Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: IQ260 WiFi... anyone seen it in action  (Read 15377 times)
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 543



WWW
« Reply #80 on: April 28, 2013, 12:28:09 PM »
ReplyReply

This will be my last post with a thread that Fred has started as a sub rosa dig against medium format......

Fred, I can say with certainty that you won't be purchasing or using a product (IQ260) from a company that you have ranted against for the past number of months. I will buy you a beer and burger if I am wrong.
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #81 on: April 28, 2013, 12:46:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Wow.

I normally just browse the Capture One part of the forum as I am in the software dept.

However, I am currently touring the USA on the IQ2 World Tour as one of the speakers. So far Toronto (yep, I know that's not in the USA. Wink, New York and Miami, next stop Chicago.

So, I thought I would have a quick look at the MF forum.

I think my conclusion to draw Fred, is that if it didn't pass the FCC test (plus multiple other tests that one engineer has been spending 90% of his time on), that you wouldn't be able to buy it and will be spared from the 'dangers'.

Moving on from lunacy, this is my fourth in total of IQ2 events. The WiFi implementation is working brilliantly.

As Doug pointed out sometime ago, the reasons for Joe's slow performance was due to an option in Capture Pilot which we will improve.  Respecting retina resolution does make the zooming into the image slower.

If you have watched any of the IQ2 events you will know that the IQ2 only sends to the iPad the 'tiles' from the image that are required for the 100% view.  So it is not like we have to render out a whole image for you to zoom into 100%.  100% details are cached so you can browse around an image without it having to redraw previously visited areas.

WiFi can be turned on and off if you are not wearing a tin hat.

Wifi can operate in Ad Hoc mode or via a router if one is available.

From an R&D standpoint this is only the beginning of what we can do and I am sure it will lead to lots of exciting options for reviewing and control.

Hope to see some of you in next stop Chicago.

http://www.anpdm.com/newsletter/888051/424559477740425C4571

David


You may try to dismiss this as lunacy and make sarcastic comments on tin hats.

How about this.
If it's lunacy can you show us at least one study on dual WiFi antennas being placed
at under and inch from the very complex and delicate structure of the eye that demonstrates that it is safe and does not
result in any alterations.
Can you also cite any other Wi-Fi product that puts a Wi-Fi antenna right in front of the eye?
« Last Edit: April 28, 2013, 02:11:00 PM by FredBGG » Logged
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 543



WWW
« Reply #82 on: April 28, 2013, 12:49:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Fred, why on earth do you give a shit???
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #83 on: April 28, 2013, 01:05:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Fred, why on earth do you give a shit???

Because I "give a shit".

For example a photographer just added a camera and lenses to his system.
It looked like his might not of arrived in time so I lent him my camera and lenses to use with his IQ160.
Never spoken to him before, but seeing he was going into a rather large job I thought it
would be nice to help out. I'm sure he will find a way to help someone else out sooner or later.



Logged
kdphotography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 709


WWW
« Reply #84 on: April 28, 2013, 01:09:51 PM »
ReplyReply

You may try to dismiss this as lunacy and make sarcastic comments on tin hats.

How about this.
If it's lunacy can you show us at least one study on dual WiFi antennas being placed
at under and inch from the very complex and delicate structure of the eye that demonstrates that it is safe and does not
result in any alterations.

You're more apt to be injured by running, tripping and poking your eye out with that "external antennae" you suggested than any of this lunacy posted here.  Of course, I don't run with scissors either.  Well, I guess if you don't like the stylish tin hats, you can always wrap the IQ260/280 in tin foil shield.  Might as well do the same to the iPad.  Hey, more weather proofing while you're at it...   Roll Eyes

I recommend Reynold's Heavy Duty Aluminum Foil, not because it is a better WiFi shield, but because summer is fast approaching and heavy duty foil can serve double duty and is better for BBQ season.  And I give a shit.  Grin  And it's the same difference really. Your loaning out a camera to someone has absolutely nothing to do with the WiFi capabilities of the IQ260/280 (both Phase One systems in which it is very apparent you have zero interest in using or purchasing).  If you think you have standing, make a complaint to the FCC and FTC.  

