Apple's attitude to photography ... 'Stop learning, we'll do the work for you!'

zauhar said:
By the way, my REAL bias is this: if you don't know UNIX, you don't know how to use a computer.

Randy
Click to expand...

As someone who loves UNIX, and uses it every single day (and not some jumped-up wannabe UNIX like Linux), I like this comment. However, and it's quite a big 'however', I also love the quote which I read somewhere that 'VMS is what UNIX wants to be when it grows up'.

Also, cost aside, I'll take IBM i (AS/400) over UNIX any day of the week, but price makes it impossible.

UNIX is great, and I'm as biased as hell towards it, but I draw the line that if you don't know UNIX, you don't know how to use a computer, there are other options that get less press, but for me, are significant improvements upon UNIX.

Also, I'm going indulge in a favourite pastime of mine, pedantry, and say that really it should be, "If you don't know UNIX, you don't know how to use Operating Systems", not computers.

Having said all that, they all have their pros and cons, Macs use UNIX, which makes them excellent by default, but Windows has come a long way, and is not the useless rubbish it once was. I've used most types of computers commonly available, and they're all crap, and they're all good, in their own ways. Macs are not better than PCs, and PCs are not better than Macs. Macs are not especially expensive, and PCs not especially cheap. It's all much of a muchness really.
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
Thanks. This is a VERY interesting article about the iPhone 5s. Camera now able to do tone-mapping, shoot a burst and select best or combine for best image, color temp adjustment for fill-flash, 120 fps slow-mo. This all sounds good to me.
Click to expand...
Me too. I'm definitely tempted.
 
It was Macintosh computers and their superb typographic and WSIWIG capabilities that COMPLETELY transformed the publishing world.

I saw it happen. Macs completely demolished typesetting equipment, mechanical paste-up, graphics methods and almost anything you could think of. The world of publishing went from 19th century to 21st century overnight. Union jobs and entrenched ways of doing things vanished.

There is just no doubt whatsoever. From the 1980's on, nothing was the same on magazines, newspapers, book publishing, anything.

Anyone who disputes this does not know what they are talking about. Poof! From one world to another, all on the back of the Mac.


* I used to be able to spec type in my head. I would call the typesetter, dictate a story with point size, kerning, wraps, etc OVER THE PHONE and get back type that fit a layout. I could never do this now. Dead lost skill.

We used to take a week to do a magazine cover. We would have to set type, change the size, do a chromaline for each new color or shift in photo, guess coverline colors. It was an expensive, time consuming, difficult nightmare. I remember the first time I showed an art department how to do a cover on a color Mac. In real time, instantly. Change type, colors, fonts, photos, with a keyclick. Then print it out on a color laser. It was like witchcraft. They were dumbfounded.
 
You're missing the biggest point in the issue about the fingerprint use of the use with the phone (but wait, you gave up that when getting a new passport). They might have been tracking before, but now its confirmative, congrats you idiots for believieng in "security". Hahahaa!
 
Boris Stupak said:
It was Macintosh computers and their superb typographic and WSIWIG capabilities that COMPLETELY transformed the publishing world.

I saw it happen. Macs completely demolished typesetting equipment, mechanical paste-up, graphics methods and almost anything you could think of. The world of publishing went from 19th century to 21st century overnight. Union jobs and entrenched ways of doing things vanished.

There is just no doubt whatsoever. From the 1980's on, nothing was the same on magazines, newspapers, book publishing, anything.

Anyone who disputes this does not know what they are talking about. Poof! From one world to another, all on the back of the Mac.


* I used to be able to spec type in my head. I would call the typesetter, dictate a story with point size, kerning, wraps, etc OVER THE PHONE and get back type that fit a layout. I could never do this now. Dead lost skill.

We used to take a week to do a magazine cover. We would have to set type, change the size, do a chromaline for each new color or shift in photo, guess coverline colors. It was an expensive, time consuming, difficult nightmare. I remember the first time I showed an art department how to do a cover on a color Mac. In real time, instantly. Change type, colors, fonts, photos, with a keyclick. Then print it out on a color laser. It was like witchcraft. They were dumbfounded.
Click to expand...

