ReanimationLP
Sep 17, 10:21 PM
One day, just rush into the store and shout "I Love You!". That should get her attention.
Yeah... and get beat down or arrested for stalking. lol. :D
Yeah... and get beat down or arrested for stalking. lol. :D
flopticalcube
May 3, 11:13 AM
As an American so you have no idea what conservative or liberal really means. Those words have been distorted by your politics over the last half century. Conservative is supposed to mean "balance the budget and pay down the debt" through prudent spending cuts and no unnecessarily raising of taxes.
which oddly was a Liberal trademark in the pre-Harper days.
What your so-called conservatives have done is cut taxes for the rich only, increased spending in the military industrial complex and refused to pass healthcare reform that could potentially save billions of dollars per year. The US spends more on healthcare per capita than any other country but it has the worst healthcare per capita than any other country in the world. Even Cuba has better healthcare.
Being a conservative is not about having no social programs but rather it is about being fiscally responsible with tax payers money and spending on social programs that serve the majority of citizens and help promote a strong and healthy workforce. The workforce is the engine of the economy.
Tax cuts are not a bad thing but they should only be done when the government is certain that the budget will be balanced or when they are needed for economic stimulus and they should be across the board or to people on the bottom end.
I suspect the Conservative govt we have seen in the past few years will look nothing like the next few. Their true colours are about to be revealed. Not quite Tea Party but still fairly unsavoury.
which oddly was a Liberal trademark in the pre-Harper days.
What your so-called conservatives have done is cut taxes for the rich only, increased spending in the military industrial complex and refused to pass healthcare reform that could potentially save billions of dollars per year. The US spends more on healthcare per capita than any other country but it has the worst healthcare per capita than any other country in the world. Even Cuba has better healthcare.
Being a conservative is not about having no social programs but rather it is about being fiscally responsible with tax payers money and spending on social programs that serve the majority of citizens and help promote a strong and healthy workforce. The workforce is the engine of the economy.
Tax cuts are not a bad thing but they should only be done when the government is certain that the budget will be balanced or when they are needed for economic stimulus and they should be across the board or to people on the bottom end.
I suspect the Conservative govt we have seen in the past few years will look nothing like the next few. Their true colours are about to be revealed. Not quite Tea Party but still fairly unsavoury.
-hh
Mar 21, 09:24 PM
Its funny that film and film cameras were so difficult to get right, but there was almost no post-processing. Now we shoot computers with lenses attached, get great technical results, yet post-process our photos to death.
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
madhatter61
Apr 5, 09:54 PM
It will be interesting to see if Apple develops its own controller chip for ARM processors. Currently the Intel controller is designed for Intel processors that incorporate PCI express architecture. ARM architecture is quite different. Thunderbolt is currently designed for the standard Mac line of products using Intel Processors. All the mobile products are Arm based processors.
The idea of having a common connector like minidisplay port is quite awesome, and the utilization is all in the software control approach. Dual channel, full bidirectional, with the possibility of multiple protocols running simultaneously with very high data rates. Apple is just covering their future bases, and doing it very nicely.
I saw posts asking about backward compatibility possibilities. The answer is a definite no. But the future arrangements will be most interesting.
One post wanted everything to go thru a standard phone jack. Not at all likely or even possible.
The idea of having a common connector like minidisplay port is quite awesome, and the utilization is all in the software control approach. Dual channel, full bidirectional, with the possibility of multiple protocols running simultaneously with very high data rates. Apple is just covering their future bases, and doing it very nicely.
I saw posts asking about backward compatibility possibilities. The answer is a definite no. But the future arrangements will be most interesting.
