Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #29829 > unrolled thread

Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-21 08:30 -0700
    Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 09:36 -0700
      Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 09:39 -0700
        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 10:14 -0700
        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-08-21 15:05 -0700
          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 15:21 -0700
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-08-21 16:04 -0700
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 16:13 -0700
                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 19:10 -0700
                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 19:29 -0700
                    Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-08-21 20:43 -0700
                      Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 21:07 -0700
                        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-08-22 02:14 -0700
                      Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 23:31 -0700
                        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-08-22 02:14 -0700
          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 15:24 -0700
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2012-08-21 15:51 -0700
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 16:08 -0700
        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-21 18:06 -0700
          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera John Young <jy@scallawags.net> - 2012-08-21 21:48 -0400
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 19:29 -0700
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 20:33 -0700
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-21 22:10 -0700
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 22:23 -0700
                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 23:31 -0700
                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 23:55 -0700
          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 19:29 -0700
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 19:40 -0700
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-21 22:09 -0700
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-21 23:31 -0700
      Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-21 18:01 -0700
        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-21 19:03 -0700
          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-21 22:17 -0700
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-22 00:37 -0700
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-22 00:55 -0700
                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-22 10:59 -0700
                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Tom Stiller <tom_stiller@yahoo.com> - 2012-08-22 14:28 -0400
                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-22 12:46 -0700
                    Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-22 15:37 -0700
                      Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-22 15:58 -0700
                        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2012-08-22 16:10 -0700
                          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-22 20:03 -0500
                          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-22 20:20 -0700
                            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2012-08-23 09:06 -0700
                              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-23 12:32 -0700
                                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2012-08-23 12:54 -0700
                                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-23 14:33 -0700
                                    Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2012-08-23 15:20 -0700
                                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-23 16:11 -0700
                                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-23 20:53 -0500
                                    Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-23 21:05 -0700
                        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-22 20:01 -0500
                          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVEsPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-22 20:44 -0700
                        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera salgud <spamboy6547@comcast.net> - 2012-08-23 08:12 -0600
            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-24 17:10 -0400
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2012-08-24 14:20 -0700
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-08-25 08:03 +1000
                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-25 09:21 -0400
                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-25 09:42 -0700
                    Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-25 13:01 -0400
                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-08-26 08:22 +1000
                    Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-26 11:41 -0400
                      Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-08-27 07:38 +1000
                        Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-26 17:48 -0400
                          Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-08-27 11:19 +1000
                            Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-27 17:13 -0400
                              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-08-28 08:05 +1000
                                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-27 18:44 -0400
                                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-08-28 11:27 +1000
                                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-27 20:31 -0500
              Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2012-08-24 21:41 -0700
                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Doug Anderson <ethelthelogremovethis@gmail.com> - 2012-08-24 22:29 -0700
                Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-08-25 09:22 -0400
                  Re: does anyone use their iPad as a camera Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-08-25 09:38 -0700

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#29880

In article <jy-3518BA.21485921082012@news.eternal-september.org>, John
Young <jy@scallawags.net> wrote:

> My 4s with the right camera app can outdo the D70 in most situations. 

that's unlikely. something might be wrong with your d70.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29882

On 2012-08-21 18:48:59 -0700, John Young <jy@scallawags.net> said:

> In article <michelle-228CFA.18060221082012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
>> but even though it is old, it is still generates superior quality pictures
>> compared to the iOS devices.
> 
> My 4s with the right camera app can outdo the D70 in most situations.
> For some people the iPad3 is far superior.

In your dreams! It seems you are a rabid advocate iOS photography and 
lack of understanding regarding the physical limitations of the 4S 
camera.

I own and use a 4S with several apps, and none of those combinations 
can match the performance of my other cameras, a Canon G11, a Nikon 
D300s, and yes, a Nikon D70.
I get reasonably acceptable images from my 4S, but what I get from my 
D300s, my G11, and my D70 are far superior to the 4s product.

Ultimately in photography, size matters, and I am not referring to the 
consumer megapixel race. So I will stick to my DSLR for anything I 
consider worth working on, and i will reserve my iphone 4S for those 
times i don't have anything more capable handy.