 Wink ken
« Last Edit: April 28, 2013, 01:29:14 PM by kdphotography » Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #85 on: April 28, 2013, 01:37:21 PM »
ReplyReply


Moving on from lunacy, this is my fourth in total of IQ2 events. The WiFi implementation is working brilliantly.


David


David.

I will not take offense to your accusation of Lunacy and comment on the software and workflow implementation
of WiFi preview/review that phase one came up with.
Brilliant is the right word. The idea of moving around only the data needed to display what is seen on the screen is really smart.
It's efficient and logical. The cashing of previously viewed parts of the image makes that even better.

Burried in the thread I made some suggestions that I think could be handy for certain users.

For example one thing that photographers will often want to do is check focus on the eyes.
Using face recognition on the ipad side could be very handy to speed things up.

Full length photo is uploaded to the ipad.
The ipad in the background looks for the face.
The ipad requests the tile of the face from the back and caches it ready for the photographer
to view without having to wait for the image to come from the back.
IF I am not mistaken there is already face recognition in the iPad that might be able to be leveraged.

Another option that might be worth considering is an option to initiate sending files to the ipad when done shooting
a set up or part of a setup. A quickly accessible optional menu item.

It could be used like this..

Photographer shooting with a MF SLR and IQ2.
HE is shooting away with his eye jammed up to the viewfinder with the WiFi on "hold" (paused so to speak).
Any time the photographer pauses he or she can send a few frames over to the iPad.
You could have an option to send frames for example starting from the last ones or send 1 in 5.
You could then have this option  set up to go back to "hold" when the photographer half presses the shutter release.

This could be useful in  several ways. First it would reduce exposure of the eye to the Wifi RF, save batter use, as well as help keep clutter off the iPad during a shoot. There are also many times that in the flow of things one needs to keep shooting even if the subject looks wrong just to move past what is wrong. This would be a nice way to keep this sort of stuff in the camera and off the Ipad. There is no reason to show either client or
subject the wonky shots.
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 953



WWW
« Reply #86 on: April 28, 2013, 05:15:07 PM »
ReplyReply

David.

I will not take offense to your accusation of Lunacy and comment on the software and workflow implementation
of WiFi preview/review that phase one came up with.
Brilliant is the right word. The idea of moving around only the data needed to display what is seen on the screen is really smart.
It's efficient and logical. The cashing of previously viewed parts of the image makes that even better.

Burried in the thread I made some suggestions that I think could be handy for certain users.

For example one thing that photographers will often want to do is check focus on the eyes.
Using face recognition on the ipad side could be very handy to speed things up.

Full length photo is uploaded to the ipad.
The ipad in the background looks for the face.
The ipad requests the tile of the face from the back and caches it ready for the photographer
to view without having to wait for the image to come from the back.
IF I am not mistaken there is already face recognition in the iPad that might be able to be leveraged.

Another option that might be worth considering is an option to initiate sending files to the ipad when done shooting
a set up or part of a setup. A quickly accessible optional menu item.

It could be used like this..

Photographer shooting with a MF SLR and IQ2.
HE is shooting away with his eye jammed up to the viewfinder with the WiFi on "hold" (paused so to speak).
Any time the photographer pauses he or she can send a few frames over to the iPad.
You could have an option to send frames for example starting from the last ones or send 1 in 5.
You could then have this option  set up to go back to "hold" when the photographer half presses the shutter release.

This could be useful in  several ways. First it would reduce exposure of the eye to the Wifi RF, save batter use, as well as help keep clutter off the iPad during a shoot. There are also many times that in the flow of things one needs to keep shooting even if the subject looks wrong just to move past what is wrong. This would be a nice way to keep this sort of stuff in the camera and off the Ipad. There is no reason to show either client or
subject the wonky shots.

