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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
They are increasingly being used for everything, even applications for
which you need a real camera. My car repair shop asked me if I had some good photos of the car. They had used a smartphone to photograph the scratches on the car body and because of the low light and limited resolution of the smartphone the pics came out so crappy that the insurance couldn't see the fine scratches on the car body. Luckily I had photographed the car side with the E-M1 II. That car workshop should have known that pictures taken with a smartphone in dim light do not come out good and have gotten a real camera for such purposes. Doesn't have to be a full frame pro one, even a cheaper camera for a few hundred Euros with an APS-C or m4/3 sensor would have done it. -- Alfred Molon Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
On 8/6/2017 10:42 AM, Alfred Molon wrote:
They are increasingly being used for everything, even applications for which you need a real camera. My car repair shop asked me if I had some good photos of the car. They had used a smartphone to photograph the scratches on the car body and because of the low light and limited resolution of the smartphone the pics came out so crappy that the insurance couldn't see the fine scratches on the car body. Luckily I had photographed the car side with the E-M1 II. That car workshop should have known that pictures taken with a smartphone in dim light do not come out good and have gotten a real camera for such purposes. Doesn't have to be a full frame pro one, even a cheaper camera for a few hundred Euros with an APS-C or m4/3 sensor would have done it. Not even that, I still use Powershot compacts for forensic work, some of them have quite decent macro capability. You do need half a brain to check that the image is focussed, and to arrange suitable lighting to show up scratches. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
On 2017-08-06 05:42, Alfred Molon wrote:
They are increasingly being used for everything, even applications for which you need a real camera. My car repair shop asked me if I had some good photos of the car. They had used a smartphone to photograph the scratches on the car body and because of the low light and limited resolution of the smartphone the pics came out so crappy that the insurance couldn't see the fine scratches on the car body. Luckily I had photographed the car side with the E-M1 II. I assure you that the tiniest and faintest scratches on any car are easily photographed with my iPhone. It's a question of light, angle, positioning, distance and steady hands. For that matter, even with a good SLR, crappy lighting will result in crappy looking detail photos. People's cell phone photos usually look like crap because people are clueless about photography. -- "Natural stupidity can wreak far more havoc than artificial intelligence..." -Alison Copnik, "Making AI More Human" -Scientific American, June 2017. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote: They are increasingly being used for everything, even applications for which you need a real camera. so what? My car repair shop asked me if I had some good photos of the car. They had used a smartphone to photograph the scratches on the car body and because of the low light and limited resolution of the smartphone the pics came out so crappy that the insurance couldn't see the fine scratches on the car body. Luckily I had photographed the car side with the E-M1 II. user error. That car workshop should have known that pictures taken with a smartphone in dim light do not come out good and have gotten a real camera for such purposes. Doesn't have to be a full frame pro one, even a cheaper camera for a few hundred Euros with an APS-C or m4/3 sensor would have done it. either they have a smartphone with a very ****ty camera or they don't know how to use what they have properly. there is no problem in taking high quality photos to show vehicle damage with a phone. an slr is hugely overkill for that. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: They are increasingly being used for everything, even applications for which you need a real camera. My car repair shop asked me if I had some good photos of the car. They had used a smartphone to photograph the scratches on the car body and because of the low light and limited resolution of the smartphone the pics came out so crappy that the insurance couldn't see the fine scratches on the car body. Luckily I had photographed the car side with the E-M1 II. I assure you that the tiniest and faintest scratches on any car are easily photographed with my iPhone. It's a question of light, angle, positioning, distance and steady hands. For that matter, even with a good SLR, crappy lighting will result in crappy looking detail photos. People's cell phone photos usually look like crap because people are clueless about photography. yep. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
Alfred Molon:
They are increasingly being used for everything, even applications for which you need a real camera. You make yourself look juvenile and pedantic when you suggest that the iPhone is not a "real" camera. http://www.buro247.my/culture/news/best-iphone-photos-of-2017.html How many awards do iPhone photos have to win, how many iPhone photos have to appear in prestigious magazines, how many Oscars do iPhone movies have to win, before you grant it "real" status? -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