For you to contemplate:
A 4S shot, not bad, but pretty much a snapshot and cleaned up in Photoshop.
< http://db.tt/jzZlmAo7 >

Two G11 shots.
< http://db.tt/kNbjk2A0 >
< http://db.tt/wyKW5yB2 >

Two D300S shots:
< http://db.tt/w0bdoUro >
< http://db.tt/XvdIPNwE >

...and a D70 shot:
< http://db.tt/pjNfsqGg >

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29888

In article <jy-3518BA.21485921082012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 John Young <jy@scallawags.net> wrote:

> > but even though it is old, it is still generates superior quality 
> > pictures compared to the iOS devices.
> 
> My 4s with the right camera app can outdo the D70 in most situations. 

Outdo in what respects?  BTW, it's a D70s, a slight upgrade from the D70.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29890

On 2012-08-21 22:10:11 -0700, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <jy-3518BA.21485921082012@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  John Young <jy@scallawags.net> wrote:
> 
>>> but even though it is old, it is still generates superior quality
>>> pictures compared to the iOS devices.
>> 
>> My 4s with the right camera app can outdo the D70 in most situations.
> 
> Outdo in what respects?  BTW, it's a D70s, a slight upgrade from the D70.

The major upgrade was a slight change to the LCD and most importantly a 
firmware upgrade which was easily applied to the D70 making the only 
difference the LCD.

There is no functional difference between a D70 with the firmware 
upgrade and a D70S.

...and a D70, or a D70S has got mobile device cameras, iOS, or Android 
beat in all but pocketable convenience.


-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29895

In article <2012082122234350878-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> > Outdo in what respects?  BTW, it's a D70s, a slight upgrade from the D70.
> 
> The major upgrade was a slight change to the LCD and most importantly a 
> firmware upgrade which was easily applied to the D70 making the only 
> difference the LCD.

the firmware added everything that the d70s had that wasn't a physical
change, which was the lcd as you mentioned, plus a wired remote jack
that most people probably didn't use.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29897

On 2012-08-21 23:31:19 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <2012082122234350878-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
>>> Outdo in what respects?  BTW, it's a D70s, a slight upgrade from the D70.
>> 
>> The major upgrade was a slight change to the LCD and most importantly a
>> firmware upgrade which was easily applied to the D70 making the only
>> difference the LCD.
> 
> the firmware added everything that the d70s had that wasn't a physical
> change, which was the lcd as you mentioned, plus a wired remote jack
> that most people probably didn't use.

Yup!
My D70 uses the small IR remote.

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29878

In article <michelle-228CFA.18060221082012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > As always this is one of those times you should discount the megapixel 
> > > race, the D70 is a very capable camera at 6.3MP.
> > 
> > it is, but it's also an old camera. modern slrs are quite a bit better 
> > than the d70.
> 
> The D70s is about seven years old; we can't all keep buying new cameras 
> every time a new model is released.

who said you had to buy a new camera every time a new one is released?

how often do you buy apple products? 

are you still using the same mac you had in 2005? there wasn't an
iphone then, but i seem to recall you've had at least two iphones.

> but even though it is old, it is still generates superior quality pictures 
> compared to the iOS devices.

my point was that if a 7 year old slr can do better than an ios device,
then a current dslr (or even a modern p&s) will be *much* better.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29881

On 2012-08-21 19:29:04 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <michelle-228CFA.18060221082012@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
>>>> As always this is one of those times you should discount the megapixel
>>>> race, the D70 is a very capable camera at 6.3MP.
>>> 
>>> it is, but it's also an old camera. modern slrs are quite a bit better
>>> than the d70.
>> 
>> The D70s is about seven years old; we can't all keep buying new cameras
>> every time a new model is released.
> 
> who said you had to buy a new camera every time a new one is released?
> 
> how often do you buy apple products?
> 
> are you still using the same mac you had in 2005? there wasn't an
> iphone then, but i seem to recall you've had at least two iphones.
> 
>> but even though it is old, it is still generates superior quality pictures
>> compared to the iOS devices.
> 
> my point was that if a 7 year old slr can do better than an ios device,
> then a current dslr (or even a modern p&s) will be *much* better.

