This is why I really appreciate YT channels like Project Farm.
631 karma · joined April 28, 2013
My point originally was that amateurs generally spend far too much time focusing on the best gear, when they should be focusing on their subject and skillset.
>Subject matter is more interesting than the technology for me.
This has always been the case though. Amateurs and people who suffer from GAS place far too much reliance on the tool. They want to purchase the ability to create good works and become defeated when they learn they can't and quit. This has been true ever since the introduction of mass market film cameras. Many pros back in the film days carried around point and shoots or fixed lens cameras for personal use and left their F3s and 80-200mms at home.
This is just a reality of the consumer society we live in; people are advertised to incessantly and are conditioned to expect purchasing things to make them better. Thankfully art is a cathartic form of protest to this in many ways; you can't buy and compute photographic skill.
I'm semi-pro and my main gear stays at home unless I'm working on a project, personal or professional, and I carry my iPhone and a Fuji X100 for daily/personal stuff.
Cameras are already downsizing, DSLRs are long dead and mirrorless are not just the future, they're now the present. I don't think size is the issue any longer.
The purpose of using a "real" camera is quality and control. If you go on IG and look as all the top photography centric accounts they're using either film or mirrorless cameras, not iPhones. The ability to manipulate RAW photos, the outright quality of better sensors and lenses, and the ease of use of "real" cameras still makes them the top choice.
When you then throw in professional use into the mix the choice becomes more obvious. Just the ergonomics alone make traditional cameras the obvious choice. I'm not going to be mounting expensive shotgun mics, matte boxes, and filters to an iPhone.
As far as computational photography goes, it's the future and all manufacturers will need to start using it to get an edge on the competition. The thing with computational photography however is that it's a data driven process, just like anything else AI; data in is data out, so the better quality of dedicated cameras simply means better data for computational methods, thus better results in the end. There's no real substitution for better lenses and sensors, because any computational method applied to a phone can also be applied to a camera.
I think there's something to be said for the lack of control with computational methods too. my iPhone for example applies a lot of processing that makes skin to me look plasticy, but it's baked into the ISP. My Fujifilm when shooting in RAW or F-Log for example doesn't have this issue. So any computational methods applied to traditional cameras need to not impede on creative control; noise reduction is an area where it would be pretty universally helpful.
Biggest issue by far. We have a fleet of 100+ MacBooks in my office and expanded batteries are probably the only thing we have that goes wrong with them. They're rock solid otherwise. The new replaceable batteries is a huge deal.
Previous two companies (650 users, 250 users), were also gull G-Suite.
A product that could even compete with half of what AD offers and could manage OSX devices would be pretty incredible.
I'm excited to try the new 1mm keyboard.
Also, Apple never does things half-assed, if they put a touchscreen in they're doing for all models just like they did the touchbar.
No, because transferring 1TB+ of data from your camera over the crappy built in wifi chip is a much worse user experience than just plugging in an SD card. Lots of cameras also require you to connect to the camera's hot-spot, which means while transferring that data you are not on wifi. If you're just sending a few jpegs over, fine, wifi is great, but for people to whom the "Pro" moniker actually matters, it's a big deal.
Dongles are fine for sure, but having a slot built in is better, and there's no real reason not to have one other than "aesthetics"
VR is such a great twist for replaying an old classic, but you have to mod a few things unless you enjoy swinging your arms at cliff racers 300 times early on!
Morrowind was a very important game to me growing up and still my favourite Elder Scrolls release. I remember contributing to the Tamriel Rebuilt project when I was in my early teens and represents my first contribution to a community project. I like to give it a replay every couple years.
So in these situations how do you tell apart electrons from one source compared to another? In the article they mention how the LHC collides particles at a rate of "40 million times each second". I can imagine there are a lot of electrons and other particles flying around from other collisions. What makes an electron discernible between one type of particle and another?
The problem isn't technical, it's monetary. Facebook pours out tons of money to kickstart developers and get games out which is why they have a monopoly. There are few technical hurdles in the way of making Oculus games work on other headsets.
15 years ago games were still largely physical. That $60 included the physical games, cases, manuals, distribution, warehousing, etc. These days everything being digital companies don't have to pay that anymore. Sure there's a commission you have to pay on Steam/EGS but I highly doubt it's close to what having a physical distribution method cost.
So the way the $60 pie is split up today is totally different, and I imagine a much, much larger portion of that goes to the developers.
That pricing isn't for an "unconnected" version, that's for a business/enterprise version and yearly support. You can't use that figure and directly convert that into a value you place on your data or ad revenue.
Your point still stands, the Quest is heavily subsidized by user data on the premise of future ad revenue. This has been a given from the moment Facebook decided merge Oculus and FB acounts into one. I'm just correcting a false assumption that the $800 model is just "Quest -facebook", it's not.