One post wanted everything to go thru a standard phone jack. Not at all likely or even possible.
more...
rhinosrcool
Feb 18, 12:17 PM
Steve doesn't look any thinner than the last two keynotes.
mrsir2009
Apr 24, 03:08 AM
This is for the 13" model as its the one I'm interested in:
1. Thunderbolt.
2. Backlit keyboard!
1. Thunderbolt.
2. Backlit keyboard!
more...
scottlinux
Sep 26, 12:05 AM
http://digg.com/tech_news/Leo_Laporte_proposes_using_the_term_netcast_instead_of_podcast
Netcast.
Netcast.
Earendil
Oct 9, 03:42 PM
Just what can Target say? "If you allow Apple do do something that might cut into out DVD sales we will intentionally sell fewer DVD" Kind of like holding a gun to your head threatening to shoot.
Well, the idea being that if Wal-mart (reported to be selling 40% of all DVDs in the US) and Target suddenly pull out of the DVD business, that would be a 40+% hit in DVD revenue, to which I don't think Apple could possibly pick up, nor would all those people go to Apple.
Now you say that people will just shop elsewhere, but that isn't going to be true either. Many people buy DVDs on either impulse or because they are cheap. Not everyone who would buy a DVD at Wal-Mart will suddenly be willing to another shop and pay $5 more.
Now, Wal-Mart and Target won't pull everything at once, so I'm not sure exactly what they could do. But anything they do WILL be felt by the movie industry in the short run at least.
And to those that say Apple won't put a dent in retail sales, you're wrong :)
Maybe not this month, maybe not this year. But in a 100 years we will be downloading all our entertainment, which means that sometime between now and then SOMEONE is going to take over that distribution. If Wal-Mart is in no position to make that move to online, than they have to stall those that are as much as possible until they are able to get in the game.
btw- how can Wal-mart make this claim about iTunes robbing retail when they themselves have an online music store. I'm not sure why a parallel can't be drawn between music and movies...
Well, the idea being that if Wal-mart (reported to be selling 40% of all DVDs in the US) and Target suddenly pull out of the DVD business, that would be a 40+% hit in DVD revenue, to which I don't think Apple could possibly pick up, nor would all those people go to Apple.
Now you say that people will just shop elsewhere, but that isn't going to be true either. Many people buy DVDs on either impulse or because they are cheap. Not everyone who would buy a DVD at Wal-Mart will suddenly be willing to another shop and pay $5 more.
Now, Wal-Mart and Target won't pull everything at once, so I'm not sure exactly what they could do. But anything they do WILL be felt by the movie industry in the short run at least.
And to those that say Apple won't put a dent in retail sales, you're wrong :)
Maybe not this month, maybe not this year. But in a 100 years we will be downloading all our entertainment, which means that sometime between now and then SOMEONE is going to take over that distribution. If Wal-Mart is in no position to make that move to online, than they have to stall those that are as much as possible until they are able to get in the game.
btw- how can Wal-mart make this claim about iTunes robbing retail when they themselves have an online music store. I'm not sure why a parallel can't be drawn between music and movies...
more...
thatisme
Mar 29, 08:42 AM
no manufacturer uses effective focal lengths to refer to lenses for dslrs (e. g. it's a 17-55 mm f/2.8 lens and not a 27-88 mm f/2.8 (equiv.) lens), be it a lens tailored for crop lenses or otherwise, but always the physical focal length.
Correct. Your lens is based in 35mm terms. So by utilizing a less than 35mm sensor'd camera, you are not using the full 35mm image being projected which is where this 1.6 factor comes into play.
Where RobbieDuncan is missing the boat, and most that are arguing incorrectly is that the image will be the same using an EF lens on either a 1.6 sensor'd camera or a FF sensor'd camera. The end result is that it will not. Focal length of the lens has not changed, but your image has.
For the EF-S lenses, since the rear element is smaller, your image circle is smaller, and is tailored to the 1.6 sensors... agreed? Ok. How can this now apply to 35mm? you don't have a full 35mm image circle projected through the lens. So apply your FOVCF to the actual focal length and you will get a hypothetical, imaginary number that equated to 35mm. But since your lens elements cant transmit a full 35mm image, then the argument goes out the window.