Fred,

I am not an expert on wireless technology nor have the technical knowledge to make sound comments.  When the IQ2 begins to ship and you are ready to purchase, if you feel there is a safety issue then I would direct your comments to the relevant licensing authority by which we are measured.

Now, you make some very good suggestions to the use of wireless tech in the IQ2!

As I said this is only the beginning and I am sure, well positive, we will add to the wireless capabilities of the IQ2 series. 

I've no idea if face recognition is an API that can be leveraged in the iPad.  If it is then certainly that kind of option could be possible if the data moving around doesn't take too much toll on performance.

Lots of possibilities.

David
Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
sgilbert
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


« Reply #87 on: April 28, 2013, 06:41:47 PM »
ReplyReply

"When the IQ2 begins to ship and you are ready to purchase, if you feel there is a safety issue then I would direct your comments to the relevant licensing authority by which we are measured."

 Smiley
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #88 on: April 28, 2013, 07:37:56 PM »
ReplyReply

"When the IQ2 begins to ship and you are ready to purchase, if you feel there is a safety issue then I would direct your comments to the relevant licensing authority by which we are measured."

 Smiley

Ever heard of rental?

One does not necessarily have to buy something to be concerned with the safety of it's use or the most prudent way of using
a first time implementation of WiFi less than an inch from the eye. That said if the promised new body from Phase is a massive improvement
on the current DF I would most likely be a Phase One owner again.
Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2765


WWW
« Reply #89 on: April 29, 2013, 07:31:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, it's truly uncharted territory using a wifi device near your head.

Except for the 250 million iPhones sold and the enormous number of wifi-enabled Android phones.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2013, 07:37:38 AM by Doug Peterson » Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
gerald.d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 383


« Reply #90 on: April 29, 2013, 07:59:12 AM »
ReplyReply

This has been covered already Doug.

It takes a lot more power to broadcast a wifi signal than it does to receive one, so unless you're habitually making and receiving phone calls whilst your Android or iPhone is serving traffic to a tethered device, I'm not sure your comment is at all relevant.
Logged
Kolor-Pikker
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #91 on: April 29, 2013, 08:55:07 AM »
ReplyReply

This has been covered already Doug.

It takes a lot more power to broadcast a wifi signal than it does to receive one, so unless you're habitually making and receiving phone calls whilst your Android or iPhone is serving traffic to a tethered device, I'm not sure your comment is at all relevant.
Except that it's an existing feature, and on a mass market device, certainly the FCC wouldn't pass something with an optional feature that could cause harm, even if the 99% won't use it? To put it in different terms, would it be alright to install machine guns in cars, just because the switch to fire them was in the trunk? Or a 3 hour long movie filled with friendship and happiness needs only 5 seconds of gruesome death to bump the rating up to mature audiences.

Personally, if I were reviewing the technical parameters of the iPhone, and someone said "oh, and you can turn it into a wifi hotspot that can fry your brains, but no one's going too use that", I wouldn't let the device pass.

I'm not of the tin foil hat crowd though, we have so much magnetic radiation around us every day in any typical city environment, with at least a dosen different wireless devices in any office, that I highly doubt it can have a detrimental effect on out health any more than it may already have.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2013, 09:07:09 AM by Kolor-Pikker » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #92 on: April 29, 2013, 09:04:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, it's truly uncharted territory using a wifi device near your head.

Except for the 250 million iPhones sold and the enormous number of wifi-enabled Android phones.

Very big difference Doug. WiFi enables cell phones are used on the side of the head and the antennas of
modern smart phones are placed on the bottom of the phone that results in the antennas being about 2 to 3 inches from the side if the face.
On the side of the face there are bones before any organs and the sensitive parts of the inner ear are quite deep in the head.

Also the uncharted territory is placing the WiFi antennas RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE EYE and MUCH CLOSER. The eye is also directly exposed
and is or a spherical shape as well as seated in a conical/spherical eye socket. Both these factors can lead to hotspots and NO SAR TESTING
takes into account eye structure or the bones around it. Research studying the RF absorption of different organs in the  body found three organs
that have higher absorption rates. The testicles, the kidneys and the eyes. The eyes being the most exposed.

