meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Conegliano, Italy | |
| age | 24 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 4 months |
| seen | 12 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 51 |
|
May 9 |
comment |
What times and settings should I use for taking pictures of stars at night and falling stars? I believe you mean Bahtinov. |
|
Apr 4 |
comment |
Are 2 megapixels enough for HD resolution pictures? I'm downvoting this answer, even though it's well written, and here's why: almost every camera, through Bayer interpolation, gives pictures with the same number of pixel as its sensor. This is commonly accepted. If one talks about a 12MP digital photo we can safely assume it came from a 12MP camera which technically has a 12MP sensor. On the other hand we're talking about resolution but we need to address aspect ratios and image quality as a whole. Interpolation is there with the quality loss it implies, but that's a different issue. |
|
Mar 15 |
comment |
How can I get better focus results with my Nikon D90 at a fashion show? @PavloDyban 3D is a settings affecting the way the AF system chooses which area of the frame to focus on. Continuous, single-servo or auto is instead used to determine whether focus is to be always kept or to be locked as soon as it is attained. |
|
Feb 19 |
comment |
Why does my Nikon D5000 stop live view after 30 seconds? The default behavior for live view is to stop after 30s ONLY if you're not shooting or recording. Otherwise your camera must be seriously broken, or recording is not actually starting. |
|
Feb 14 |
comment |
Why does my Nikon D5000 stop live view after 30 seconds? The OP didn't mention this "No movie" issue. |
|
Feb 14 |
comment |
Why does my Nikon D5000 stop live view after 30 seconds? DSLR video always takes place in live view mode as the mirror needs to be raised for light to continuosly hit the sensor, thus obscuring the viewfinder. This might not be the case in cameras with a translucent mirror, like those from Sony. |
|
Jan 16 |
comment |
How do I capture streets and amusement parks at night with a Nikon D40? I wouldn't suggest using the 35mm 1.8 DX for night photography if the intended subjects are those mentioned by the OP. It's a great lens for most purposes, still it has the worst flare issues of any lens i've tried. Weird green blobs almost always appear when bright "bare" light sources (e.g. streetlamps) are in the frame. Besides that it has no distance scale, which could be very useful for night photography, and the focus ring doesn't stop at infinity. |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? The second image actually looks much more saturated to me (in firefox, but they look exactly the same using every other program). Sorry I'm spamming the comments, it feels like that's where this kind of reply belongs. |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? No, it can't be a matter of AdobeRGB. I always and only shoot sRGB and I'm well aware of that. And I checked these particular shots many times also today, they're sRGB right out of camera. |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? I added some detail at the bottom of the question. It's strange what you say, I have absolutely no problem with tagged or untagged images, using any software except firefox, which only behaves well with the untagged ones. |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? ah, I've added samples. How do they look to you? |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? I've never had problem with untagged images... Is it possible for my problem to depend on operating systems? |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? Very interesting, thanks. AFAIK every browser assumes pictures are in the sRGB color space, so why do they say it's not so and assign the "facebook profile"? don't they mix the concepts of profile and color space? isn't sRGB a standard on the web? I don't really think I'm smarter than the facebook guys, there's just something I can't understand. And the complete inadequacy of firefox baffles me. Its rendition of color does a worse damage to photos than an uncalibrated monitor can do. |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? Ok, fine. I found a partial answer to my question: facebook appears to actually apply to pictures an ICC profile called c2, which my image viewer couldn't detect and show as metadata but handled fine, while Ps recognized it (and had no problem handling). I'm not posting an answer myself because I don't have a solution for this issue, so keep 'em coming. I'm kinda hating this absurd behavior of facebook ;-) who are they to apply profiles to my photos? |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? I commented on my question about this absurd "facebook profile". Also I made it clear in my question that I don't consider changing settings in firefox a solution. If firefox can't handle gracefully out of the box an image tagged with a color profile, at least ignore the profile if it's not able to display it properly, it means many many people using internet in the whole world are seeing pictures with random colors. It would be a serious issue, wouldn't it? |
|
Jun 22 |
comment |
Is facebook applying some undetectable color profile or is firefox's color management nonsense? I used Photoshop CS2, which at the time for some reason I had set to apply this sRGB IEC61966-2.1 profile to all edited images, which came from the camera in the sRGB color space, with no profile. No other color management was done. The only editing was curves. I'm uploading a sample as soon as possible. p.s. I don't know why a comment asking for this kind of detail was removed, still I'm leaving my reply, as it may be useful, even though a bit redundant. |
|
Jun 7 |
comment |
How important is a camera with improved Hydrogen Alpha sensitivity to astrophotography? The new EOS 60Da should be available shortly. |
|
Jun 6 |
comment |
How was Claire Benoist's flower diptych picture shot? @publicRavi - that's just too nice of you! |
|
Jun 6 |
comment |
Why are my city night pics more blurred than I expect, and what can I do about it? Your image looks very nice and sharp to me. It shows visible jpeg compression artifacts and a little purple-blue fringing near the (right) border, but it is perfectly sharp across the whole frame. |
|
Apr 27 |
comment |
Megapixel race unnecessary? @jrista - I get the point you made about more pixels meaning demosaicing artifacts below detail level, that's very interesting. I just meant to say: while undesirable low accuracy in colors and edges is certainly caused by demoisaicing, some artifacts probably are a side effect of additional processing which (strictly speaking) is not part of demosaicing. p.s. "The purpose of demosaicing is not to make the image softer" I actually know that, thank you :-) |
