Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Bonobo on January 28, 2010, 07:40:59 am
-
So, its finally arrived, after months of speculation Apple has released the iPad. i cant say that i was very impressed my self. But after looking at the specs page i noticed that there are two adapters for it, one USB and one SD card. This got me thinking that it would make a great viewer for MF backs. If they released a FireWire adapter for it, and Phase one made a "Lite" version of C1, could be very useful...
What are your thoughts..
-
As far as I can tell, it will be able to run any app that already runs on an iPod Touch / iPhone, which means that the Leaf Capture Remote app (http://www.leaf-photography.com/products_lcremote.asp) will probably run on it already, although they might have to tweak it a little to adjust the display resolution, or something perhaps. Maybe the guys at Leaf are already testing one?
-
Expect a number of interesting display / transfer / process applications from various companies over the next 6-9 months. Photokina this September will be particularly interesting.
Michael
-
It could be the ultimate tethering and portable hard drive/backup system. But from what was announced yesterday, I believe there's nothing of particular interest* (for pros, that is). (Still I want two, but that's another subject
* They say you can already connect to cameras via USB. It would be interesting to now exactly what functionality is already there.
// Petter
-
The iPad runs Apple's own CPU, the Apple A4, manufactured by Samsung. Not surprisingly, it has an ARM Cortex A9 CPU core in it, which makes sense given that the iPod Touch and iPhone all use ARM-based CPUs, otherwise they'll have to resort to software emulation which will kill any performance benefit it's 1GHz clock speed gave it. I've not had the benefit of trying out Leaf's Capture Remote app, but if the iPod Touch can run it, then the iPad should run it even better, but for certain, I would seriously doubt that the Apple A4 CPU can come anywhere near the performance of even a "lowly" 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo running at full blast converting a RAW file...
People look at the iPad and yawn, saying, "OK, ya, so what, it looks like a gigantic iPod Touch." but from someone who worked on industrial apps when the Apple MessagePads came out, this is the sort of tablet device we've ended up having to wait a decade for. Screen quality, price, thickness and battery life are everything for this form factor, and I would expect they've tuned the multi-touch experience well too. I say, "Finally, someone's finally done it." Now I hope it sparks a plethora of competing ultra-thin tablets from Asus, Acer and the rest too.
-
Weather it can tether my Leaf back, provide backup storage, run C1, is besides the point. The big impact is on the business of publishing. What matters is that the iPad may enable the magazines to survive by charging a subscription fee for the new magazine apps on the iPad. I used to make money working for magazines, until they started on down the path to the lowest common denominator, cheaper and more is btter route. I hope to again make money working for magazines, in the new format, shooting both stills and video.
-
The IPad really disappoints me because i hoped to a Mac OS Software and a USB or Firewire Connection. I love shooting tethered and I hoped that the new Mac could be used for it. My MacBook is to bulky to use it when the camera is on the tripod. Now it seems its more useful for my children....
Michael Heinrich
-
I hoped for a low spec laptop like device.
I love the iPad but I think for serious photography it's not that good.
It will not handle the RAW files, it will not tether and it won't run Aperture.
On the other hand I see BIG BIG possibilities for our Home Theater.
It's the perfect replacement for Creston etc. So I'm excited to see what happens with that.
At the moment it's a iPhone XXXXXXL but no reason for me to run to the stores.
-
First, it is great at anything the Apple exec. demonstrated it is good at:
for some leisure tasks and some work tasks.
Great tool for photographers, while they are not shooting.
It is a good portfolio replacement and great tool to display images for different purposes at meetings.
Iphone was already pretty good at that, the iPad is simply better.
-
I think this thing has incredible potential as a tripod-mounted focusing aid.
I could never get used to focusing in a little tunnel of the Mamiya AFDIII viewfinder while shooting landscape work.
And for those hardy souls using MF View Cameras/plate cameras/Alpa bodies, this could be the biggest thing since Phase One stayed open-platform:
-You could use that $30,000 back without having to mechanically slide it over or switch it out with a ground glass.
-The camera can be kept intact and therefore more weather sealed/ dust-resistant
-and you could focus your 645 sensor on a nearly 8x10 inch "ground glass". Anybody who has tried tilts and swings with a MFDB would probably agree that this would be a huge improvement.
-
As far as a product for non-photographers I would like to see this:
Scroll to the 3:15 mark...
http://vimeo.com/8217311?hd=1 (http://vimeo.com/8217311?hd=1)
-
can't we imagine a fake CF card for wifi in the back to send the picture to the tablet ?
