A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Ripe Apples



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old November 17th 17, 06:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,056
Default Ripe Apples

On 11/16/2017 11:11 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:41:55 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I evaluated a lot of
monitors, including some branded by Apple, before I made my decision.
I
feel no compulsion to discuss this further.

Peter, how long have you had your present monitor?

About a eighteen months, more or less. And it pretty much fits my needs.
I am not responding to the troll on that subject.

It's just that the first Retina display emerged in 2012 and I was
fairly sure we had discussed your experiences of deciding on a new
monitor since that date.

that was for a macbook pro, and actually, the first retina display
emerged in 2010, on the iphone 4.

he was considering a display for his desktop.

the first retina imac came out just 3 years ago, in october 2014, later
updated to a wide gamut dci-p3 display a year later, in 2015.

Still comfortably before PeterN made his decision about a replacement
monitor.


he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays.


Then why did you drag in Retina displays?

So when you wrote "I evaluated a lot of monitors, including some
branded by Apple, before I made my decision." and nospam replied "you
did so long before there were retina displays and also received bad
advice. your conclusion is therefore not valid" he was just pulling a
reply out of his arse.

nope.

i recall he mentioned evaluating it prior to october, 2014.

And made his decision several months fter that date.


based on evaluations made before that date.


I'm glad you were there as a witness. Afterall its not everyone who
would make a decision and would then put it into effect only after
several months while ignoring the subsequent new products and
developments.

as i recall, he only evaluated the older very glossy displays, not the
more recent ones that weren't as glossy.


Which are still too glossy for me and probably for PeterN.


Indeed.

--
PeterN
  #102  
Old November 17th 17, 09:03 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,467
Default Ripe Apples

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 01:43:02 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Thursday, 16 November 2017 18:26:53 UTC, PeterN wrote:
On 11/16/2017 5:26 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 16:50:23 UTC, PeterN wrote:


The in context and clear meaning of my statement is that glossy monitors
have issues displaying color gradations in the dark and shadow areas. My
conclusion was drawn after I had conversations with users, and
manufacturers representatives, including Apple.

what year was this ?
As I find it strange that a lot of pro photographers do use Macs, lots of graphic editors use Macs, lots of teching establishmetns use macs, we do here, specifically brough for multimedia teaching, the only time we use PCs is when quality doesnlt matter such as write up sending emails looking at websites, and teaching code writing and such.


My subject is not Mac vs PC. It is monitors.


So talk about monitors NOT the computer you're the one going on about PCs being upgradeable and how you have to buy another monitor and another graphics card and install a new HD, nowerdays I tened to get what I want in the package I prefer, I don;t feel the need to replace anything the next week month or even 18 months, I tend not to bother for about 3-5 years then upgrade.


My 'PC' upgrades come about once every six years.

In the early days of computers real upgrades came out faster so my upgrade path was about every 18 months.


--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #103  
Old November 19th 17, 11:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,085
Default Ripe Apples

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

It's just that the first Retina display emerged in 2012 and I was
fairly sure we had discussed your experiences of deciding on a new
monitor since that date.

that was for a macbook pro, and actually, the first retina display
emerged in 2010, on the iphone 4.

he was considering a display for his desktop.

the first retina imac came out just 3 years ago, in october 2014, later
updated to a wide gamut dci-p3 display a year later, in 2015.

Still comfortably before PeterN made his decision about a replacement
monitor.


he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays.


Then why did you drag in Retina displays?


because they're much higher quality, much sharper and overall better.
  #104  
Old November 19th 17, 11:21 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,085
Default Ripe Apples

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

As I find it strange that a lot of pro photographers do use Macs, lots
of
graphic editors use Macs, lots of teching establishmetns use macs, we
do
here, specifically brough for multimedia teaching, the only time we use
PCs
is when quality doesnlt matter such as write up sending emails looking
at
websites, and teaching code writing and such.

I can't explain the photographers or teaching establishments but most
graphic editors work with commercial print media or sRGB,

the ****ty ones might. the better graphic editors do not.

Correct me o learned one: what do they use?


argb, and now dci-p3 is becoming common.


That's a color space and has nothing much to do with the abilities of
the monitor.


false.

neither of
which are worrth a damn when it comes to resolving fine detail in the
shadows.

also wrong.

Even the best of commercial print media is limited in it's ability to
print a really deep black, let alone display subtle variations in deep
grey tonality. You may believe otherwise but there is a fortune
waiting for you if you can prove your claims for a conventional
commercial printing system.


deep black != shadow detail.


But the ability to display subtle variations in in deep grey tonality
does = shadow detail.


false.