What does happen, as indicated by the linked image earlier whereby the 5D was modified to accept an EF-S lens, the image is not complete. Not enough image is sent through the optics of the lens. This shows exactly what my argument has been all along.... the image will be different. What a 1.6 camera is doing is taking that sample image, but only recording the center of it. So, Effectively, it is a zoomed image. So the Effective Focal Length for that image is bigger... say 50mm, where the lens may have been an EF-S 35mm.
Correct. Your lens is based in 35mm terms. So by utilizing a less than 35mm sensor'd camera, you are not using the full 35mm image being projected which is where this 1.6 factor comes into play.
Where RobbieDuncan is missing the boat, and most that are arguing incorrectly is that the image will be the same using an EF lens on either a 1.6 sensor'd camera or a FF sensor'd camera. The end result is that it will not. Focal length of the lens has not changed, but your image has.
For the EF-S lenses, since the rear element is smaller, your image circle is smaller, and is tailored to the 1.6 sensors... agreed? Ok. How can this now apply to 35mm? you don't have a full 35mm image circle projected through the lens. So apply your FOVCF to the actual focal length and you will get a hypothetical, imaginary number that equated to 35mm. But since your lens elements cant transmit a full 35mm image, then the argument goes out the window.
What does happen, as indicated by the linked image earlier whereby the 5D was modified to accept an EF-S lens, the image is not complete. Not enough image is sent through the optics of the lens. This shows exactly what my argument has been all along.... the image will be different. What a 1.6 camera is doing is taking that sample image, but only recording the center of it. So, Effectively, it is a zoomed image. So the Effective Focal Length for that image is bigger... say 50mm, where the lens may have been an EF-S 35mm.
Tones2
Apr 19, 10:03 AM
So what's this, an OLD white iPhone 4 prototype with 64 GB with a different version of iOS 4, none of which will ever be released? Wow, great news. :rolleyes:
Tony
Tony
more...
Time Less
Apr 21, 02:26 PM
When the current form-factor is fundamentally flawed:
1. Fragile build materials (glass that shatters)
:confused::eek:
1. Fragile build materials (glass that shatters)
:confused::eek:
Medium Rare
Mar 27, 11:58 AM
$106.9 litre.... Edmonton,Canada
more...
digiguy23
Dec 28, 01:17 PM
All the other Cellular providers is no different. I cancelled Verizon because of the lack of customer support in their stores and I had constant dropped calls.
As as for buying the iPhone, I replaced my iPhone 3G with the 3GS through the Online Apple Store. Came to my front door in 3 days. NO headaches, NO problems.
As as for buying the iPhone, I replaced my iPhone 3G with the 3GS through the Online Apple Store. Came to my front door in 3 days. NO headaches, NO problems.
mischief
Sep 20, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by LethalWolfe
I think I'm gonna kill the next person who uses a stupid car anology...;)
Lethal
You're right, Cars are a bad comparisson:
Better to compare Trucks. :D
Macs are like Semi's : the don't rev very high but they can haul a ****load of cargo from A to B.
PC's are like Chevy Avalanche: A nearly useless SUV with nearly every extra but guarenteed to work and look like **** in less than 5 years and always do a half-assed job on all but the basic navigation. :D
I think I'm gonna kill the next person who uses a stupid car anology...;)
Lethal
You're right, Cars are a bad comparisson:
Better to compare Trucks. :D
Macs are like Semi's : the don't rev very high but they can haul a ****load of cargo from A to B.
PC's are like Chevy Avalanche: A nearly useless SUV with nearly every extra but guarenteed to work and look like **** in less than 5 years and always do a half-assed job on all but the basic navigation. :D
more...
Abulia
Sep 27, 10:48 AM
Dooooooooooooooommmmmmm!!!!!
:eek: :eek: :eek:
:eek: :eek: :eek:
cmaier
Mar 25, 03:07 PM
While reading these pages, what amazes me is that many people keep calling KODAK a patent troll.