-
I think this is a good start, because this product is a content viewer, not a content creator/processor. I'm a bit disappointed that apple said this is the BEST way to view the internet in their videos but there's no flash support? I would say that 50% of my internet usage involves flash in one way or another. I go more in detail on my blog calebcondit.com/blog if anyone is interested in reading more. I agree with Micheal that it'll be interesting to see what apps are created for this thing to tap it's full potential because as it stands now I might buy it to read magazines and show a multimedia presentation of my portfolio, but that's a big might. Now if there are some serious apps worked out for professional photographers then I'd definitely get on board.
-
I think this thing has incredible potential as a tripod-mounted focusing aid.
I could never get used to focusing in a little tunnel of the Mamiya AFDIII viewfinder while shooting landscape work.
And for those hardy souls using MF View Cameras/plate cameras/Alpa bodies, this could be the biggest thing since Phase One stayed open-platform:
-You could use that $30,000 back without having to mechanically slide it over or switch it out with a ground glass.
-The camera can be kept intact and therefore more weather sealed/ dust-resistant
-and you could focus your 645 sensor on a nearly 8x10 inch "ground glass". Anybody who has tried tilts and swings with a MFDB would probably agree that this would be a huge improvement.
im not sure why it would be better than a laptop for photography. im sure the keyboard will be more of a hassle than a real keyboard, and you would have to prop it up to see it, a laptop props its self up.
and im sure it wont have anywhere near the horse power of a laptop. if you need lightness, then theres the macbook air (if you dont need fw). i doubt anyone will make a fw adaptor for the ipad, nobodies made any usb/fw adaptors yet.
i would really like to see small pics being sent to an iphone from a leaf back- like they use to do with an hp handheld, but they cant even do that without having a macbook in the mix.
paul
-
With no multitasking... what do you want that thing to be useful for?
Nice beta version of what it could have been...
But Apple design and it looks good.
Must be hard to find a good designer on earth for the other companies to come with such a sleek design...
I found that though... http://www.axiotron.com/index.php?id=home (http://www.axiotron.com/index.php?id=home)
-
I think TMARK's right on the money re magazines, I think the iPad will be the saviour of the magazine industry.
As for tethering I don't think we'll ever see it with an iPad. What I currently do when shooting tethered with my Hasselblad is set Phocu to auto export new images as previews.
This means I can get the AD, model's mother in law etc away from the shooting station. The previews pop up on a networked mac in quicklook about 2 seconds after they are shot and it would be cool to set up an iPad this way..
Nick-T
-
I completely understand why Apple is doing it this way, its a must have toy, not a tool for serious work. If we are lucky we will be able to tether our DSLRs with it, but I am very shure, MF digital is S.O.O.L. Apple wants to sell millions of them, three for every houshold, not just a few hundreds for a few photo geeks. I'll get on (or three) anyways...
-
iPaid
iPeed
-
I found that though... http://www.axiotron.com/index.php?id=home (http://www.axiotron.com/index.php?id=home)
That is the right tool for us.
-
That is the right tool for us.
no outdoor screen, slowish processor, OSX is not great with a tablet
its weakness have been discussed on this forum before - please do an archive search.
use a windows 7 tablet - much better answer, very powerful and cheaper.
see the post under "Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques" iPad discussion
-
Taking a step back from the hype & inevitable downer reactions, I think this device will actually be a big success given time. Echoing many, It's the content that will make or break it.
As for it having a place in our photography toolboxes, I'm not in the slightest bit bothered about back up/ storage etc. Some kind of USB input would have been useful though.
I think it will be a great tool for viewing for clients/art directors in studio enviroments with LC remote etc & I'd like to see a serious version of PS, Lightroom & In Design etc for it as I think it's would be a great way for AD's to muck around with images & their layouts whilst shooting & be able to knock them back & forth with email etc.
Also a front facing cam for chat would also be an obvious addition next time.
It's by no means essential for me to have one yet so I'll happily wait, like i did with the iPhone, for a couple of revisions to come.
Overall though I think it's definately got legs & I like it.
-
A quick look at the spec sheet of the iPad indicates to me that it is not very suitable for high-end photography. No FireWire 800 (or 400 for that matter) connection, no CF slot (or an ExpressCard that would enable this), ... So this is certainly not very usable as field storage for high end digital shooting. But then again, the thing was most likely not conceived for this purpose but is geared towards gadget-seekers.
-
Apple became a gadget company since the iPod. I wouldn't be surprise that eventually they venture into the video-game market.
