srt101fan wrote:
Given your un-nice criticism of a nice picture, could you at least say how you would post-process it? 🤔
If I am provided with:
â–º The op permission
â–º The op original
As to be 'un-nice' (that word does not exist), I am giving an honest opinion instead and falling over myself in awe of a capture that at this point has only potential. Also, if this was posted in the gallery, I would not have commented. But if you originally post in the main channel, many will still give false 'ooooohhhh that is sooooo gooood!!!' and other will give an opinion that is usually right.
moonhawk wrote:
The "overpopulation" alarmists always want other people to die off. No one seems to be willing to take one for the team.
It is not being an alarmist or even wanting people to die off.
Just check the world population. It is growing at fast pace since the 1800s, the start of the industrial age.
This is also the start of many other things like unchecked pollution, not that anyone paid attention, most refuse was biodegradable and localized.
Not to worry, the Olympic Games is known for offering a plethora of new equipment in photography, videography and not limited t these two fields...
Underwhelming post of a capture that would greatly benefit of post-processing TLC.
Artcameraman wrote:
.../... That's it my brain is tired. Cheers.
That it is, that it is...
Love the 'climent' too.
As to the source of the problems? Blame the symptoms, not the issue, overpopulation.
I am well aware of it.
The point is, this is a bad habit to always use these shortcuts. The file menu and its drop-downs offer of plethora of options we simply ignore because we are not exposed to them properly. Not only that, but if you create actions, using the shortcuts will confuse PS CC when it replays.
tomc601 wrote:
The real question is will our wallets be able to keep up.
I am not into the habit of asking my wallet anything.
andesbill wrote:
.../... What about the screens? Will they be able to resolve all the information in the photo? .../...
They already do not. Most are still sRGB. The highest resolution at the moment is 8k.
andesbill wrote:
.../... Will there be printers that can do the photos justice?
Same as above, worse even, most labs require a JPG sRGB so you lose both way.
andesbill wrote:
.../... I’m sure that the external drives will be up to the task..../...
They are, as they do not interpret anything. They are like storage unit. You can store anything from a car to a needle in one, so...
andesbill wrote:
.../... How about the computers themselves? The speed they’ll need. The RAM. The graphics card. .../...
We under utilize our PC (or Mac) so, yes, they can. The limitation are in the above-mentioned screen.
andesbill wrote:
.../... The software (PS gigapixel anyone?).../...
PS CC is already capable of handling 100Mb rasterized original.
andesbill wrote:
.../... Will our eyes be able to resolve the difference between say a 100mp photo and a 1gp photo? .../...
No, for many reasons
Thank you. For some reason, I was mystified...
A fat cat a fox and snacks next to them....
And... Weirder comment... does not the fox look foxy?
User ID wrote:
Yes, I did *hear* of it, but no pix cuz thaz several hours up I90 from here.
It was visible in Georgia...
Is this software going the way of the dodos or has it been dead for a long time?
They all will found themselves parked in the gallery.