Paul Eveleth wrote:
I'm venturing into recording videos on my Nikon Z 6 and having difficulties in establishing remote wireless connectivity. I get this error message "This option is not available at current settings or in the cameras current state"
Can anyone point me in the right direction? My goal is to send my live video recordings from my camera to a remote tv.
Thank you in advance,
losing what little hair I have
Getting video to move wirelessly from a camera to a monitor is EXPENSIVE. It requires pro quality gear that can handle the data bandwidth.
Better practice on a budget is to use an HDMI cable for short runs, or some sort of HDMI over Ethernet scheme. This requires a transmitter, cable, and receiver setup that converts HDMI output from your camera to an Ethernet signal, sends it over the cable, then decodes it into an HDMI signal for your TV or monitor. Cable runs of 50 to 200 feet are possible, depending on the device quality.
https://www.avaccess.com/blogs/guides/what-is-hdmi-over-ethernet/#:~:text=It%20is%20a%20method%20of%20video%20signals%20over%20a%20network.
hawkowl951 wrote:
Chris Christian was a long time and active member of the Ugly Hedgehog community. He passed away on Saturday May 4th while editing photos.
Chris had strong opinions and rubbed people the wrong on occasion but you always knew where he stood. I found him to be very kind and funny.
He was an active member of the Hellertown community where he lived. Holding positions in the fire company and water authority
He photographed thousands of athletes in the area. Capturing images that I'm sure many cherish. Chris was a friend of mine and we talked Nikon gear all the time. Chris was fond of Nikon and owned many pieces of Nikon gear.
I attended his viewing today and was saddened in a way to hear people speak so kindly about him and what he meant to them. I was saddened because of being close to Chris I know that some of those that spoke didnt say those nice things while Chris could hear that. It would have meant a lot to him if he heard that directly. It was a reminder to me to tell people what they mean to me before its to late.
Here is his obituary
https://sauconsource.com/2024/05/06/christopher-j-christian-69-of-hellertown-obituary-brought-to-you-by-heintzelman-funeral-home/
Chris Christian was a long time and active member ... (
show quote)
Wow. Chris was one of the good guys here. His comments were usually insightful and worth reading. He knew his photography! Sad to hear. One of the hardest things about aging is seeing your peers die off before you do. Many of my high school and college classmates are gone, and I'm only 68.
SteveR wrote:
If you've seen both
Eclipse — especially when listening to
Automatic Sun by The Warning.
https://youtu.be/PDFH9AcPpyA?
The thing is, there is so much good music to be heard, from all over the world, that there's no way anyone can hear it all. We're not in a top 40 world any more. We're not even in a top 40 million world anymore! Anyone with a computer can record and mix digital music and post it on the Internet for download sales and streaming. YouTube is full of music reactors — people who react to music they have never heard before, either for fun, or Kofi donations, or Patreon contributions, or similar. YT won't monetize their channel content if it would infringe copyrights, so the original musicians get a small chunk of change from the exposure. But reactors can make a little by "pan handling" for donations. Some of them are music experts who have very insightful things to say about what they hear. Others are just ordinary listeners with nothing to do. Some of them are quite entertaining, and others are downright offensive or just boring. But they do serve a purpose of exposing their followers to music that they haven't heard before. Chances are, if you search for an artist on YouTube, his/her reactors will pop up along with the artist's own channel content. I'm constantly amazed by what and who is out there.
markngolf wrote:
I hope this music survives. Among the current musical scene and avid followers, it's unlikely. Hoping to be surprised.
https://youtu.be/cWc7vYjgnTs
and: https://youtu.be/BSPuY-YLe-w
and: https://youtu.be/I4cSVnqGmOc
Enjoy, Mark
Oh, it will survive. YouTube will preserve it.
There are numerous versions of Nessun Dorma by Jeff Beck. It was a favorite of his. Of course, Beck is known for his guitar work in rock, but he played a bit of everything.
