All posts by jetrotz

the author of this blog.

Don’t ‘diss a blogger

Thomas Hawk documents his experience with a Brooklyn discount photo store (PriceRitePhoto.com) as he tried to purchase a new Canon EOS 5D. Like all the lore suggests, the price was just too good to be true, and the retailer threatened Mr. Hawk after learning that he was going to blog his experience after the seller refused to fulfill the deal unless he purchased all sorts of high-markup accessories. Long story short – Yahoo! Shopping delisted the company, Digg.com users nearly took the company’s server down, and they ended up being pulled from most of the major comparison shopping sites following the brouhaha. I’ve experienced this on occasion before myself, though not quite to this degree. Seller beware!

technorati tags: , , , ,

Sweeet

PC Magazine has just published a review of CNN Pipeline – the closing sentence has a really nice ring to it:

CNN Pipeline isn’t perfect, but it’s certainly the most impressive video offering the Web has ever seen.

technorati tags: , , , ,

Pipeline Comments and Content

Two quick links for the morning re: the CNN Pipeline launch on Monday.

Most of the discussion is dismissive of this as a pay product. Others try to balance the trolling with reasonable questions about the acceptance of users if the conent was interspersed with ads. A good discussion overall. I especially like the comments from Digg users pointing out that there is really no other source for day-in, day-out live streamed news on the web other than Pipeline. A few requests for BBC Pipeline, Digg.com Pipeline, and ESPN Pipeline. One user predicts CNNSi Pipeline for $5/month by the end of next year. Nice idea, but they’d have to resurrect my old network to do that ;-). Here’s a great comment from blueice03:

I beta-tested this and I was overwhelmingly impressed. Why? Because few other outlets, sites, news organizations or what have you, have done what CNN is attempting to do with this. All these comments about how absurd it is to pay for a service like this are, not to be a troll, the types of comments I’d expect from the slashdot crowd. I guess I don’t get it. Why is there this expectation that services offered over the internet should be cheap or free? If you want a premium service then you should expect to have to pay for that premium service and this, my friends, is a premium service. Hell, it is even cheap. It is just a little over $2 a month. And whoever complained earlier about having to download CNN’s own special player, you don’t have to. They do have a web version that is download free. It is a great looking service and the kind of offering I have always expected news outlets to have but don’t.

technorati tags: , , ,

Aperture Anxiety

In an exhaustive review on ars.technica, serious concerns are raised about the RAW import/translation capabilities of the new monster app from Apple. While they rave about the UI and organization tools in Aperture, they point out that the output from the program includes far more noise than any professional would tolerate in the images. Basically, the program is getting hammered in reviews. Studio2f.com points to one commenter on Slashdot who said it like this:  ‘Photoshop is the darkroom. Aperture is the light table. If you don’t understand this, you’re not in the target market.’ While that sounds dead-on right, I’d have to say that crappy RAW handling is something that any pro-level workflow tool simply cannot have.

From the red channel framegrabs in the Ars review, I suspect that Aperture is using a JPEG as a transitional format for display purposes despite the fact that the source is a RAW file. iPhoto has always done this – claimed ‘RAW’ support but actually converted all the files to JPEG. Ars sums up the problem thusly:

Many of you probably are hearing the alarm bells and you should. The whole premise of this program, and the RAW format itself, relies on quality input for quality output. If the RAW converter in Aperture is no better than shooting in JPEG format, then it has little appeal over iPhoto as a professional’s tool. This isn’t something that can be fixed overnight either. Adobe’s Camera Raw and other programs like Capture One have been years in the making and unless Apple buys up some quality RAW technology and drops it into the 1.5 update, you’re not going to see Aperture rival the professional RAW apps any time soon.

The problems continue for basic features like Unsharp Mask combining with this type of post-import noise to produce lots more artifacts for basic editing tasks. Also missing are a true ‘curves’ tool – only a 4-step levels tool exists. And a pixel sampler is also absent, something most pros want to see in their basic workflow. To me, this app would need to provide the basic tools I need to import, ouptut galleries, prints, etc plus organize, do basic color and exposure correction, plus minimal unsharp mask tools. If, however, the RAW issue is pervasive and real, Apple may have jumped the gun on releasing this latest application. To sum it up, Ars closes as follows:

I’d like to get excited about things like instant books and the light table, but if the base technology in Aperture is flawed, it can’t be the high-end imaging hub it wants to be.

Ouch! Even with all these problems, if Aperture helps deal more fluidly with the  22k+ images in my iPhoto library, it will be a godsend.

technorati tags: , , , ,