Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10 »
 on: Today at 02:11:17 AM 
Started by juliche - Last post by juliche
still available

 on: Today at 01:54:53 AM 
Started by nemophoto - Last post by OnyimBob
Might be wrong but I think it happened with Version 5 - can't remember why???

 on: Today at 01:49:27 AM 
Started by Dave (Isle of Skye) - Last post by BradSmith
I had two reasons for my comment.  People engaged in the ongoing debate will most likely disagree with both.
First, I thought the "combative" tone during an off topic discussion of semantics on a photo forum was, a little like kids in the playground kicking sand at each other, just for the pleasure of kicking sand.  Yes, I know.  I'm sensitive. 
Secondly, all of this is happening well over 400 posts into a topic about Adobe Creative Cloud's reception/implementation.   Long ago in this thread, long trains of posts went off into new, unrelated territory to the Topic.   The semantics of Destructive/Non-Destructive is the most recent example.   How would anyone browsing the Topic Titles have any idea that there was a "destructive/non-destructive" semantics debate occurring.  None of those searchers will ever get the chance to be either fascinated or informed by the discussion (as you have been), or shake their head as to the uselessness of this back and forth discussion (as I have been).  I say useless because all of the participants in the discussion understand exactly how all the software being discussed works in this regard, so a heated, semantics battle about what to call the software's behavior seems useless to me.

I assumed that if the moderator followed my suggestion and closed this Topic, then one of the participants would open a new topic with a title that somehow remotely identified what was being discussed.   Or one of the participants would come to their senses and start that new topic themselves now.   Focused Topics that more or less stay on track......I think they are a much better way to enable people to come to a discussion of interest, or avoid a Topic of disinterest.


Brad, I totally disagree, I for one have found this discussion both fascinating and informative. OK, it might have become a little combative at times, but none the less informative. There is nothing wrong with a spirited debate, just look away if it's annoying you.  Wink

 on: Today at 01:41:41 AM 
Started by Colorado David - Last post by Petrus
Using typical landscape apertures of 8 and 11 vignetting is a non-issue. If one is not shooting pictures which include close distance objects, i.e. which can be shot without a tripod even by just turning the body, nodal point shift is also a non-issue. Make some tests and refine the technique when the faults become readily apparent. There is no law against shooting stitch panoramas without an Otus and nodal point tripod head system.

 on: Today at 01:39:24 AM 
Started by felix5616 - Last post by plugsnpixels
The 2007 Mac Pro (and perhaps models on either side of it) were notoriously flakey. I was gifted one by a colleague who couldn't bear to fight with it anymore (he had Apple replace various parts and it still restarted randomly, etc.). I learned a lot working on it myself (not as my main machine) and ended up parting it out and shipping pieces all over the country courtesy of ebay...

Anyway, I would be hesitant to put any money into even the later ones (another colleague has a 2009 model that won't boot, even after repairs). I would personally build a Hackintosh out of new parts before buying one of these older Mac Pros. Even if I got another for free I could never trust it.

 on: Today at 01:33:06 AM 
Started by BartvanderWolf - Last post by BartvanderWolf
There is a possible improvement of the tuning of the EWA Lanczos 3 deblur that I've been thinking of trying out for a long time but never found the time to do carefully.
It goes like this:
Create a synthetic image which is light gray on the left and dark gray on the right, with a perfectly sharp vertical interface between the two.
Now, for all deblurs between the LanczosRadius one and the LanczosSharp one, enlarge this image a lot (128 times, say) with the corresponding EWA Lanczos (with -define filter:blur=value, where value ranges roughtly from .91 to 1).
Crop the result so boundary effects don't matter, and measure the largest undershoot (or overshoot).
Question: Which deblurs are local minimizers? (There may be more than one.)
A similar question concerns the second overshoot (or undershoot).
I expect, without having any solid basis for it, that there is a local minimizer at, roughly, .94 or .95.

Hi Nicolas,

I'll see what I can do. Just to be sure, when you talk about 'deblur', you have the IM expert function (like '-define filter:blur=0.95 ') in mind, correct? The deblur expert function does have a nice auto-scaling of the kernel support size property, although it is probably less effective than a (slower) Deconvolution in actually restoring some detail.