Agreed. There is no getting away from the handicap of physical sensor 
size found in the camera of any mobile device, iOS or Android.
...and no App is going to compensate for that.


-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29887

In article <210820121929042809%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > > > As always this is one of those times you should discount the 
> > > > megapixel race, the D70 is a very capable camera at 6.3MP.
> > > 
> > > it is, but it's also an old camera. modern slrs are quite a bit 
> > > better than the d70.
> > 
> > The D70s is about seven years old; we can't all keep buying new 
> > cameras every time a new model is released.
> 
> who said you had to buy a new camera every time a new one is released?

then why bother to say that it's an old camera?

> are you still using the same mac you had in 2005? 

Nope.  I am using the same Mac I had in July 2007, though.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29894

In article <michelle-BBD7A0.22091221082012@news.eternal-september.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > > > As always this is one of those times you should discount the 
> > > > > megapixel race, the D70 is a very capable camera at 6.3MP.
> > > > 
> > > > it is, but it's also an old camera. modern slrs are quite a bit 
> > > > better than the d70.
> > > 
> > > The D70s is about seven years old; we can't all keep buying new 
> > > cameras every time a new model is released.
> > 
> > who said you had to buy a new camera every time a new one is released?
> 
> then why bother to say that it's an old camera?

because if a camera from 7 years ago beats an iphone, then one from
this year will blow well past it because today's cameras are quite a
bit better than cameras from 7 years ago.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29861

In article <2012082109361980278-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
 Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> First you have to compare like images. The iPad, iPhone are jpeg files 
> while the NEF is an unprocessed RAW file and has to minimally be 
> processed via a Raw converter.

Why?  I was trying to show the best that each device can do.

> That said, of the iOS shots the non-HDR iPhone shot is the best

Even though it and the iPad shots completely wash out the sky?

> The iPad shot is awful, or should I say the worst of the four. 

It has the same sensor as and better optics than the iPhone 4.

You gave us your opinion as to which is better than which, but you didn't 
give us your reasons for your opinion.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29875

On 2012-08-21 18:01:59 -0700, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <2012082109361980278-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
>> First you have to compare like images. The iPad, iPhone are jpeg files
>> while the NEF is an unprocessed RAW file and has to minimally be
>> processed via a Raw converter.
> 
> Why?  I was trying to show the best that each device can do.

Fine. However, there are a few things to consider when viewing an 
unprocessed RAW file, especially a NEF when compared to the in camera 
sharpening, noise reduction, contrast,  and saturation levels applied 
to jpegs. That includes jpegs captured in your D70, iPhone, or iPad.
Also not all here are going to be able to view unprocessed NEFs natively

> 
>> That said, of the iOS shots the non-HDR iPhone shot is the best
> 
> Even though it and the iPad shots completely wash out the sky?

...and your point of focus was where?
Any P&S camera, where the exposure metering is some form of matrix 
metering around the point of aim is going to give you the "best" 
exposure metering it can around the point of aim, and both the iPad & 
iPhone are P&S cameras with limited exposure metering choices . Hence 
your blown sky.

> 
>> The iPad shot is awful, or should I say the worst of the four.
> 
> It has the same sensor as and better optics than the iPhone 4.

So? I made the comparison with your images and I gave you my opinion 
based on them. With the images you provided the iPad was the worst 
performer. Under different circumstances, with different subject matter 
it might do better. You did ask us to make a comparison and provide an 
opinion.

> 
> You gave us your opinion as to which is better than which, but you didn't
> give us your reasons for your opinion.

I made my comparison by downloading your images, and processing the NEF 
to create a jpeg.
I then took a look at 100% crops of different areas of each image to 
compare. My conclusion was made from that comparison. For the image you 
provided, for whatever reason, the iPad shot was poor, with out of 
focus detail making for a much softer image than the one produced with 
the iPhone.

Perhaps a different set would lead me to a different conclusion, but 
those were the ones you gave us.