YET KODAK STILL MAKES DIGITAL CAMERAS AND PRINTERS BASED ON THESE PATENTS!
really? which printer or camera uses it? It should be marked with the patent number if it does.
Earth to MacRumors members... APPLE WILL LOSE TOO MOST LIKELY.
Doubtful. A judge already said they don't infringe.
YET KODAK STILL MAKES DIGITAL CAMERAS AND PRINTERS BASED ON THESE PATENTS!
really? which printer or camera uses it? It should be marked with the patent number if it does.
Earth to MacRumors members... APPLE WILL LOSE TOO MOST LIKELY.
Doubtful. A judge already said they don't infringe.
more...
macman916
Dec 1, 10:58 AM
If you want it, buy it. Stop complaining about other people's success. Lots of people sell 3rd party junk.
Thomas Harte
Nov 11, 05:31 AM
Ironically the Japanese site seems to crash Safari on my powerbook...
Ditto on my MacBook Pro.
Ditto on my MacBook Pro.
rhinosrcool
Feb 19, 02:23 AM
Steve looks the same as he did at the last two keynotes.
alamein
Nov 22, 11:09 PM
seeing the success of these kids i'm sure apple will start selling them too (only better quality)
davegregory
Mar 29, 07:34 AM
Robbieduncan is correct. The only reason the EF-S exists is because it's cheaper for Canon to make wide angle lenses with a short focus back (i.e. that the lens is closer to the mirror than EF lenses). It's purely consumer oriented! Lower-end - mid range cameras use the 1.6 FOVCF, making them inexpensive. Canon wants cheaper lenses so they can sell more lenses and cameras. That's it, plain and simple. They are technically identical to any EF lens in every other way but the mount depth.
Heilage
Apr 13, 12:16 AM
What about denying somebody a job because of their, say, intelligence? Charisma? Any number of things that are largely predetermined?
Ethnicity doesn't say anything other than the color of the persons skin. However, intelligence and stuff are things that actually can affect wether you are qualified or not. Two quite different things, if you ask me.
Ethnicity doesn't say anything other than the color of the persons skin. However, intelligence and stuff are things that actually can affect wether you are qualified or not. Two quite different things, if you ask me.
Geckotek
Apr 13, 12:00 PM
But most have nothing set up. I'm not exactly sure what that does, I think adds an extra step in querying the ISP. That always slows me down.
And, of course, the other half can be an issue, too. People never talk about that except when they want to download a brand new firmware or something. I see "waiting for xyz.com" plenty.
If you have nothing setup it will use DHCP to get your DNS from whatever device is providing you your IP address. For most people this would be a DSL or cable modem which is passing the DNS servers from their ISP.
So not setting it up is not an issue, unless your ISPs DNS servers suck.
But how do you know if it sucks? How do you know if Google's DNS servers are actually an improvment for you? You can't know until you test. There are several DNS test utilities you can download that will measure this for you and tell you. I highly suggest people not assume that using Google's DNS servers is always best. For some people it will actually perform worse. Test to know for sure.
And, of course, the other half can be an issue, too. People never talk about that except when they want to download a brand new firmware or something. I see "waiting for xyz.com" plenty.
If you have nothing setup it will use DHCP to get your DNS from whatever device is providing you your IP address. For most people this would be a DSL or cable modem which is passing the DNS servers from their ISP.
So not setting it up is not an issue, unless your ISPs DNS servers suck.
But how do you know if it sucks? How do you know if Google's DNS servers are actually an improvment for you? You can't know until you test. There are several DNS test utilities you can download that will measure this for you and tell you. I highly suggest people not assume that using Google's DNS servers is always best. For some people it will actually perform worse. Test to know for sure.
kwick87
Mar 16, 11:44 PM
$1.10/L for regular at the co-op across the way i think that makes it about $4.17/Gallon