The only reservation I have about the type of target you describe is, that in practice such a sharp edge can only be provided by a vector / CGI image source. A digital camera will always create a small amount of blur (I've rarely seen an image with less than 0.7 Gaussian blur with very good lenses, unless already sharpened to death). That is due to the residual lens aberrations, the IR and optional optical Low-pass filters, and the sensor element's area sampling (it's not a point sampler). Then there is usually a Bayer CFA demosaicing required as well, to reconstruct a full RGB image from undersampled colors.

So with that in mind, while a sharp discontinuity makes a nice torture test, I'll probably also do the same test with a, say Gaussian 0.39 (a theoretical 1 pixel sharp edge transition from an area sampling device), pre-blurred edge. That's not point-sample Gaussian blur, but one with an adjusted shape, like my PSF generator tool can produce. That would allow to design an operation that does not attempt to overcompensate for artifacts that are never encountered in real images. Cartoons and other line drawings, are perhaps better vectorized before resampling anyway, although it would be nice if they too can be handled reasonably well with the same resampling method.

There is also a similar optimization that is linked to how I determined that the Keys spline are optimal, among BC-splines, for EWA resampling. It has to do with affine gradients as closely as possible, a very attractive property from a numerical analysis viewpoint. I'll keep that in mind.
The tricky thing is that infinite deblur is most likely the global winner in both cases. It's really local minimizers I'm looking for.

I'm not sure I fully understand, could you explain? I'm always in for optimizations, so I want to understand exactly what can be done to see if it can be implemented in a practical way ...


 on: Today at 01:13:49 AM 
Started by dreed - Last post by duane_bolland
Iíve never used the desktop version, but I found the browser version to be minimally adequate and the iPhone version is really nice.  I have no need for a tablet either, but the iPhone is a seriously useful tool.  Besides TPE, I use Tide Graph, a DOF calculator, Pocket Universe and more.  TPE in your pocket trumps TPE on your desktop any day. 

 on: Today at 12:59:29 AM 
Started by PWS - Last post by adokeeffe
I too am looking at a new Macbook for university, both as a mobile editing machine for my photography unit, and as a general 'on the go' laptop.

My philosophy though is that a computer is only useful to you when it is computing, it's not much use if it doesn't exist. And while more may seem better, unless you're working on extremely high resolution 16-bit PSD files with dozens of layers and masks, or doing very intensive post-production on high resolution video or audio, the current crop of Macbooks are more than sufficient. Also worth keeping in mind is that the general word among technology sites is that the Broadwell series processors have been constantly delayed, and won't be available to manufacturers until the end of this year, with high volume not expected until early next year. A new generation of Macs may well be announced in September or October, but don't expect to be able to run out and buy one. And even if you could, would a new Macbook really do anything that the current generation cannot do?


 on: Today at 12:58:30 AM 
Started by Colorado David - Last post by BernardLanguillier
Thanks for the reply.  I'll just play devil's advocate for a minute.  Assuming that the problem of focal length creep was mitigated with a bit of gaffer tape, the variation in focus won't be a real issue.  So now then for the devil's advocate; if people are shooting panos handheld and panning at the waist or knees and getting results that they're willing to post on this forum, aren't the potential issues minimal?  I know that Bernard is mostly using the Otus, but what are others using?

Zooms do work but you need to be aware that the nodal point position changes with focal length.

Using DxO helps reduce light fall off, but PTGui Pro does that very well too.


 on: Today at 12:27:06 AM 
Started by KPV - Last post by CptZar
I am very happy with mine. I just watched a video for the A6000 on which gives an overview of it's functions. Lot of those are the same as of the A7r. I had no idea, how much cool technology is in the Sony. And that after shooting it for months.  If I was shooting people, which I don't do enough, that face recognition, registration and then tracking function would really excite me. By the way one of the things, which would just not be possible with an OVF.

I don't see the shutter shake problems and if some images do not habe a 36MP resolution but more a 24MP resolution, I couldn't care less. Lens line up? Choose whatever you want. They all fit. Native lenses? 16-35 coming very soon, 24-70, imho an excellent lens, a very sharp 70-200. 50/1.8 which is one of the best lenses you will find, only outperformed by the Otus, and that only wide open. More primes announced.

Lossy compression? There is tons of discussion out there. Actually I remember a very interesting thread here at

Anything missing? Ah, I forgot weight and size, half of a DSLR.

The D810? There will always be a new kid on the block. And the next A7 or A9, however they may call it, will have the fastest autofocus, EFC, and all the other distractions people find now will be gone.

Isn't that a train o jump on?



Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10 »