In article , Alan Browne
says... I assure you that the tiniest and faintest scratches on any car are easily photographed with my iPhone. It's a question of light, angle, positioning, distance and steady hands. For that matter, even with a good SLR, crappy lighting will result in crappy looking detail photos. People's cell phone photos usually look like crap because people are clueless about photography. But a real camera has much better autofocus and low light capabilities than a smartphone. And especially in a car workshop where the lighting conditions are challenging, you need a real camera. -- Alfred Molon Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote: I assure you that the tiniest and faintest scratches on any car are easily photographed with my iPhone. It's a question of light, angle, positioning, distance and steady hands. For that matter, even with a good SLR, crappy lighting will result in crappy looking detail photos. People's cell phone photos usually look like crap because people are clueless about photography. But a real camera has much better autofocus and low light capabilities than a smartphone. doesn't matter, since the car won't be moving and the photos will be taken in bright light. And especially in a car workshop where the lighting conditions are challenging, you need a real camera. nonsense, and they most likely will be taken outside the garage. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
Alfred Molon
Sun, 06 Aug 2017 09:42:37 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote: They are increasingly being used for everything, even applications for which you need a real camera. You don't always need a 'real' camera. What exactly is a real camera these days, anyhow? -- https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php http://picpaste.com/m9WZ0KrA.jpg - David and Trisha http://picpaste.com/U5np7XvN.jpg - How to contact David and Trisha This space was empty. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Smartphone disease spreading
"Tony Cooper" wrote
| To call and raise your objection, why do you single out iPhones and | not include phones that are not made by Apple? Isn't it rather | juvenile of you to imply that only iPhones have capable cameras? | Camera snob vs Apple fan? I think both of them, and you, make good points. There was an interesting article last week: https://9to5mac.com/2017/07/31/iphon...d-photography/ The hot buzz seems to be "computational photography", which is little more than a techie-sounding term for auto-photos. Want a shot of your backyard in magical light with a unicorn and rainbow, and would you like to be able to take that photo in any light? There's a setting for that. Vic Gundotra is saying that iPhone cameras are so good because they'll take great photos without him needing to know what he's doing. The question then becomes, "what's good photography"? Not only can poor technique be fixed, but one doesn't have to settle for reality. Want a $20K dental job for your Christmas card photo? There's a setting for that. It begins to blur the line between photography, drawing and fantasy. I wonder about the economics of it. Both Android and iPhone now take RAW. Yet RAW- capable cameras seem to start at over $500 retail. And who uses the RAW setting on their phone? What's the point? On the other hand, the upcoming iPhone is expected to be over $1,000. What's wrong with this picture? How much are people paying for the RAW-capable camera part of the phone when all they want to do is take selfies and send them as maximum 1K-pixel-wide images to friends, who will glance for a moment and then delete? Why do they need a high-quality, RAW-capable camera if they're just going to juice up selfies with "computational photography"? What kind of idiot pays $1,000+ to carry around a tiny, ergonomically disastrous computer masquerading as a phone? Most people, it turns out. I don't understand why people aren't clamoring for a market in basic phones that leave out the features they don't really want or need. But maybe that need is filled by various Android models. In my contracting business I'm getting an increasing number of people who email me pictures of bathroom water damage or molding design from their phones. They're good images. Certainly good enough for me to see what I need to. Are they talented photographers? I don't know. Does it matter? They're just trying to send me a clear picture of damaged drywall and their camera is adequate to that task. It makes things easier for me.... But I still think they're idiots for spending so much on a phone. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kodak Ektra smartphone inspired by 1940s | Savageduck[_3_] | Digital Photography | 8 | October 21st 16 06:18 AM |
Smartphone AF | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 2 | October 18th 12 07:51 AM |
Smartphone heavy moiré | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 30 | October 25th 11 11:43 PM |
Smartphone image quality | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 20 | October 18th 11 06:38 PM |
iPhone SLR Mount turns a smartphone into a serious camera | charles | Digital Photography | 13 | September 3rd 11 11:13 AM |