March 04, 2015, 11:27:00 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 - 3kramd5

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40
1
The private detective industry must be drooling over this new gizmo from Nikon.

I'm not sure they'd care much about zoom. It's what, 330mm at the long end, give or take? I'd rather sit in a car with a super tele pointed at my subject, looks more like the movies :P

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: March 02, 2015, 03:32:19 PM »
I wouldn't care if they left it the same as long as they added a built in beer bottle opener on the side.  I can't, for the life of me, understand why that hasn't been implemented

Just take your lens off, the mount works in a pinch ;)

3
try the new sigma 150-600mm sport and you,ll soon realise that the tammy is totally outclassed . 8)

It better outclass the tamron at twice the price.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: March 02, 2015, 09:30:21 AM »
Birders and sports guys should be using the 7DII or the 1Dx not a 5D... Why would you spend $4K on a camera only to crop the images down and get less quality than you'd have on a better suited camera that costs half as much...

If you properly equip yourself with appropriate lenses for your subject at your proximity, you'll need not crop and will get better images due to having a substantially larger sensor.

I'm particularly confused by why you suggest a 5D is inappropriate for birding due to a necessity of cropping, but that a 1Dx is appropriate even though it has the same sensor size.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 26, 2015, 11:05:08 PM »
A FF camera with 61 focus points and 10FPS...why would anyone buy the 5DS other than to have crazy high megapixels?

Um, its pixel count IS its sales pitch.

6
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming March 9
« on: February 25, 2015, 01:26:31 PM »
I get what you're saying, you could use the healing tool that's already there to draw in the boarders, but at that point you're creating pixels, and I just see that as PS territory. Not to mention, I can only imagine what it would require to do that non-destructively

It wouldn't take much, but it would likely bog down a catalog like nobody's business.

7
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming March 9
« on: February 25, 2015, 10:20:27 AM »
Re. Canvas extension I don't know whether those proprietary raw file format(s) would allow for it or not. I do not want to convert raws to tiff or psd file format, but keep them as CR2s.

Maybe I'm wrong, but in LR you aren't really viewing the raw, you're viewing a raster of the raw with myriad processing selections. I think it would be possible to support canvas extension without a file type change. It would just be "not from RAW" in the areas outside the native frame.

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: I just want a stills camera.
« on: February 24, 2015, 10:04:19 AM »
5. The post had to do with whether or not a stills camera allowed to evolve on it's own, without having to cram so much more technology into the small case, might evolve more quickly and be a better camera in the long run. It is a question, not a manifesto.

I imagine that the development teams are divided into photography and videography groups. Would putting twice as many people into photography software improve photography? Maaaaybe, but more likely they'd just finish the work package sooner.

If there are video-specific hardware compromises made, such as an strong low pass filter (mentioned above), then it's possible a stills-only camera would be a little better than a hybrid. I suspect those situations are rare, and that no, photography wouldn't evolve significantly faster if it weren't for video.

A camera without unnecessary holes in its shell for mic, speakers, video-only connectors would be better and cheaper to weatherseal. Those holes are additional video-induced compromises and weaknesses compared to what a pure stills machine would be.

Kind of picking a nit, there. Neither a rather insignificant body weakness nor the cost of a gasket have any impact on still photography performance, any more than the presence of a mirror box impacts video performance. If they created light leaks, that would be another story entirely.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
« on: February 23, 2015, 12:11:24 PM »
For those wishing for a 36 MP Camera and/or wanting something close to or similar to D810. Its never going to happen because of this...





What a ridiculous thing. For shame, Canon.

10
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming March 9
« on: February 22, 2015, 12:28:39 PM »
And criticism of the Adobe uncreative cloud supscription/rental model does not qualify as ranting, but is an absolutely legitimate complaint against Adobe's rip-off attempts of clients who have no desire whatsoever to rent,  purchase or use Photoshop in addition to Lightroom.