Opera and Classical are still alive. My wife and I went to see Nia Imani Franklin perform with the Winston-Salem Symphony Orchestra last Saturday night. She is a former Miss America (2019) who also composes for symphony and chamber ensembles, sometimes directs, AND sings opera, American popular song, soul, and gospel. Her two best pieces were
Fantasy Exceeded, one of her compositions, and
Quando M'en Vo, by Puccini. To hear her go from Gershwin's
Summertime to
Quando M'en Vo was quite a jolt! Her operatic voice is NOTHING like her pop/soul/gospel voice.
Quando M'en Vo was her Miss America opera performance, and it is on YouTube.
https://youtu.be/p8aZPjWTnTo?
jerryc41 wrote:
Do you mean the camera is connected to an external power source - like a portable battery? If so, that's a good feature. Video cameras can often do that. If I record a two-hour play, the standard battery may or may not last long enough, so connecting an external powerpack is ideal.
Several of the latest Panasonic Lumix Micro 4/3 and full frame L-Mount camera bodies have USB-C ports on them. They can be used with certain high specification SSD drives to record high quality, high bit rate video, OR they can be used for USB Power Delivery (charging and powering the camera). The cables and battery pack or AC charger must support a very specific USB-PD specification for Voltage and Wattage. It's something like 15 Volts at 3 Amps.
Grumpyone wrote:
Try walking around with one of these, you get all sorts of looks.
I am a Caveman and I have a microwave.
Hmmm... Looks like a good way to get shot by a cop.
Reuss Griffiths wrote:
Amazon is frequently a topic for discussion on this forum and generally not viewed kindly, with many better options from other companies. I have always like using Amazon because generally their prices are reasonable, and they literally carry everything, and I've always had good experiences dealing with their customer service. But I recently made a terrible decision on a purchase from Amazon and feared the worst.
I have breathing issues which affect how far and fast I can walk. I can get almost anywhere I wish but at a pace with many delays to catch my breath. I've been on supplemental O2 for 3 years. To be able to get to places and see things that have generally been realistically beyond reach, I bought an electric mobility scooter for $650 total including $60 for shipping from a third-party seller. It's a small, light-weight vehicle which can be carried in the back of your car and used both indoors and out and is capable of going on most flat surfaces and moderate hills. I purchased one from a company called E Wheels. When I assembled it (fairly simple) it beeped and did not work. There are 3 main separable components, front control/wheels, rear wheels/motor and battery. An on-line video indicated this was because there was a problem in the front, controls section.
When I tried to contact the company, I got a recorded message to leave a message and they would call me back. Over the next week, I called at least 50 times with no response. I complained to Amazon and they tried to call them with the same outcome. They communicated with them via emails. By that time I wanted to return the scooter and have nothing further to do with them. I checked with Fed Ex and it would cost me $481 to send it back. Amazon requested that the pay for the seller par for the return of the scooter and refund my money. The company did not respond. I'm thinking I'm out $650 and have nothing to show for it. To my surprise, Amazon refunded me the full amount and told me to keep the scooter and I could do anything I wanted with it. I never expected they would refund that kind of money out of their own pockets to make an issue right with their customer.
That's why I titled this piece, Amazon - a Stand-Up Company!
Amazon is frequently a topic for discussion on thi... (
show quote)
Amazon is a HUGE company that can afford to make things right for the customer. They generally do the right thing. I think most companies could learn a lot from them. Customer good will brings in future sales. It didn't cost Amazon $650 in the long run. It made them money, by keeping you happy. You'll order from them again.
Steve221221 wrote:
I just tried the silent shutter for the 1st time on my Sony A7iii and experienced banding. After searching I found out this is a common problem. I always thought mirrorless cameras were silent by the nature of its construction and an artificial sound was added to simulate a mirrored camera. An article said "This is normal for cameras with electronic shutters. Due to pulsing of the lights." Electonic shutters as opposed to what? What are the pros and cons of each, other than the banding?
I just tried the silent shutter for the 1st time o... (
show quote)
Banding occurs because LED and CFL and gas discharge lamps PULSE. They flicker on and off. The cheaper the lamp, the more drastic the flicker. Good stage lights won't do it. Good video and photo lights won't do it. Their more sophisticated ballast circuits have better capacitors in them. But cheap Walmart Great Value bulbs or Home Depot EcoSmart bulbs will flicker like crazy! (Those are just two of many that do.)