-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29889

In article <2012082119032275249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
 Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> >> First you have to compare like images. The iPad, iPhone are jpeg 
> >> files while the NEF is an unprocessed RAW file and has to minimally 
> >> be processed via a Raw converter.
> > 
> > Why?  I was trying to show the best that each device can do.
> 
> Fine. However, there are a few things to consider when viewing an 
> unprocessed RAW file, especially a NEF when compared to the in camera 
> sharpening, noise reduction, contrast,  and saturation levels applied to 
> jpegs. That includes jpegs captured in your D70, iPhone, or iPad.

I didn't let any apps touch the iOS images; the only in-camera adjustment 
was to generate the HDR picture.

> Also not all here are going to be able to view unprocessed NEFs natively

Really?  All they have to do is download it and open it in Preview.  If 
they're using a Windows computer, I'm sure it has an application similar to 
Preview.

> >> That said, of the iOS shots the non-HDR iPhone shot is the best
> > 
> > Even though it and the iPad shots completely wash out the sky?
> 
> ...and your point of focus was where?
> Any P&S camera, where the exposure metering is some form of matrix 
> metering around the point of aim is going to give you the "best" 
> exposure metering it can around the point of aim, and both the iPad & 
> iPhone are P&S cameras with limited exposure metering choices . Hence 
> your blown sky.

The point of focus on all of the shots was the plant.

> I then took a look at 100% crops of different areas of each image to 
> compare. My conclusion was made from that comparison. For the image you 
> provided, for whatever reason, the iPad shot was poor, with out of 
> focus detail making for a much softer image than the one produced with 
> the iPhone.

You still haven't said why you rated the photos the way you did.  I'm not 
questioning your ratings; I'm asking how you reached your conclusions.  Oh, 
it would also help if we knew what your qualifications were.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29900

On 2012-08-21 22:17:46 -0700, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <2012082119032275249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> First you have to compare like images. The iPad, iPhone are jpeg
>>>> files while the NEF is an unprocessed RAW file and has to minimally
>>>> be processed via a Raw converter.
>>> 
>>> Why?  I was trying to show the best that each device can do.
>> 
>> Fine. However, there are a few things to consider when viewing an
>> unprocessed RAW file, especially a NEF when compared to the in camera
>> sharpening, noise reduction, contrast,  and saturation levels applied to
>> jpegs. That includes jpegs captured in your D70, iPhone, or iPad.
> 
> I didn't let any apps touch the iOS images; the only in-camera adjustment
> was to generate the HDR picture.

I was not referring to anything you might have done, just remember the 
Camera in the iOS devices is an App.
All jpeg files in any camera have the raw data from the sensor 
processed with various proprietary processes to produce the jpeg, 
regardless of you letting any apps touch the iOS images, they have had 
the sharpening, saturation, WB, contrast, the iOS developers determined 
was required for the production of jpegs within the iOS cameras. The 
production of HDR within iOS is not true multi-exposure HDR, unless you 
have an app which does that.
...and you don't get iOS RAW files from the iPhone, ...yet.

> 
>> Also not all here are going to be able to view unprocessed NEFs natively
> 
> Really?  All they have to do is download it and open it in Preview.  If
> they're using a Windows computer, I'm sure it has an application similar to
> Preview.

True. However it will still be an apples & oranges comparison as the 
NEF viewed in Preview will not have the in camera jpeg tweaks to 
sharpening, contrast, noise reduction, etc. made in the iOS devices. 
The D70 NEFs were notoriously "soft" and low saturated and always 
required some fixing in ACR.
BTW: You have a dust spot up there in the sky. That was another big D70 
problem, it was a major dust magnet and I learned all my sensor 
cleaning skills because of it.

> 
>>>> That said, of the iOS shots the non-HDR iPhone shot is the best
>>> 
>>> Even though it and the iPad shots completely wash out the sky?
>> 
>> ...and your point of focus was where?
>> Any P&S camera, where the exposure metering is some form of matrix
>> metering around the point of aim is going to give you the "best"
>> exposure metering it can around the point of aim, and both the iPad &
>> iPhone are P&S cameras with limited exposure metering choices . Hence
>> your blown sky.
> 
> The point of focus on all of the shots was the plant.