This week end I asked an Eye Surgeon (award winning researcher and surgeon currently with UCLA) what he thought about this and his immediate response was that the positioning of the antenna right in front of the eye is a bad idea. You should have seen his face.
He told me as I already had read that low intensity RF is used to treat certain eye conditions by modifying the connective tissue
around the lens.

Another thing. I went to the FCC website and looked up the Samsung Galaxy SIII SAR testing reports.
It is quite interesting. Being a smart phone that is both dual band and WiFi enabled all three were tested and at different frequencies.
Thanks to this one can see a good comparison between WiFi and cell signal SAR levels.
What is interesting is that the SAR level of the cell signal is only 4.8 times stronger than the WiFi SAR level. And these were measured on the side of the  head with the phone in inclined position with the antenna about two inches from the  cheek with just the speaker touching the ear.

It is also important to consider that the Samsung Galaxy is a billion  dollar product and much more work goes into it as far as minimizing SAR levels.


Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #93 on: April 29, 2013, 09:23:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Except that it's an existing feature, and on a mass market device, certainly the FCC wouldn't pass something with an optional feature that could cause harm, even if the 99% won't use it? To put it in different terms, would it be alright to install machine guns in cars, just because the switch to fire them was in the trunk? Or a 3 hour long movie filled with friendship and happiness needs only 5 seconds of gruesome death to bump the rating up to mature audiences.

Personally, if I were reviewing the technical parameters of the iPhone, and someone said "oh, and you can turn it into a wifi hotspot that can fry your brains, but no one's going too use that", I wouldn't let the device pass.

First of all the FCC DOES NOT DO ANY TESTING. The testing is carried out by Independent private companies. The situation  is similar in Canada and if you look at the safety statement for Canada in the manual of products it states that the item has passed regulatory tests, but that that is not a
statement by the Canadian gov that it is safe.

The SAR testing procedure tests for absorption using a plastic half body cast filled with sugar/salt water. It does not come close to a realistic model
for the eye that is a very complex organ that is exposed to the surface and has 2,000,000 rods and nerves.
What is also interesting is that the plastic body cast called a Phantom is made from a shape developed by the Army that is based on the size of a
soldiers head that is not representative of the general public.

Then there is a last factor to be considered. Cell phones use very smart power optimization and bring the transmission signal as low as possible
in  order to preserve battery power and keep signal congestion in general down. Power levels can also be lowered to a point that includes thousands of digital errors because the data being transmitted for speaking is only for communication purposes and the acceptable level of artifacts is quite high. Sending digital files over WiFi cannont be done with errors especially if compression is involved. WiFi does use lower power, but does not have the power management of cell phone transmission. Just try using a very low power WiFi device in a building with many different WiFi networks running at the same time. It just won't work, even in close proximity.



Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #94 on: April 29, 2013, 10:00:15 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm not of the tin foil hat crowd though, we have so much magnetic radiation around us every day in any typical city environment, with at least a dosen different wireless devices in any office, that I highly doubt it can have a detrimental effect on out health any more than it may already have.

Proximity makes a MASSIVE difference when it comes to RF signals.
When you are out and about in the city the RF signals are never coming from very very close. When a signal comes from a distance the effect on the body is very different from when it is coming from very close and directly infront of an exposed organ like the eye.

Also as far as a WiFi cluttered office goes you should be aware of the fact that FCC regulations only take into account one device AND DO NOT TESTING with combined devices. It's a complete gray area as far as what the impact of multiple wireless devices all going off at the same time
in a confined space.