The flicker is revealed due to the timing difference between the electronic shutter capture and the lamp's rate of flicker. Mechanical shutters typically display less flicker, but if the shutter speed is fast enough, you'll still get it.
SOME cameras have anti-flicker technology that does a good job of killing this. If you're photographing sports, you need one of these.
If you can stand a slow shutter speed, try using a speed that is half the power line frequency. (i.e.; use 1/30 for 60Hz power in the USA, 1/25 in parts of the world where 50Hz is the power line frequency. I've had great luck with that.
markwilliam1 wrote:
I’m thinking just Old folks. I’m 70 and could care less how my photos appear when they are blown up so much that they show artifacts. I use Everything to enhance my photography including all the Topaz suites and the Adobe subscription….but if I went pixel peeping I would see strange stuff Everywhere. I use Sony cameras and they are 24 megapixel cameras and I crop extensively so I use software to eliminate noise and such. Is it because your camera is better than mine with the images blown up and you don’t see such artifacts. Or is it important because you sell your images? Or why is it important to you if you’re a retired old guy like me? I print 13X19 images on my Canon Pixel Pro 100 and they look great to me with lots of processing. Don’t think the younger generation who uses Cell Phones for their photography ever heard of Pixel Peeping. Just wondering…
I’m thinking just Old folks. I’m 70 and could care... (
show quote)
I do it when sharpening. INITIAL sharpening should always be done at 1:1 (100%), or one pixel in the file to one pixel on the monitor. That way, you can discern the best settings for a natural look with no weird artifacts. Final sharpening is done just before printing, and is determined by many factors, through personal taste and experience. Print size, subject, and paper type are factors when printing.
But pixel peeping for the sake of pixel peeping is silly. My tendency is to look at an image and ask myself, "Does it "say" what I want it to say?" If the answer is yes, I leave it alone.
jerryc41 wrote:
Unfortunately, this forum doesn't have a feature for taking a poll, so this will have to do.
Do you subscribe to Adobe or do use use alternate programs? So, the choice is simple:
Subscribe
Don't subscribe.
Adobe — subscribe
Other programs — yes (Photos, Fotor, Graphic Converter...)
blue-ultra wrote:
I have been exploring using my D850 for video. I would like to be able to edit the short videos. Mainly doing open mic music performances. Looking for suggestion on what software is good and reliable and easy on the wallet. Suggestions anyone? Thank you
Bob
If you have a Mac, the absolute no-brainer is iMovie. But Black Magic Designs' DaVinci Resolve has a free version that is both far more advanced and far more complex. Resolve comes in both Mac and Windows versions.
dbrugger25 wrote:
In the 1960's we could buy a 21-inch color TV for $350 to $400 US dollars that only connected to an antenna and frequently could only show a picture with a green tint. Now, you can buy a 50-inch cable-ready TV with a 4K picture that shows amazing color in the same price range. Technology is amazing.
$400 in 1964 had the purchasing power of nearly $4000 in 2024. So we have come a LONG way.
Jack 13088 wrote:
This morning I read a thought provoking post by Steve Perry on his web site that opened with, “ Warning - you might not like what I have to say.” I thought it would be amusing to throw a match in that gas can. What do you think on the topic Is Technology Killing Photography?
Without knowing Steve or his website, I can only answer that:
Technology is an enabler, not a killer. The person responsible for images is behind the camera, or in front of the computer, not in it. Humans make the ultimate decisions about what images to create, present, and accept.
What technology can do is to amplify whatever intelligence or stupidity is applied to a situation. But there again, it is the choice of a human to use a particular technology.
SuperflyTNT wrote:
“I’m going to do a school shooting today.”
Yeah, doesn’t sound good.
I’ve heard worse from newbies. Ever see a whole kindergarten class cry on command?
“Make sure your eyes are open when I shoot you,” is not a good start to your day.