@Clancycoop: Just because bosskev offered some constructive criticsm don't automatically jump down his throat and label him a know-it-all asshole. I don't do anywhere near as much photography as I'd like to (which is ironic since I work in photo related industry). As a result I cannot be called an amatuer or even a hobbyist for that matter. That doesn't mean I can't express my opinion on the subject.
I can tell a crappy picture or image when I see one. I've also worked with enough image editing applications to tell the good ones from the bad. This app doesn't impress me. Based on the reviews I'm obviously not the only person who thinks that way either. They're off to a mediocre start. I hope they take the feedback positively and apply it to future revisions of this app.
Great. So now iPhone users can get the same hideously unnatural and/or flat'n'ugly HDR results that desktop users can.
* sigh *
This is just another in a series of tools which, when handed off to people who don't know squat about visual aesthetics, proudly make total crap, just like the sample shown. I mean, all I want to do is take these untrained/clueless but otherwise well-meaning folks, sit them down and pound three things into their little me-too noggins:
1) Photography: HDR, when used with restraint can be beautiful, but pay attention that you don't get clownish results. Just use your eyes and common sense. If you find you're pushing the sliders out near the limits, chances are you're screwing it up.
2) Video: Do NOT use transitions between every frickin' clip. When you DO use them, again, show a LOT of restraint both in number and type, that is unless your point IS to make a laughably bad video.
3) Video: Do NOT feel you need to add a damned piece of music to every frickin' video you dump onto YouTube. People, you are NOT making music videos. Silence or natural soundtrack IS FINE.
@bosskev: Yeah i know, how dare they take advanced tech and put it in the hands of mere mortals. Come on man, everyones gotta start somewhere and not everyone is going to end up a Picasso , but we need more people exposed to more things to find the diamonds in the rough.
(Pablo Picasso was never called an asshole, at least not in new york)
@dillinger23: I think it's GREAT that advanced tech is being put into the hands of laypeople. But just because a tool ALLOWS you to do something does not mean it is a correct or pleasing usage. And you do not need to aspire to Picasso-eque standards to grasp basic concepts of how to make your everyday family-oriented photos and videos more pleasing.
And I don't fault people for their lack of training, understanding that they WANT to make nice looking things, and said as much above. But it is incumbent upon the creators and vendors of these tools to guide people as to how to best use the tool they are selling and, more importantly, to not mislead people as to the nature of their product.
If you have the time, go take a look at the iTunes page for this HDR product. Look at the samples provided by the vendor and also read the text. It seems to me these are people who may be great programmers, but know nothing about HDR or what it is supposed to be. Their sample pics are each and every one ugly and unnatural. Colors are usually so oversaturated that the pics almost take on the quality of a Lite-Brite toy. Then in the text they talk about how the tool is SUPPOSED to essentially do just that, intensify the colors. Uh, that is NOT HDR.
Now go Google HDR. Find out what HDR is SUPPOSED to be, as used by trained photographers. It is NOT a "saturation" and "vividness" tool. It IS a tool about dynamic range, a very different factor, specifically related to highlight and shadow detail. The commonly accepted goal of HDR is to put subtle and natural--keyword here is NATURAL--details back into those two extreme light/dark values of the photo. Sadly, this HDR tool for the iPhone sidesteps that whole concept, misdirecting and selling people with a buzzword that is being overplayed internet-wide.
@bosskev: I notice that that most people who criticize attempts at photography are those who are uncomfortable with their creative output. They do not have anything to contribute themselves, so they tear others down. If you go to Flickr, you will find that those who are most popular always offer positive and encouraging comments.
Why don't you post your Flickr photostream link and let us judge your work? I am a hobbyist photog myself, but I don't believe I have the right to tell other people what they are trying to accomplish with their work.
Probable past quotes:
"It truly is a shame that the common man should have the skills of writing"- Renaissance Royalty
"Imagine the monstrosities that will be created with the affordable graphite pencil!"-High Modernist Artist
And the current:
"(HDR) is just another in a series of tools which, when handed off to people who don't know squat about visual aesthetics, proudly make total crap"- 2009 know-it-all
@Clancycoop: And I notice that that most people who criticize people who try to offer constructive criticism about photography are those who are assholes.
My work is private and/or commercial. As such it is not posted on Flickr and never will be. However, since you ask, here is one set of samples of portrait/celebrity work I did at Sundance in 2008 (and this site is, as all are my photo pages, usually password protected and not visible to the public).
@bosskev: Okay, you have an iWeb Mobile Me site. Great. I still believe that calling people "asshole" and judging other people's photography like you are a god isn't constructive.
The funny thing is that I agree with you that this app is useless, and it is only jumping on a bandwagon already rolling. I agree there are many "HDR" images that aren't visually pleasing. I think the only thing that I don't agree with is your incredibly disrespectful attitude.
Your photography looked great. Crystal clear, even in low light. Because of this, I don't think that you need to put other's lowly attempts at photography down. You don't need to stand on their heads.
@bosskev: Great pics Kev. I would share my collection with you but they are not as techincally good as yours nor do I think you would be interested in the subject matter. You have a good eye though, that much is ocvious even to a novice.
@Clancycoop: FWIW, I looked up your Flickr photostream last night. While you may not care about my opinion, I do have to say you've got some great photography there. In particular you seem to have a strong sensitivity with selective focus/controlled depth of field and also a couple of "Wow!" portraits. You also have a large body of work in which you've purposely manipulated the color saturation levels way beyond norm, pushing the values into near-poster-level vibrancy. In this case--and very much unlike this iPhone app's samples--such over saturation works, and works well. You've manipulated the colors well and, as a series, they are quite strong, not meant to be realistic but surrealistic. Now, since you have artfully pushed the saturation levels, I would not say that series is an example of HDR-only work, although you may have incorporated those techniques as well. And it was in the discussion of HDR in the article that my hot buttons were pushed. The HDR technique CANNOT be done with a single photo as this dumb-dumb iPhone app would try to sell us. It IS a process of combining two or, more typically, three photos of purposely varied/bracketed exposures and digitally combining the best-exposed elements of each, creating a single photo with dynamic range that no current digital sensor (nor software application) can achieve. While color may suddenly appear in areas that were otherwise poorly exposed, color saturation in itself is not part of the HDR equation.
Anyway, if we're offering olive branches to each other, I accept yours and hope you can do the same in return.
@bosskev: In a somewhat rare occurrence on the internet, I think that we see eye to eye. I believe I understand what you are and were originally saying. Maybe I am oversensitve because I don't think that HDR should be dismissed as a parlor trick. And as you said, I often use the technique. Many of my photos are surrealistic (though I believe would be defined as more "dreamy" than poorly executed).
As I said in my previous post, it is true that this iPhone app is dumb. And all it is doing it making "HDR" an acronym that will make photogs cringe because of poor use.
Well, that settles that. Sorry that I didn't show more tact in my initial reply.
BTW, I live 1/2 hour away from Sundance. I don't know if you live nearby. Maybe we could shoot the lake sometime and you could give me some tips.
@Clancycoop: Thanks for the lake invite, but I'm actually a couple of states distant. I'm only out your way when I'm at Sundance, which I have been shooting for the last few years. Anyway, agreed on being agreeable.
Bartender! A round of hugs and kisses, all around the house, my tab! Cheers!
only thing stopping me from breaking out the plastic is the mention of a timer mode or time lapse mode.. which is an extremely important feature for me in a p/s camera such as this.. I'd rather leave this out for a day or few hours and not my 5dm2.. Canons p/s with a hacked firmware to allow time lapse functionality might be a win over this one for that feature alone
1. How is that HDR mode not a gimmick? It certainly doesn't look anything like any HDR photos I've seen / made. It should be called something like enhanced mode. Using the name HDR has gimmick written all over it.
2. Acceptable ISO noise? Really? That to me looks appalling. Even ISO 400 shots aren't really usable at 100%
The price is pretty normal. I wouldn't call it a photographer's point and shoot though. For that, I'll stick with my Canon PowerShot G series, which is truly as feature packed as you can make a point and shoot.
I like it....I like it a lot, especially the macro function, which I'd use a great deal. I'm willing to completely forget the niggles about video capture, though it's something I currently use on my SD1000, including the time-lapse function (which is actually pretty sweet.)
nice looking specs...and nice backup... i like the Canon G10, but it is a bit more expensive...if i didnt have it already i would look very much to this camera as my pocket camera in the field
@JonathanATTY: Ricoh has a history of producing the best point and shoot cameras - all the way back to the age of film. When they're not pandering to the lowest price point [and other corporate necessities], they turn out some pretty cool stuff.
These are a couple of very cool Ricoh film cameras and sample shots:
@thinkmore: I have a Ricoh film camera from way back in the day. One of the things I love about it is that it takes regular old AA batteries. No hunting around for weird batteries while on vacation.
Of course, now that I have a D40, the Ricoh pretty much just gathers dust... :(
What impressed me about the photo is that while everything looks like an acid trip, the miniature Statue of Liberty looks normal. So, get wasted all you want folks, the core elements of our freedom will be there to sober you up.
05/23/09
I can tell a crappy picture or image when I see one. I've also worked with enough image editing applications to tell the good ones from the bad. This app doesn't impress me. Based on the reviews I'm obviously not the only person who thinks that way either. They're off to a mediocre start. I hope they take the feedback positively and apply it to future revisions of this app.
05/23/09
It totally goes out of its way to broken the blacks in the image and add some more saturation.
05/23/09
Er...um...huh?