Just last week I was over at my favorite restaurant owned by a triathlete, ironman and marathon runner.
He is a vegan and young. He and his doctors are puzzled by the fact that he has high blood pressure.
Well his wireless router is about two feet from where he works 90% of the time
 and he runs two laptops and his two cell phone (on WiFi) that are on the counter.
The signals go through him daily for hours.
I borrowed an  RF measuring device from the tech department of a broadcast TV show and went and measured the signals
that were in the area he works in. Well the signal was high especially if two of the devices went off at the same time.
He is replacing everything with hard wired lines and is moving the WiFi access point to the opposite side of the restaurant.
It will be interesting to see what happens.

Going back to the issue of multiple devices lets consider this.
High speed flash sync at 1/1600th on MF requires using the Prophoto wireless sync in high speed more that keeps the two radios
connected all the time. If the photographer is also using WiFi from his or her back that is two devices transmitting at the same time
in very close proximity. I wonder what even the somewhat limited SAR testing would find if this setup were tested.

It would also be very interesting to see what the  hotspots that could be created from shooting in front of a giant silver Elinchrom Octa or the
giant Broncolor 130" para. I'll do a test with my Octas.
Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2765


WWW
« Reply #95 on: April 29, 2013, 11:14:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Just last week I was over at my favorite restaurant owned by a triathlete, ironman and marathon runner.
He is a vegan and young. He and his doctors are puzzled by the fact that he has high blood pressure.
Well his wireless router is about two feet from where he works 90% of the time
 and he runs two laptops and his two cell phone (on WiFi) that are on the counter.
The signals go through him daily for hours.
I borrowed an  RF measuring device from the tech department of a broadcast TV show and went and measured the signals
that were in the area he works in. Well the signal was high especially if two of the devices went off at the same time.
He is replacing everything with hard wired lines and is moving the WiFi access point to the opposite side of the restaurant.
It will be interesting to see what happens.

FredBGG MD
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2765


WWW
« Reply #96 on: April 29, 2013, 11:30:44 AM »
ReplyReply

It takes a lot more power to broadcast a wifi signal than it does to receive one, so unless you're habitually making and receiving phone calls whilst your Android or iPhone is serving traffic to a tethered device, I'm not sure your comment is at all relevant.

And again, according to all the engineers I've spoken to safety studies are normally done at max transmit/receive. Wifi enabled devices capable of transmitting and receiving are tested while transmitting and receiving.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #97 on: April 29, 2013, 11:56:53 AM »
ReplyReply

FredBGG MD

Same old pattern. Attack with insults and sarcasm.
I'm not an MD and my friend is seeing more than one MD.

One doctor told me that they are using low RF signals to disrupt nerve activity that when over active can cause high blood pressure.

Here is a link to the studies made by Emory University.

http://shared.web.emory.edu/whsc/news/releases/2011/12/emory-study-uses-radiofrequency-energy-to-permanently-lower-blood-pressure.html

Again.... can you point to any studies that demonstrate that RF form WiFi in very CLOSE FRONTAL PROXIMITY
to the eye is safe.

What is also very interesting is that testing required by the FCC does not involve using a real human being.
One would wonder why once SAR tests are passed on a phantom why not do some testing on a real body?

Again can you point to any professional use of a WiFi device that has it's antenna in such close frontal proximity to the eye?
Logged
Steve Hendrix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1096


WWW
« Reply #98 on: April 29, 2013, 12:05:25 PM »
ReplyReply

What about all these?

http://gizmodo.com/5903007/the-best-inexpensive-point+and+shoot-camera-with-wi+fi


Is there any such discussion on the other LL camera discussion forums? No? Oh, surprise.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
MFDB: Phase One/Leaf-Mamiya/Hasselblad/Leica/Sinar
TechCam: Alpa/Cambo/Arca Swiss/Sinar
Direct: 404.543.8475
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #99 on: April 29, 2013, 12:18:52 PM »
ReplyReply

What about all these?

http://gizmodo.com/5903007/the-best-inexpensive-point+and+shoot-camera-with-wi+fi


Is there any such discussion on the other LL camera discussion forums? No? Oh, surprise.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

And you call that a good example...... I'll get back to you on this one.....
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad