!
(please correct me, if I get this patent wrong)
Maybe I'd be more impressed hadn't our kindergardeners figured out how to entertain themselves during travel by playing a variation of "magna doodle" or the shadow theatre game on those seperators. ;D

The new part is just the use in the viewfinder, to replicate parts of the functionality an EVF has.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Variable Diffusion Focusing Screen
« on: October 16, 2014, 04:11:58 AM »

I wouldn't have even thought about this beeing possible.
So if this comes true, then nobody should call Canon "not innovative" again.

Its quite common in interior design, make a door or seperation wall transparent/frosted/darkened on the press of a button, or by a slider on your cell phone.
The most public use I can think of would be in the ICE high speed trains - sudden whiteout? Likley a sheep that didn't make it off the track in time? Or something akin.

EOS Bodies / Re: Multilayer Sensors are Coming From Canon [CR2]
« on: October 16, 2014, 12:13:09 AM »

It doesn't exclude anyone. You write the software to take advantage of a GPU. If you don't have one, the software works perfectly. If you have one, it is faster. The user can run it on their tablet, thier laptop, or their desktop ( rack mount for me :) ). If you want more performance, buy better hardware. It is better to have that option than no option at all.

And sooner or later the naysayer will realize that your average tablet also has a GPU that can do those calculations faster while using less energy per operation. Their cores are actually very closely related to their desktop/console counterparts, much more then the main CPUs.
They see quite a lot of action in the image manipulation done for GUI representation, so using them to manipulate images isn't exactly terra incognita.


So why did some people feel it was appropriate, or even helpful, to attack his photography? 

It just does not make sense.

You don't like the message, either directly or because it reminds you of something related? Yet know you can''t refute it? Shoot the messenger who puts a finger in the wound.
It's an all to common behavioral pattern...

EOS Bodies / Re: Multilayer Sensors are Coming From Canon [CR2]
« on: October 09, 2014, 02:18:45 AM »

Readout speed is almost infinitely parallelizable, as is image compression/encoding.  Performance is almost entirely a question of how much hardware they decide to throw at it.  If they're feeling particularly nuts, they could use a two-sided silicon wafer, put all the circuitry on the back side with vias, and use a per-pixel ADC, as in this design....

For starters one could take a look at the NX1 - with the action trigger mode reading and evaluating all of those 28MP at quite impressive 240 fps. Enough power to read 8K video at 120fps for slow motion, for example. Or 36m full RGB pixels faster then the 1Dx is now. Well, at 12bit, still not bad compared to 14bit with the lower parts filled with a blend of random&pattern noise.
Not that a 1DsIII-successor would need such framerates...most of the time the strobes would be the limiting factor anyway.

Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 08, 2014, 04:58:28 PM »

Oh yea and the cinema camera/lens plug; Use a movie that is at least still in theatres ($1 shows dont count)...

For that matter reading the comments, especially the one by the director himself, is enlightening. Contrary to apologetic mantras finding suitable productions isn't that easy. Some might claim that's just my bias - yet Canon pulled a Potemkin. Makes one wonder why?

Lighting / Re: POLL: What flash modes do you use?
« on: October 08, 2014, 02:12:40 AM »

I'd love to see some real manufacturers numbers on this, unsubstantiated Strobist editorial content doesn't necessarily establish stable facts.

It makes sense once you set the right context. The blog doesn't.
The tube would really die quite fast if driven at its rated power - if. But tubes of the size found in your average flash gun have rated powers of about 200Ws, give or take. With only a quarter of that energy in the capacitors and the steep power/lifetime curve of the tube something in the 100k full power pops range is a more realistic lower estimate.
Beware - that's if everything, electronics hate overheating after all, is properly cooled&ventilated. Exeeding the max. energy for a certain time window is also a bad idea. If you manage to fry your strobe those are the likely culprits.

Lighting / Re: POLL: What flash modes do you use?
« on: October 06, 2014, 04:30:37 PM »
The Thyristor Mode works great Off camera where ETTL would nuke the exposure or burn the exposure depending on the background.
And, on the 600EX-RT, gives you the same exposure for every flash in one group. Not the same power, but actually exposure(as seen by the strobes sensor, naturally).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Posting about sensors and DR!
« on: September 30, 2014, 09:57:55 AM »

Where did he say that no professional commercial/fashion photographer used Canon?
I believe he said that, when they do use Canon, they have a problem which they would have liked to see fixed.
Thinking only in black and white, a clear indicator for insufficient mental dynamic range ;)
As for the fixing - does a sponsoring contract outweigh the costs of additional processing? That's why prominent names are ideal for such ideas, esp. when they use said gear only for selected jobs, not exclusively.
OTOH we just ha(ve/d) the fashion weeks and the related shoots - a much more representative cross-section in my book.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Posting about sensors and DR!
« on: September 30, 2014, 08:34:44 AM »
But with less noise and cleaner images, we escape from having to waste the time with extreme processing of the images....

That's "just" a software problem, but I agree there's room for improvement here as long as the data is in the image at all and not clipped.

Beware - the same noise/banding that makes lifting shadows a problem is always there, its fraction just gets smaller at higher exposure levels. So everything seems nice if you do the ETTR thing.
BUT there is another part in the process that uses the same lower bits as shadow lifting: color reconstruction during debayering. No matter what you do to control contrast or suppress noise in software - color suffers one way or the other.
Well, that's a issue commercial/fashion clients tend to notice, but is all to easy to ignore by the "I put extra thick slices of tomato on my eyes and still can't hear the noise, so it can't be a problem"-fraction.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D750 to be Canon 5D3 competitor?
« on: September 08, 2014, 04:07:34 PM »

Ahhh, yes...anecdotes.  % of what?  20?  200?  20,000?  Ot that last number is likely to have any significance or impact on Canon's priorities.

A higher percentage then the sample size for the Nielson ratings for example.
But your still on the "mixing market segments as if all cameras had the same target demography"-trip

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D750 to be Canon 5D3 competitor?
« on: September 08, 2014, 03:53:43 PM »
Or could it be that the 'issue' is neither as widespread nor as impactful as you're implying.

If it isn't a iusse, then why did the share of C-users in our extended professional network drop from ~90 to ~30 percent?

Sure, that observation doesn't mesh well with certain confirmation biases...

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 28