July 23, 2014, 01:46:30 AM

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 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 21
166
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 16, 2013, 02:09:34 PM »
It's slow going due to general buggy-ness

My experience when trying it is quite the opposite: LR5 feels like turbo-charged, as if the build a wait loop into LR4 to make people wish for an upgrade :-> ... this and some new features like the heal/clone brush are enough to upgrade, let's hope the RC phase doesn't take the better of a year's time.

Out of curiosity: OSX or Windows? I've thus far only used it on Windows 7. May load it up on my Mountain Lion machine this evening.

It does feel peppier than 4, and I'll note that I always work each photoshoot in its own fresh catalog, so there's no "few hundred versus tens-of-thousands" effect at play.

What I meant was: getting through the entire set is slow going, because I have to restart LR every couple of frames. Most common failure has been the adjustment brush. It repeatedly stopped working, i.e. I'd select the tool but when I clicked to place it it merely zoomed in an out. Restarting the software remedied it. Other times it crashed outright.


167
Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5 Public Beta Available
« on: April 16, 2013, 08:35:15 AM »
I used the beta on a photoshoot last night. It's slow going due to general buggy-ness, but when the brush tools work they work well. I like, and will upgrade when the time comes.

The offline editing feature is probably very compelling for some (particularly those with only one harddrive, i.e. laptop users).

168
Software & Accessories / Re: Lightroom 5 Beta available for download!!
« on: April 16, 2013, 08:33:15 AM »
I used the beta on a photoshoot last night. It's slow going due to general buggy-ness, but when the brush tools work they work well. I like, and will upgrade when the time comes.

I'm hard pressed to see the big step change that warrants a full version number. 

The offline editing feature is huge. It opens up a world of new storage solutions.

169
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MK II Error - Pink Frame
« on: April 15, 2013, 09:43:14 AM »
Weird... it being the previous frame makes it seem like it's trying multiple exposures a'la the mk3. Wonder if they put the wrong firmware on when they refurbed it.

170
Site Information / Re: Minimum CR Forum IQ?
« on: April 11, 2013, 06:17:02 PM »
Doesn't matter as long as the median is 100.

171
I am aware that SSD will significantly increase the start up times and read/write times but I have a specific question regarding the the performance of Adobe CS6, Lightroom 4.4, Final Cut Pro etc, with an SSD:
I currently have a Mac Book Pro Mid 2010 (OSX 10.8.3) with 16 GB DDR 3 RAM, 750GB HDD, 2.9 GHz intel Core i7 processor, and all of the above programs work perfectly, I have no issue at all, but what I want to know is will upgrading to an SSD will have a significant performance improvement after those programs have been launched?

It is a little like a DSLR, there are many components that make it better.

I am no fan of anything "Apple" and I recommend the high end Lenovo or Dell machines for heavy image, engineering apps and HD video etc.

That aside, it will give you a boost upgrading to an SSD if all the components are correctly in place and aligned. The CPU plays a major part, the video card again is extremely important, your RAM and the type of RAM etc. Plus a lot of people forget the bus, if you connect an SSD to a SATA 2 bus then performance will be limited. I think 3 (GB/s) is the latest (not sure though), so no matter what the SSD claims is the read/write speed if your laptop cannot handle those speeds you just won't get them

My laptop currently has two SSDs in it and could have four, but for me the main advantage with SSD (apart from the speed) is how quiet they are. Really makes a difference to your day if you work somewhere very quiet.

So would I recommend an SSD, definitely. Do I recommend upgrading a current laptop from a 750GB spin drive with all the headaches that that entails? That is the major question imho. Personally, I probably would wait until you want to upgrade your entire laptop. But if you are comfortable technically moving from a 750GB spin to a SSD then why not.
Thanks for your reply ... unfortunately it does not answer my question. My question is very specific, i.e. "will upgrading to an SSD have a significant performance improvement specifically for CS6, LR 4.4 & Final Cut Pro, after they have been launched?
I also use a Dell Alienware Mx14 (2012 version Core i7) which has a dedicated graphic card, yet the MacBook Pro outperforms but my question, about SSD replacment, remains the same for either systems.

It will help with program start up but after the program starts for the most part everything is in your RAM.  So for the most part no additional help after start up.  Write should be faster so that may be the only noticeable increase.
Thanks for replying to my specific question ... appreciate that.
Regards

Except, say you import a handful of 5Dmk3 raws into photoshop. That alone will likely exceed your memory, and you'll be pushed into virtual memory. Having a faster drive setup (be it 6GB/s SATA3 drives with or without striped or mirrored arrays) will be better than having a slower drive setup (say SATA2 spinning drives).

SSDs are great for boot drives and program installs.  For data storage, it can still be expensive and you must be religious about backing up. (A good idea whether using standard HDD or SSD)

Anecdotal, I've had a much higher percentage of spinning drives fail than SS. There are far fewer failure modes with SSD.

172
Haven't heard of this "EQD" brand.  Would it be just as good as a Dell IPS 24", which often is on sale as well?


Where are you seeing EQD? I'm seeing Monoprice-branded displays. I assume they use LG panels.

http://www.macworld.com/article/2027182/review-crystalpro-monitor-has-a-hard-to-beat-price.html

173
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon Refurb 400mm f/5.6L $910
« on: April 10, 2013, 04:23:34 PM »
how much image difference would this have versus a 70-200 2.8L IS II with a 2x converter? you'd have 140-400 f/5.6 w/IS-


The 400 is sharper, especially in the corners

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=278&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=1

174
I am aware that SSD will significantly increase the start up times and read/write times but I have a specific question regarding the the performance of Adobe CS6, Lightroom 4.4, Final Cut Pro etc, with an SSD:
I currently have a Mac Book Pro Mid 2010 (OSX 10.8.3) with 16 GB DDR 3 RAM, 750GB HDD, 2.9 GHz intel Core i7 processor, and all of the above programs work perfectly, I have no issue at all, but what I want to know is will upgrading to an SSD will have a significant performance improvement after those programs have been launched?

That depends on whether those programs are continually reading and writing to that drive (i.e. you don't have an external data drive).

In my system, I have two SSDs. One is for the OS and applications. The other is where I import photo (and the odd video) sessions to, and for application scratch space (e.g. LR, Photoshop, Edius). Lightroom catalogs get created on that second SSD on a per-shoot basis (e.g. I have SSD\LIGHTROOM\2013-04-10\2013-04-10.lrcat and SSD\DATA\2013-04-10\<DNG files>), and they remain there until my workflow is complete after which I push them to my archival library on a large spinning drive.

It's noticeably faster, particularly for large sessions where my memory (16GB) is quickly consumed and I have to rely on swap (but to be fair, my previous methodology had me working from a 5400RPM drive, so the jump to SATA3 SSD may not be representative of your gains). This is all subjective. I've done no testing.

176
Lenses / Re: Wedding with crop bodies, help with rentals.
« on: April 08, 2013, 08:02:22 PM »

If you're going to rent a 70-200, don't get the f4, go for the f2.8, the sharpness is amazing. You also may want to consider renting an L Prime, as they also produce good results.

My friend doesn't want to use my bodies because he wants to be able to put all the good ones that he took in his personal portfolio. Weird but he doesn't want to get his clients hopes up by using a body that he doesn't have. Its his personal preference.

Yet he wants to use a rented lens?


So if we go for the f/2.8 should we get the non-IS or the IS version?

Lenses aren't a big deal for him. He can rent all the lenses he wants. It's the body that he really wants to wait for. He will not shoot with a FF camera until he has his own. He's set on that ideology. I've tried telling him that 5Dc's aren't that expensive.


http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/cameras

177
Landscape / Re: San Francisco Sunrise to Yosemite Sunset in a Day
« on: April 07, 2013, 11:38:42 PM »
Quite a day!

Love the valley in the snow

178
the AF from the 7D is more or less wasted on baby shots.

Maybe for a few months, but when they start moving, they move very unpredictably.

179
EOS Bodies / Re: Question regarding ISO 50 on 5D III
« on: April 03, 2013, 01:37:53 PM »
So basically you're saying the ISO50 setting only affects metering, not sensitivity?

If I set up at ISO100, meter dead center, take a photo, and then drop to ISO50 with all else being equal, I'll see the meter move one stop to the left, but the actual picture will be the same?

Metering and the ISO value recorded in the metadata.  Assuming you're in manual mode (since in an AE mode, the change from ISO 100 to ISO 50 will result in a compensatory change in aperture or shutter speed to maintain metered exposure), the RAW data file will be the same - an ISO 100 exposure.  The jpg file will be pulled down a stop, and when you open the ISO 50 RAW file in an editor, it will display darker than the ISO 100 file, because the RAW editor/converter will pull the exposure down based on the ISO value in the metadata.

Seems silly/pointless for manual/raw (how I shoot). Good to know.

180
EOS Bodies / Re: Question regarding ISO 50 on 5D III
« on: April 03, 2013, 01:25:32 PM »
I see lots of confusion here.

Except for the EXIF flag indicating exposure, the RAW file you'll get with ISO50 @ f/8 @ 1/400 will be exactly the same as the one you'll get at ISO100 @ f/8 @ 1/400. The only difference is that, if the camera's meter tells you that the proper exposure is ISO100 @ f/8 @ 1/400, it'll tell you that you should be exposing the ISO50 shot at f/8 @ 1/200. And, of course, the RAW developers are programmed to invisibly apply a stop of digital pull to the ISO50 shot.

There will be a difference between ISO50 @ f/8 @ 1/200 and ISO100 @ f/8 @ 1/400 -- and it's that difference that people almost always compare.

BUT!

There won't be a difference between ISO50 @ f/8 @ 1/200 and ISO100 @ f/8 @ 1/200.

And, of course, there will be a difference in the RAW files between ISO100 @ f/8 @ 1/400 and ISO200 @ f/8 @ 1/400.

Hope that helps clear things up....

Cheers,

b&

P.S. A very similar thing happens with highlight tone priority, except in the opposite direction. The RAW files for a given shutter and aperture will be identical between ISO100 and ISO200 + HTP, but the meter will be different. b&

So basically you're saying the ISO50 setting only affects metering, not sensitivity?

If I set up at ISO100, meter dead center, take a photo, and then drop to ISO50 with all else being equal, I'll see the meter move one stop to the left, but the actual picture will be the same?

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 21