Eduardo
But then again, the thing was most likely not conceived for this purpose but is geared towards gadget-seekers.
-
Apple became a gadget company since the iPod. I wouldn't be surprise that eventually they venture into the video-game market.
Eduardo
Already happened ... Haven't you seen the legions of kids playing games on their moms' iPhones?
The Parental iPhone seems to be the primary backup to the Nintendo DSi for the 5-9 y/o crowd ... with Brickbreaker on the Blackberry as the last resort ...
-
Already happened ... Haven't you seen the legions of kids playing games on their moms' iPhones?
The Parental iPhone seems to be the primary backup to the Nintendo DSi for the 5-9 y/o crowd ... with Brickbreaker on the Blackberry as the last resort ...
yeap...
when I would have love to see a tablet/macbookpro under steroid that I could have wirelessly plug to a screen at home, and then my touch screen become my keyboard and my graphic tablet... that would have been something...
-
I've been waiting for a new Mac Pro forever. The average product cycle is about 260 days and the current offering is over 300 days old... granted they're just waiting for the 6 core processors, but I'm pretty damn frustrated with Apple right now. The announcement of this toy just adds to that frustration. They used to make their money on the high end machines, but it's become obvious that the App Store is where the money's at.
-
They used to make their money on the high end machines, but it's become obvious that the App Store is where the money's at.
If you believe Apple (and I rarely do these days), the App Store is not making them much money as yet.
From http://www.t3.com/news/itunes-and-apple-ap...nge-that?=43335 (http://www.t3.com/news/itunes-and-apple-app-store-not-profitable-islate-may-change-that?=43335) dated 26 Jan 10:
CFO Peter Oppenheimer said of the services: “Regarding the App Store and the iTunes Store, we're running those a bit over break-even, and that hasn't changed, We're very excited to be providing our developers with just a fabulous opportunity, and we think that's helping us a lot with the iPhone and the iPod touch platforms."
Given Apple's limited involvement I fail to see why they aren't profiting from it. Longer term, and if the iP(h)ad becomes popular, it should become much more profitable.
-
Watch the iPad launch video on the Apple site. That's where Steve Jobs has stated that they are a mobile devices company. Laptops, ipods, iphones and soon to be ipads are where they make their money now. Macbooks outsell their other desktop platforms.
It's changing so fast. I now think of the Imac 27" as their tower. When I think of the actual towers, I think of the Edsel.
Portable and lightweight is the word.
-
In terms of technology, I'm glad someone finally put together (what I presume to be) a well built piece of hardware. To me, the iPad represents where the 10" or close to A4 sized tablet has to be in terms of build, weight, thickness, basic specifications and so on, but the lack of Flash compatibility in the browser and multitasking makes the software a disappointment for me. It's amazing how many websites won't work properly without Flash. Even the lowly Nokia N810 Internet Tablet with it's 400MHz processor runs regular YouTube properly (i.e., not HD content of course). Presumably, they also built the Apple A4 processor to make it that much harder for someone to get Linux running on it too. I'm sure it does what it was made for really well. I guess Steve Jobs quite possibly was having trouble reading text on his iPhone these days and asked the kids at Apple to come up with a bigger one that he could read more easily? Just kidding.
-
use a windows 7 tablet - much better answer, very powerful and cheaper.
The point of the iPad, and the aspect that will make or break it as a product, is the fact that it is not a computer.
If you tether a netbook to your camera, attached to your tripod, you have a underpowered computer running full-size programs intended for proper use at a desk. Even Canon's DPP is a full size raw conversion program that you can use to tether. It would tax even the fastest lil netbook.
Suppose instead that someone made a smaller, more manageable App that only handled camera interface on the best touch screen available, and you can see why it might be worth $500. It would not be an "almost good enough" computer. It would be a very, fast, very focused digital photography aid.
Thats the only promise I think this has for professionals- that and portfolio viewing.
If you think $499 a lot of $ for a better workflow, try the $600 Canon wireless remote or $1200 wireless file transmitter. Yikes!
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...p;modelid=15710 (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&tabact=SNAModelSuppliesTabAct&fcategoryid=803&modelid=15710)
-
iPad Pro?
http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/02/01/apple-tablet-os-x-ipad/ (http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/02/01/apple-tablet-os-x-ipad/)
-
To me, the main use of the iPad would be for backup in the field instead of using a laptop. But it doesn't seem to support RAW files, much like the iPod didn't support RAW files. If this is the case, then the product is of very limited usefulness to me. And with the limited storage space, it would need to have the ability to attach via USB to a small external drive. So, all things considered based on what I know now, I doubt if I will be buying one. At least until v.2 is released!