...and therefore the highlights were blown

> 
>> I then took a look at 100% crops of different areas of each image to
>> compare. My conclusion was made from that comparison. For the image you
>> provided, for whatever reason, the iPad shot was poor, with out of
>> focus detail making for a much softer image than the one produced with
>> the iPhone.
> 
> You still haven't said why you rated the photos the way you did.  I'm not
> questioning your ratings; I'm asking how you reached your conclusions.  Oh,
> it would also help if we knew what your qualifications were.

I am certainly no professional photographer, but I have 50+ years of 
experience under my belt as a film/digital shooting 
hobbyist/enthusiast. That includes 14 years of experience with digital 
photography.

I believe I said that I looked at 100% crops of several different areas 
of each image, when making that comparison the foliage in the iPad 
image is obviously out of focus, it is not in the other three. That is 
not a criticism of the iPad's photographic ability, but of the image 
presented for comparison.
The iPhone shots are OK, with the difference between the two being the 
blue sky being visible in the HDR treatment. Since there is little 
difference between the the quality of each and the HDR is produced from 
the basic camera , I hold that the non-HDR is the better of the two. 
There is also a dynamic element absent from all three of the iOS images 
resulting in a slightly dull appearance to them when compared to the 
D70 shot.

Then just looking at the overall effect of each and the wider DR is 
quite apparent in the D70 image when compared to the other three.

Therefore I stick to my original conclusion regarding the devices used 
to produce the four images you provided. Ranking them D70, iPhone 
non-HDR, iPhone HDR, and bringing up the rear the iPad.

Again with a different four images, with different subjects, and 
different lighting I might come to a different conclusion.


-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29901

On 2012-08-22 00:37:38 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:

> On 2012-08-21 22:17:46 -0700, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:
> 
>> In article <2012082119032275249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>>  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> First you have to compare like images. The iPad, iPhone are jpeg
>>>>> files while the NEF is an unprocessed RAW file and has to minimally
>>>>> be processed via a Raw converter.
>>>> 
>>>> Why?  I was trying to show the best that each device can do.
>>> 
>>> Fine. However, there are a few things to consider when viewing an
>>> unprocessed RAW file, especially a NEF when compared to the in camera
>>> sharpening, noise reduction, contrast,  and saturation levels applied to
>>> jpegs. That includes jpegs captured in your D70, iPhone, or iPad.
>> 
>> I didn't let any apps touch the iOS images; the only in-camera adjustment
>> was to generate the HDR picture.
> 
> I was not referring to anything you might have done, just remember the 
> Camera in the iOS devices is an App.
> All jpeg files in any camera have the raw data from the sensor 
> processed with various proprietary processes to produce the jpeg, 
> regardless of you letting any apps touch the iOS images, they have had 
> the sharpening, saturation, WB, contrast, the iOS developers determined 
> was required for the production of jpegs within the iOS cameras. The 
> production of HDR within iOS is not true multi-exposure HDR, unless you 
> have an app which does that.
> ...and you don't get iOS RAW files from the iPhone, ...yet.
> 
>> 
>>> Also not all here are going to be able to view unprocessed NEFs natively
>> 
>> Really?  All they have to do is download it and open it in Preview.  If
>> they're using a Windows computer, I'm sure it has an application similar to
>> Preview.
> 
> True. However it will still be an apples & oranges comparison as the 
> NEF viewed in Preview will not have the in camera jpeg tweaks to 
> sharpening, contrast, noise reduction, etc. made in the iOS devices. 
> The D70 NEFs were notoriously "soft" and low saturated and always 
> required some fixing in ACR.
> BTW: You have a dust spot up there in the sky. That was another big D70 
> problem, it was a major dust magnet and I learned all my sensor 
> cleaning skills because of it.
> 
>> 
>>>>> That said, of the iOS shots the non-HDR iPhone shot is the best
>>>> 
>>>> Even though it and the iPad shots completely wash out the sky?
>>> 
>>> ...and your point of focus was where?
>>> Any P&S camera, where the exposure metering is some form of matrix
>>> metering around the point of aim is going to give you the "best"
>>> exposure metering it can around the point of aim, and both the iPad &
>>> iPhone are P&S cameras with limited exposure metering choices . Hence
>>> your blown sky.
>> 
>> The point of focus on all of the shots was the plant.
> 
> ...and therefore the highlights were blown
> 
>> 
>>> I then took a look at 100% crops of different areas of each image to
>>> compare. My conclusion was made from that comparison. For the image you
>>> provided, for whatever reason, the iPad shot was poor, with out of
>>> focus detail making for a much softer image than the one produced with
>>> the iPhone.
>> 
>> You still haven't said why you rated the photos the way you did.  I'm not
>> questioning your ratings; I'm asking how you reached your conclusions.  Oh,
>> it would also help if we knew what your qualifications were.
> 
> I am certainly no professional photographer, but I have 50+ years of 
> experience under my belt as a film/digital shooting 
> hobbyist/enthusiast. That includes 14 years of experience with digital 
> photography.
> 
> I believe I said that I looked at 100% crops of several different areas 
> of each image, when making that comparison the foliage in the iPad 
> image is obviously out of focus, it is not in the other three. That is 
> not a criticism of the iPad's photographic ability, but of the image 
> presented for comparison.
> The iPhone shots are OK, with the difference between the two being the 
> blue sky being visible in the HDR treatment. Since there is little 
> difference between the the quality of each and the HDR is produced from 
> the basic camera , I hold that the non-HDR is the better of the two. 
> There is also a dynamic element absent from all three of the iOS images 
> resulting in a slightly dull appearance to them when compared to the 
> D70 shot.
> 
> Then just looking at the overall effect of each and the wider DR is 
> quite apparent in the D70 image when compared to the other three.
> 
> Therefore I stick to my original conclusion regarding the devices used 
> to produce the four images you provided. Ranking them D70, iPhone 
> non-HDR, iPhone HDR, and bringing up the rear the iPad.
> 
> Again with a different four images, with different subjects, and 
> different lighting I might come to a different conclusion.