Not that I was in publishing (was a high school student at the time) but I remember seeing WYSIWIG on a Mac for the first time and being stunned. Even years later I was using word processing software that required you to enter printer codes for text style and type - you needed a printer manual next to your computer. It's easy to forget that at that stage Windows was a program UI running in a different Operating System, not an OS itself. Apple could have ruled the world if they had licensed their OS at that stage, or had been able to deliver low-cost Macs. While kerning mentally (!!!) is a skill that has died, it probably didn't add to the final product. Understanding the interaction between shutter speed, motion blur, aperture and depth of field is much more useful. That said, for "snapshot" photos this was rarely used by Joe Average. Even my 1937 roll film camera has marks for "set here and you'll get something." A P&S in your pocket that produces great-looking snapshots? Priceless.
 
The iPhone and subsequent "smartphones" are actually misinterpreted. Steve Jobs understood what he was introducing.

They are tiny, handheld, full function COMPUTERS, not phones at all. Digital cameras are cameras with computer functions, but smartphones are full blown computers.

The "phone" function is just one program. The "camera" is another program. They are marvelously integrated devices with wireless, networking, lenses, microphones, touch displays, gyros, sensors. They connect to the whole world, instantly.

They can do anything and be anything. (not to mention the perfect big brother surveillance device that people voluntarily carry! Stalin would have killed to have his whole population walk around with them.)


If you want to talk about the camera "PROGRAM", then it makes sense.

The average consumer couldn't care less about any camera controls, adjustments, etc.

Apple has the right idea. They want the picture to be good without any thought. If the camera/phone can fix backlighting, shutter speed, low light conditions, high contrast, and so on, the vast majority of users will be very happy with it.

When my wife, for example, uses a camera, her only critical comments are "That one is not clear" or "that one is fuzzy". She wants to take a photo of the kids and have the skin tone nice, the focus sharp and the exposure right. She has no idea what a shutter or an f-stop do.

With her camera or phone she NEVER uses the stuff like white balance adjust, or sepia tone, or "scene modes" or "instagram" stuff. Too complicated and she doesn't care.

She snaps photos of the kids, and videos of them with her phone. Once in a while she will take a photo of scenery or food in a restaurant, but mostly it is kid pix.

Right now she has a Samsung Galaxy S3 and she is happy with the photos. The phone camera does everything she cares about. Why drag along a flip camera or a point and shoot? Her photos look great.

(if I take a photo of strangers, or "street" photography, or something with an interesting composition, she is totally baffled. "Why do you waste pictures? Take pictures of the children or the family.")
 
But this has always been the goal of camera manufacturers throughout history in order to sell to the 99+% who just want the images and don't care about how they're made (not meant pejoratively). Film camera developments that resulted in less knowledge needed included built-in meters; focusing devices (e.g., rangefinders); multiple auto exposure modes; auto focus; and built-in flashes. Digital added auto ISO, auto white balance (no need to know about color temperature or filters), and ability to immediately see if you got the image you wanted. And incorporating a camera into a phone elimiminated the "inconvenience" of carrying a separate camera and images can be sent all over the place immediately.

Also, this kept camera manufacturers going because if everyone was still using well-made cameras from the 1950s, 60s, 70s, etc., the manufacturers would have gone out of business a long time ago.

The ultimate development requiring no knowledge of the process would be the ability to create and transmit images from one's mind with the eyes as the lens. I'm sure someone is working on that.
 
I don't care too much and I'm also quite comfortable being
quote : [... we’re being told we’re an insignificant speck of a demographic].
LOL, I like that, using a rangefinder in todays world fits that description totally :D.

PS: I only have an "unsmart phone" which I think is Samsung but it could be something else,
I would have to check for the brand name somewhere ... important for me :
I can make phone calls and it has a darn good battery life (about 2 weeks).
I am not using it for taking pictures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom