December 21, 2014, 10:19:11 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 - Botts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14
Software & Accessories / Re: My Dell vs iMac
« on: December 10, 2013, 01:01:32 PM »
Just checked the GeekBench 2 scores for your i5 760 vs the iMac's i7 4771.  The iMac scores 2.01x higher on GeekBench than your dell which is substantial.

The loaded iMac scores 17% faster than my Retina MacBook Pro, which is pretty close to what I see in real world speed difference for heavy compute actions.  I.e. video rendering, or heavy PS work.  As such, I'd expect the iMac would smoke your Dell.

I still don't think I could justify anything bigger than a 256GB SSD at today's cost though, as the only thing you really need to store on the SSD is programs and LR Catalogues.  USB 3.0 / Thunderbolt also lets you add SSDs in SATA6 enclosures down the road.

Here's what I'd do instead of splurging on the 960GB SSD.
RAID enclosure $175 + 2TB Seagate $90x4 + 4TB USB 3.0 External $200

That comes to $735 and you'd get a RAID-10 enclosure with usable 4TB of space, and an external 4TB for offline backups.  You could do a 2TB version of this for $605.  It'll come down to whether or not you need that much data protection, I'd argue you always do; though I'm more conservative than most on backups.

Software & Accessories / Re: My Dell vs iMac
« on: December 10, 2013, 02:26:11 AM »
Disclaimer: I worked for Apple for quite a long time.

I'd go with the iMac.  The 27" display is fabulous, and the computer is wicked fast.  I've got a loaded 2013 sitting on my desk right now.

If I were you, I'd go with the GPU and CPU upgrades from factory, I'd also choose the 256GB SSD.  Buy your RAM as cash becomes available. 
I run 24GB of RAM right now in this config: 4GB (stock), 4GB (stock), 8GB (aftermarket), 8GB(aftermarket).

The GPU and CPU will future proof you the longest.

With regards to the suggestion of the 960GB SSD, I'd avoid going that route.  I'd also avoid the Fusion Drive. Reasons are as follows:

1. You will outgrow the SSD, be it 960GB or 256GB.  It's a just a matter of time, then you're limited to USB 3.0 attached options anyways.
2. Lightroom runs great off a 2 HDD RAID-0, just make sure you've got a solid backup scheme or run RAID 10 with periodic offline backups.  Further, moving your Lightroom Catalogues to SSD, then running the masters off the RAID will lead to even better performance.  The Fusion drive won't touch either setup for speed.
3. Fusion Drives are currently a little finicky, and the replacement SSDs are still a constrained part AFAIK at Apple stores. I.e. if yours goes down, it's down for 2+ weeks.
4. That 960GB SSD is really expensive compared to building a fast RAID-0 + backup.  You could probably do a 4TB RAID 10 for under $600 now.  Alternatively, you could get a USB 3.0 DROBO.
5. Fire your programs on the SSD for super quick load times.

With regards to Aperture or Lightroom, keep in mind all they are, are glorified databases.  They need super quick read/write to the database, master reads are less crucial.  As such, most users with big libraries, or a need for speed run their Catalogues/Aperture Libraries on their SSDs, but store their masters / reference their masters on an external drive, RAID or otherwise.

If you have any questions, please PM me.

Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 10, 2013, 02:08:23 AM »
Tied with the "tripod" that has flexible legs and can supposedly wrap around a fence post or branch.

I really hope I am not the only one who fell for that, this thing can barely carry its own weight, but it really reminded me of the "buy cheap, pay double" saying :-\

I quite liked my GorillaPod, it had its place, and my Gitzo has its place.  I use my gorilla pod lots with my P&S in places like Disneyland, or to strap a T2i to my Gitzo if I want video to supplement my photos.

Sort of like camouflage flashlights :)

As someone who has spent a substantially amount of time outdoors, I actively seek out the brightest coloured, least camouflaged items I can find.  Nothing worse than seeing someone drop a brand new camo zippo or flashlight in the bush, never to see it again. 

The only things I buy in less visible are things that I don't store in my pack if I'm trying to go low observable, but even then the items will be OD or black, not camo.

The worst accessory I can think of is the selfie stick!

Lenses / Re: DIY carbon hood for 40mm stm lens
« on: October 29, 2013, 11:33:12 AM »
No, i used epox that hardened on room temperature. No need for oven...

I see, I guess it doesn't need to be as strong as F1 chassis...

Most DIY carbon fibre things are cured at room temperature.  You use CF fabric, then coat with epoxy, similar to fibreglassing.

Pre-impregnated or prepreg CF is stored in a freezer, then shaped on a mold and heated to 100C to cure.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 27, 2013, 01:40:19 PM »
The noise in the 7D  reminds me of the classic Panasonic all-in-one super zooms. But yeah, terrible blue channel noise at ISO 100. I'd much rather see them focus on low ISO dynamic range and noise than ISO 64000 jpeg noise.  Any addition of megapixels to the 1.6x sensor means I won't be picking one up. 18 is already too many.

Why?  More pixels = less noise and more detail.

There is a school of thought, somewhat based in science, that bigger pixels equal less noise and/or higher sensitivity.

There are engineering realities which can nullify, mitigate, or amplify the above however.

Software & Accessories / Re: OS X Mavericks
« on: October 26, 2013, 10:01:25 PM »
Got the email from Planet 5D ... thought it might be of interest to some of you:
"APP Nap: FCPX under Mavericks: Won’t background render unless you change this!
For FCPX (and many other apps) under the new Apple OS X Mavericks, apps will by default, attempt to save processing for foreground apps by doing something new called “App Nap” – and that will cause background rendering to STOP unless you turn it off.

This is all news to me so I thought I’d share!"