Here are the crops.
Take a look for yourself, just to keep the playing field even I opened 
all images in Preview and made these 100% crops with Preview.

< 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lx56l61b7bbj1se/lMrk1c5X0b/Shared%20Images/USENET%20SHARE/iOS-D70-crops 
>

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29911

In article <201208220055367987-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
 Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> Here are the crops.
> Take a look for yourself, just to keep the playing field even I opened 
> all images in Preview and made these 100% crops with Preview.
> 
> < 
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lx56l61b7bbj1se/lMrk1c5X0b/Shared%20Images/USENET%2
> 0SHARE/iOS-D70-crops 
> >

I disagree with you about the HDR and non HDR versions of the iPhone shot; 
the HDR has more saturated greens, closer to the actual color of the 
leaves, and the leaves themselves are sharper, less soft, than in the non 
HDR picture.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29912

In article <michelle-87B92A.10591422082012@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <201208220055367987-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
> > Here are the crops.
> > Take a look for yourself, just to keep the playing field even I opened 
> > all images in Preview and made these 100% crops with Preview.
> > 
> > < 
> > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lx56l61b7bbj1se/lMrk1c5X0b/Shared%20Images/USENET
> > %2
> > 0SHARE/iOS-D70-crops 
> > >
> 
> I disagree with you about the HDR and non HDR versions of the iPhone shot; 
> the HDR has more saturated greens, closer to the actual color of the 
> leaves, and the leaves themselves are sharper, less soft, than in the non 
> HDR picture.

Not to mention, you can see the clouds in the HDR shot which is pretty 
much what one would expect from increased dynamic range.

-- 
PRAY, v.  To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf
of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. -- Ambrose Bierce

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29913

On 2012-08-22 10:59:14 -0700, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <201208220055367987-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
>> Here are the crops.
>> Take a look for yourself, just to keep the playing field even I opened
>> all images in Preview and made these 100% crops with Preview.
>> 
>> <
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lx56l61b7bbj1se/lMrk1c5X0b/Shared%20Images/USENET%2
>> 0SHARE/iOS-D70-crops
>>> 
> 
> I disagree with you about the HDR and non HDR versions of the iPhone shot;
> the HDR has more saturated greens, closer to the actual color of the
> leaves, and the leaves themselves are sharper, less soft, than in the non
> HDR picture.