05/22/09
* sigh *
This is just another in a series of tools which, when handed off to people who don't know squat about visual aesthetics, proudly make total crap, just like the sample shown. I mean, all I want to do is take these untrained/clueless but otherwise well-meaning folks, sit them down and pound three things into their little me-too noggins:
1) Photography: HDR, when used with restraint can be beautiful, but pay attention that you don't get clownish results. Just use your eyes and common sense. If you find you're pushing the sliders out near the limits, chances are you're screwing it up.
2) Video: Do NOT use transitions between every frickin' clip. When you DO use them, again, show a LOT of restraint both in number and type, that is unless your point IS to make a laughably bad video.
3) Video: Do NOT feel you need to add a damned piece of music to every frickin' video you dump onto YouTube. People, you are NOT making music videos. Silence or natural soundtrack IS FINE.
/soapbox
05/22/09
(Pablo Picasso was never called an asshole, at least not in new york)
05/22/09
And I don't fault people for their lack of training, understanding that they WANT to make nice looking things, and said as much above. But it is incumbent upon the creators and vendors of these tools to guide people as to how to best use the tool they are selling and, more importantly, to not mislead people as to the nature of their product.
If you have the time, go take a look at the iTunes page for this HDR product. Look at the samples provided by the vendor and also read the text. It seems to me these are people who may be great programmers, but know nothing about HDR or what it is supposed to be. Their sample pics are each and every one ugly and unnatural. Colors are usually so oversaturated that the pics almost take on the quality of a Lite-Brite toy. Then in the text they talk about how the tool is SUPPOSED to essentially do just that, intensify the colors. Uh, that is NOT HDR.
Now go Google HDR. Find out what HDR is SUPPOSED to be, as used by trained photographers. It is NOT a "saturation" and "vividness" tool. It IS a tool about dynamic range, a very different factor, specifically related to highlight and shadow detail. The commonly accepted goal of HDR is to put subtle and natural--keyword here is NATURAL--details back into those two extreme light/dark values of the photo. Sadly, this HDR tool for the iPhone sidesteps that whole concept, misdirecting and selling people with a buzzword that is being overplayed internet-wide.
05/23/09
Why don't you post your Flickr photostream link and let us judge your work? I am a hobbyist photog myself, but I don't believe I have the right to tell other people what they are trying to accomplish with their work.
Probable past quotes:
"It truly is a shame that the common man should have the skills of writing"- Renaissance Royalty
"Imagine the monstrosities that will be created with the affordable graphite pencil!"-High Modernist Artist
And the current:
"(HDR) is just another in a series of tools which, when handed off to people who don't know squat about visual aesthetics, proudly make total crap"- 2009 know-it-all
05/23/09
My work is private and/or commercial. As such it is not posted on Flickr and never will be. However, since you ask, here is one set of samples of portrait/celebrity work I did at Sundance in 2008 (and this site is, as all are my photo pages, usually password protected and not visible to the public).
[web.me.com]
And if you need more "shut the fuck upping", let me know and I'll post some more links.
05/23/09
05/24/09
The funny thing is that I agree with you that this app is useless, and it is only jumping on a bandwagon already rolling. I agree there are many "HDR" images that aren't visually pleasing. I think the only thing that I don't agree with is your incredibly disrespectful attitude.
Your photography looked great. Crystal clear, even in low light. Because of this, I don't think that you need to put other's lowly attempts at photography down. You don't need to stand on their heads.
05/24/09
05/24/09
Anyway, if we're offering olive branches to each other, I accept yours and hope you can do the same in return.
05/24/09
As I said in my previous post, it is true that this iPhone app is dumb. And all it is doing it making "HDR" an acronym that will make photogs cringe because of poor use.
Well, that settles that. Sorry that I didn't show more tact in my initial reply.
BTW, I live 1/2 hour away from Sundance. I don't know if you live nearby. Maybe we could shoot the lake sometime and you could give me some tips.
05/25/09
Bartender! A round of hugs and kisses, all around the house, my tab! Cheers!
05/22/09
05/22/09
05/22/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
2. Acceptable ISO noise? Really? That to me looks appalling. Even ISO 400 shots aren't really usable at 100%
The price is pretty normal. I wouldn't call it a photographer's point and shoot though. For that, I'll stick with my Canon PowerShot G series, which is truly as feature packed as you can make a point and shoot.
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
Also lens is too slow and the high ISO shots are very noisy.
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
[www.ricoh.com]
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
I like it....I like it a lot, especially the macro function, which I'd use a great deal. I'm willing to completely forget the niggles about video capture, though it's something I currently use on my SD1000, including the time-lapse function (which is actually pretty sweet.)
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
These are a couple of very cool Ricoh film cameras and sample shots:
[thinkmoreinc.wordpress.com]
05/07/09
Of course, now that I have a D40, the Ricoh pretty much just gathers dust... :(
04/15/09
04/15/09
*beep bop bop buooop
04/15/09
04/15/09