Please note that I did say at the beginning "most graphic editors work
with commercial print media or sRGB". I'm not talking about specialty
print techniques.


most ****ty ones do. the better ones do not.


The better ones are not 'most'.


you're contradicting yourself again.

I'm not pursuing this any further.


wise choice.
  #105  
Old November 20th 17, 03:47 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,467
Default Ripe Apples

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 17:21:27 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

It's just that the first Retina display emerged in 2012 and I was
fairly sure we had discussed your experiences of deciding on a new
monitor since that date.

that was for a macbook pro, and actually, the first retina display
emerged in 2010, on the iphone 4.

he was considering a display for his desktop.

the first retina imac came out just 3 years ago, in october 2014, later
updated to a wide gamut dci-p3 display a year later, in 2015.

Still comfortably before PeterN made his decision about a replacement
monitor.

he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays.


Then why did you drag in Retina displays?


because they're much higher quality, much sharper and overall better.


But, as you have now explained, irrelevant to the discussion of
PeterN's needs. So why did you drag them in?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #106  
Old November 20th 17, 04:14 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,085
Default Ripe Apples

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

It's just that the first Retina display emerged in 2012 and I was
fairly sure we had discussed your experiences of deciding on a new
monitor since that date.

that was for a macbook pro, and actually, the first retina display
emerged in 2010, on the iphone 4.

he was considering a display for his desktop.

the first retina imac came out just 3 years ago, in october 2014, later
updated to a wide gamut dci-p3 display a year later, in 2015.

Still comfortably before PeterN made his decision about a replacement
monitor.

he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays.

Then why did you drag in Retina displays?


because they're much higher quality, much sharper and overall better.


But, as you have now explained, irrelevant to the discussion of
PeterN's needs. So why did you drag them in?


i said no such thing.

in fact, i said the *opposite*.
  #107  
Old November 20th 17, 07:52 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,467
Default Ripe Apples

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 22:14:09 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

It's just that the first Retina display emerged in 2012 and I was
fairly sure we had discussed your experiences of deciding on a new
monitor since that date.

that was for a macbook pro, and actually, the first retina display
emerged in 2010, on the iphone 4.

he was considering a display for his desktop.

the first retina imac came out just 3 years ago, in october 2014, later
updated to a wide gamut dci-p3 display a year later, in 2015.

Still comfortably before PeterN made his decision about a replacement
monitor.

he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays.

Then why did you drag in Retina displays?

because they're much higher quality, much sharper and overall better.


But, as you have now explained, irrelevant to the discussion of
PeterN's needs. So why did you drag them in?


i said no such thing.

in fact, i said the *opposite*.


You wrote:

"he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays."

As you well know he *couldn't* consider retina displays as there
were/are none independent of the computer.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #108  
Old November 20th 17, 04:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,085
Default Ripe Apples

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays.

Then why did you drag in Retina displays?

because they're much higher quality, much sharper and overall better.

But, as you have now explained, irrelevant to the discussion of
PeterN's needs. So why did you drag them in?


i said no such thing.

in fact, i said the *opposite*.


You wrote:

"he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays."

As you well know he *couldn't* consider retina displays as there
were/are none independent of the computer.


he could have. he chose not to. as did you.
  #109  
Old November 20th 17, 06:04 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,056
Default Ripe Apples

On 11/20/2017 5:44 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:


snip


I did that too, I didn't need to take the computer apart either.
For me technology is still moving fast enoguh for me to to want to leave it 8 years before upgrading, you prefer upgrading individual components, I prefer for the most part getting a new computer.





You must have more money than I:
my earlier quote from Cato is applicable he

"Emas non quod opus est, sed quod necesse est. Quod non opus est, asse
carum est."


--
PeterN
  #110  
Old November 20th 17, 09:58 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,467
Default Ripe Apples

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:43:16 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays.

Then why did you drag in Retina displays?

because they're much higher quality, much sharper and overall better.

But, as you have now explained, irrelevant to the discussion of
PeterN's needs. So why did you drag them in?

i said no such thing.

in fact, i said the *opposite*.


You wrote:

"he was looking at a separate display, not an all in one mac, which
means he didn't consider retina displays."

As you well know he *couldn't* consider retina displays as there
were/are none independent of the computer.


he could have. he chose not to. as did you.


Ye daft loon!

He could have considered a display using a sports stadium filled with
fans holding up colored cards!
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/84/75...e10f60a04b.jpg

For some reason he chose not to.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ripe Apples Davoud Digital Photography 3 November 9th 17 06:29 AM
Apples, oranges, new crop of P&S's [email protected] Digital Photography 1 December 16th 07 08:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.