Of course it qualifies as ranting because it is not what Adobe are asking of you. If you want LR as a standalone perpetual license you can buy it, if you don't want PS then don't buy it, if you don't want the subscription model or CC don't sign up.

How exactly is that "ripping you off"?

If, to use Lightroom, Adobe forced you to rent software you didn't want then they could be accused of pressuring you, if your old LR catalogs no longer opened unless you signed up and paid for a subscription license that had to include PS, and you didn't want it, then they could be accused of ripping you off. But they are not doing anything like that, so take your vitriol laden hate messages somewhere where complete lies and fabrication are accepted and encouraged, maybe Fox News?

If existing, perpetually licensed versions of LR ceased to function in the wake of a new cloud model, that would be a ripoff, and further an actionable one.

Only offering new versions of LR as a package (which isn't happening as far as I can tell) isn't a ripoff, as they are not and can not force people to subscribe. It's the same thing when people complain about what "canon gives us" in a new model. Canon doesn't give a way anything, customers either buy what they're selling, or they don't.

Personally, while I RARELY use PS, I'd easily pay the nominal fee of $10/month for the package. It's an exceptional deal that I'm actually a bit surprised they offer.

11
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming Very Soon
« on: February 20, 2015, 02:40:35 PM »
Only the Import module knows about real folders contents.

Interesting. IIRC (I'll check when I get home, but I think this behavior is accurate), if I delete the contents of a given folder-within-lightroom, and then remove that folder from lightroom, the folder will be deleted from my file system, but ONLY if that folder is empty. If it's not empty, it doesn't get deleted. Does lightroom thus have some knowledge of folder contents not explicitly imported, or is it sending some IF command/query to the OS (IF the folder is empty delete it, otherwise don't)?

12
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming Very Soon
« on: February 20, 2015, 11:26:26 AM »
I have two catalogs - a 200,000 image main catalog and an 800 image test catalog.  I can't tell a difference in speed between them.

Strange. Your experience is entirely different from mine.

13
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming Very Soon
« on: February 20, 2015, 11:25:33 AM »
I find performance takes a major hit as catalog size increases, even if it deletes rendered previews on a scheduled basis.

Keep the catalog on a fast disk.

My master is on a slow disk (typical 7200RPM HDD), but if I move it to an SSD it doesn't improve noticeably. My workflow is now entirely on SSD (working catalogs and in-work files reside on SSD until I'm done with them).


Also do you let Adobe "optimize" the catalog? It will "compact" and eliminate internal fragmentation. It's something SQLite needs to keep the best performance.

From time to time, yes.


Anyway your workflow can make sense, other photographers use a "staging" area to clean up before delivering to the final destination.

Yah, that's basically how I do it. Trial and error to find the best solution.

14
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming Very Soon
« on: February 20, 2015, 11:18:49 AM »
4000+ images now in one catalog and no slow down. I read that it's a combo of things that slow down LR including how many of your images have been edited and how many local edits such as the adjustment brush you have applied. Liberal use of the brush slows down my laptop which is my biggest annoyance. Other than that it seems to handle several thousand images in the library fairly well.

I'm sure it's a combination of a lot of things, but logically if things like quantity of local edits matter, then it will compound as catalogs grow.

Regardless, I notice it most significantly in large catalogs (which in my case = hundreds of thousands of images).

15
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 6 Coming Very Soon
« on: February 20, 2015, 10:36:37 AM »
Thereby creating multiple catalogs can make little sense unless you have a very good reason to do so - it can make sense for example to have a "personal" one, and a "professional" one if you want to keep  really separated say, your family shots from those you make for your customers - maybe you don't want to show your personal shots to a customer by mistake.

I find performance takes a major hit as catalog size increases, even if it deletes rendered previews on a scheduled basis. Therefore I don't work in my master catalog. I create a new dedicated catalog for each individual shoot or day, depending on the situation. Once I've completed my culling/processing/exporting, I open my master catalog and import the new one to it. This way I rarely have more than a thousand photos within a working catalog.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40