Interesting, my FCP X hasn't been behaving like this.

Software & Accessories / Re: OS X Mavericks
« on: October 23, 2013, 01:29:35 AM »
Overall, I'm very happy with the upgrade.  It took about 90 minutes for the whole process.  Something I wish they warned me about    ;)

How long?

25 minutes here. Probably due to using an SSD though.

32 mike on my SSD.

Software & Accessories / Re: OS X Mavericks
« on: October 23, 2013, 12:23:09 AM »

Adobe needs to address this ASAP.

I have been sitting this thread out, until now.

I took my ~ 2 year old MBA 13" on a road trip.  I found that it was fine speed wise for LR5, great size and weight wise to carry, BUT- not enough screen real estate to work with.  I also recommend that the retina screen is a must.  Next time out, I'm taking my 15" MBP to try.  My 2 C.


One of my friends from Cupertino let me play with his new Retina MacBook Pro 15".

Damn I wish I could afford to upgrade my current rMBP.

How about a mirrorless camera? Might be less intimidating than a DSLR for her.
If you read above it looks like she specifically requested DSLR.
I'd seriously consider a 60D.

It's pretty similar in cost to a T4i or T5i and a beefier body with better speed and quality.  I find the heftier body is a selling point for everyone who has already decided they want to go to DSLR.  The 60D also has two control dials which are immensely helpful in manual vs the hold Av button and spin wheel option on the xxxD/Txi models.

Add a 18-55 or an 18-200 and you have a great starter kit.  Adding a 40STM is great too.

Personally, I think a crop is a good place to start, she'll learn to shoot just the same as she would with a 5D.  Then she can decide on her own later if FF is where she wants to go, and then whether or not she wants speed (5D3), or value (used 5D/5D2 or 6D).  She can then choose lenses that she wants for the FF.  For example, I hated the 35mm on crop, but love it on FF.

For a great picture get it right at the camera first, the less you have to correct in PP the less it will look fake.

This works great if you know your destination, sometimes you don't though.  If I'm shooting images for a fun photo book, I don't know if my photo will be cropped to 4:3, 4:5, 16:9 or some other aspect ratio. 

Framing for a perfect 4:3 composition would really limit which photos I could use where.

Similarly, if I'm shooting an event, I'll usually make a slideshow 16:9 if it's full images, or any aspect ratio if it's more like a collage.  Also, I'll probably wind up printing some of the images as large 4:3s.  I like having some space to work with.


Having prices drop from the original introductory price isn't exactly a theory, that can be supported by heaps of data.  The claim here was the price it was going to hit, and it was done with a fair amount of chest thumping.  I'd say it was way the hell off.

My favorite line from the whole thing:

"People who claim this pricing could never happen would have conveniently "forgotten" by then or remain mum when that day does come..."

I was trying to be friendly and diplomatic!

Canon General / Re: Canon LP-E6 Product Advisory
« on: October 09, 2013, 12:32:13 PM »
In essence, does this mean Canon tried to embed a non-genuine battery detection into the charger and screwed it up?

To me it sounds like they have trouble to supply the internal electronics sufficiently when the battery is deeply discharged. I don't think this is related to their security stuff.

I think steb nailed it.  With a lot of Apple's lithium batteries, when really really dead they require a process similar to this.  Quite often they'll be beyond saving though.

Canon General / Re: How to be a bad photographer.
« on: October 09, 2013, 12:30:31 PM »
Very good post.

If you want to be a bad photographer you need to find inspiration here:
Excellent site.  I disagree though when he says photographers shouldn't burn their finished images and let their clients print them how they want.

I'd much rather spend $3k on my wedding photography, get all the images on disc, then print them myself or make my own albums.  I'm probably not the average client as I have a 19" printer at home, and am a couture book and asuka book client.

Paying $2-3k and then having a potentially ballooning print cost with insane markups from the photographer bugs me.  Could be that personally I'm used to being paid by the job and not charging per print though.

Thankfully though my GAS has been mostly cured.

I've slimmed down my fleet of camera gear and rent when I need to for specific tasks.
Now my gear list is: 6D, Sigma 35/1.4, Canon 70-200 f/4IS.
Recently I've rented: 500L II, 5D3, 200/2 IS
Down the pipe is: 1DX, 200-400, 5D3, 70-200/2.8L II, 16-35.

I ran the numbers and it makes way more sense for me to rent than tie up capital in gear.  Rental is also 100% tax deductible which is good.

Asking a digital photog for unedited images is like going to restaurant and asking the chef to take a steak out of the freezer and slap it straight onto a plate and serve it up.

Even uploading, backing up, sorting and rating is part of the editing process. Maybe some cropping thrown in at least. Then there's output sharpening. So saying you don't do PP is basically jpeg in camera straight to client, no middle man PC work at all. I'm sure some people work like that and make money (excluding sports photogs on deadlines where the editor needs the shots right away) but they can't be all that great which is why they value their own work so cheaply.

I've run into this before.  I didn't want unedited images to save money, I was paying the photog the same either way.  I really liked her images, we just didn't share the same post philosophy.  I told her to rate and edit down, but send me her edited JPEGs and RAWs.

Also, I was willing to spend a serious amount of time editing each image, far more than she would be able to.  I'm not opposed to compositing faces from one shot on to another, if for example, I looked really good in one, and my fiancé blinked and vice versa.  My fiancé is a blinker with ETTL, so I'm used to doing this for her.  Unless you take the time to use manual flash she'll blink in over 80% of shots with ETTL.

It let me sharpen to my output, and resize to my needs, I was also able to composite multiple exposures as necessary, she took beautiful photos, and I retouched them how I like and it worked out great.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14