OK! That is what happens when you ask for an opinion based on a 
subjective non-standard comparison test, and you already held your own 
preconceived opinion.
Opinions on non-standard test images are just that, opinions. Even a 
review and test site such as DPreview (and they have been accused of 
having their own particular biases over the years) has maintain their 
set of standard test set-ups, which have used the same subject matter 
and lighting for years so that different critical elements for each 
image captured can be compared with an indifferent eye.

As I have said before these are the images you shot for us to compare, 
and that i have done. give me a different set of comparison images and 
we might make a different conclusion. Now if the new set is a true test 
scene under controlled lighting we might get a comparison we can all 
agree on.

Take a look at some of the dpreview.com comparison tests to get an idea 
of what I am talking about. Then get back to us on this subject. If you 
are trying to justify your use of HDR with an iPhone app because it is 
your preference, go ahead. I am not averse to the use of HDR, but I 
usually shoot 5 exposure brackets for HDR processing. When I shoot HDR 
I will sometimes work for a subtle effect and sometime I will go over 
the top.

Here are comparisons of three different takes on my HDR shots, each 
done for different reasons. Each has the final result compared with the 
unprocessed "normal exposure".
< http://db.tt/XLQuMW40 >
< http://db.tt/I8XZNMzm >
< http://db.tt/ZGHuxSvJ >

The important thing to remember is, HDR is not a replacement for 
non-HDR photography, each has its place.
< http://db.tt/QTQOQMV1 >


-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29919

In article <2012082212460731729-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
 Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> > I disagree with you about the HDR and non HDR versions of the iPhone shot;
> > the HDR has more saturated greens, closer to the actual color of the
> > leaves, and the leaves themselves are sharper, less soft, than in the non
> > HDR picture.
> 
> OK! That is what happens when you ask for an opinion based on a 
> subjective non-standard comparison test, and you already held your own 
> preconceived opinion.

No, I did not have a preconceived opinion.  And actually, I didn't ask for 
an opinion; I merely presented the pictures.

> Take a look at some of the dpreview.com comparison tests to get an idea 
> of what I am talking about. Then get back to us on this subject. If you 
> are trying to justify your use of HDR with an iPhone app because it is 
> your preference, go ahead. 

I am not trying to justify anything; I was merely pointing out what I 
observed.

I could not see how you preferred a picture with washed out sky and less 
saturation and detail in the leaves to one with a properly exposed sky and 
greater detail and saturation in the leaves.

If you want to make a contest of it, go a head, but I'm not playing that 
game.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29921

On 2012-08-22 15:37:47 -0700, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> In article <2012082212460731729-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>  Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> 
>>> I disagree with you about the HDR and non HDR versions of the iPhone shot;
>>> the HDR has more saturated greens, closer to the actual color of the
>>> leaves, and the leaves themselves are sharper, less soft, than in the non
>>> HDR picture.
>> 
>> OK! That is what happens when you ask for an opinion based on a
>> subjective non-standard comparison test, and you already held your own
>> preconceived opinion.
> 
> No, I did not have a preconceived opinion.  And actually, I didn't ask for
> an opinion; I merely presented the pictures.

With apparantly little purpose.

>> Take a look at some of the dpreview.com comparison tests to get an idea
>> of what I am talking about. Then get back to us on this subject. If you
>> are trying to justify your use of HDR with an iPhone app because it is
>> your preference, go ahead.
> 
> I am not trying to justify anything; I was merely pointing out what I
> observed.
> 
> I could not see how you preferred a picture with washed out sky and less
> saturation and detail in the leaves to one with a properly exposed sky and
> greater detail and saturation in the leaves.

My preference was for the D70 image.

> If you want to make a contest of it, go a head, but I'm not playing that
> game.

What contest?
You started this, and your OP is taking on trollish dimensions.
What were we supposed to do with your posted images, look at them and 
go, "hmmm"?



-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web