-
Sometimes a video speaks more than a thousand text jokes
http://www.youtube.com/v/8eF0y0IfpPU&r...color1=0xb1b1b1 (http://www.youtube.com/v/8eF0y0IfpPU&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1)
Edmund
-
It could be the ultimate tethering and portable hard drive/backup system. But from what was announced yesterday, I believe there's nothing of particular interest* (for pros, that is). (Still I want two, but that's another subject
* They say you can already connect to cameras via USB. It would be interesting to now exactly what functionality is already there.
// Petter
http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/control...2FABC3CE1BC569A (http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/controller/e/web/LenovoPortal/en_US/systemconfig.runtime.workflow:LoadRuntimeTree?sb=:00000025:000027C6:&smid=653343E0DE54435882FABC3CE1BC569A)
-
Re. the OP: it can't be used in professional photography at all, it really is a shame.
I don't think that will ever change; for tethering there are no apps, Raw isn't supported, the processor is slower than a netbook's, and the (phone) OS is not likely to run any regular programs in the future, just downsized iApps .
It's a closed-system, consumer-only device ; only time will tell, but I think , even if it sells, the majority of buyers might run into usability issues very quickly.
-
Re. the OP: it can't be used in professional photography at all, it really is a shame.
I don't think that will ever change; for tethering there are no apps, Raw isn't supported, the processor is slower than a netbook's, and the (phone) OS is not likely to run any regular programs in the future, just downsized iApps .
It's a closed-system, consumer-only device ; only time will tell, but I think , even if it sells, the majority of buyers might run into usability issues very quickly.
Of course there are no tethering apps because it's a new platform, but vendors are free to make them. What do you mean RAW is not supported? If you make your own app, you can support RAW all you want. The processor is very capable considering the device. No it's probably not as fast as a netbook processor, but then again it's not running an OS that's designed to run on much larger machines (like netbooks are). That's why it probably will respond much faster than most netbooks. If by regular programs, you mean desktop applications, you're right, it'll probably never run those and thank god for that. They are made for keyboard and mouse, not your finger. However, it will run up(!)sized iPhone apps and apps made directly for the iPad. Apple for instance made its office suite, iWork, for iPad and it seems very promising.
The system is just as closed as the iPhone - but despite it being "closed" as you say, the iPhone is probably the most versatile and capable handheld computer platform in the world today, simply because of the amount of apps available for it. That gives you many choices you don't get from other "open" platforms. And what do you mean by usability issues? You can say many things about the iPad, but the usability is one of its most guaranteed strengths.
I think the iPad could be a great device for various kinds of photography apps. Don't expect to see a full blown RAW converter in the iPad platform though. Decoding a RAW file is just too heavy a task to make it run satisfactory on a device like the iPad. That also means that you probably won't see it talking directly to a camera without a computer to decode the RAW files in between. But as a large preview pad like the ones that exist for the iPhone today it should be great.
-
The system is just as closed as the iPhone - but despite it being "closed" as you say, the iPhone is probably the most versatile and capable handheld computer platform in the world today, simply because of the amount of apps available for it. ...
I think the iPad could be a great device for various kinds of photography apps. Don't expect to see a full blown RAW converter in the iPad platform though.
I mostly agree: many iPad Apps will come, but photographic Apps will be limited by factors like lack of multi-tasking and the low-power, lower-performance processors. Indeed, Apple clearly has no interest in the iPad displacing sales of its more expensive MacBooks, let alone replacing MacBook Pros.
One iPad use I can see is as a "thin client" (VNC): as a highly mobile interface to a "real" computer over WiFi or 3G connection. The hand-holdable mobility could be useful even if the other computer is in the same room. And there are already VNC Apps for iPod, which will surely be enhanced for iPad.
My guess: Apple will soon add touch features to Mac OS X (at this year's Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, June/July), catching up with Windows 7 on that front, and with that will launch an iPad App to allow remote use of Mac OS X computers. And maybe also some touchscreen Mac OS X hardware products; even a higher-end, full-featured Mac OS X "iSlate"?
-
http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/control...2FABC3CE1BC569A (http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/controller/e/web/LenovoPortal/en_US/systemconfig.runtime.workflow:LoadRuntimeTree?sb=:00000025:000027C6:&smid=653343E0DE54435882FABC3CE1BC569A)
yes, like I keep posting, the answer is here with us right now - its good Tablet PC's. they have EVERYTHING a pro photographer needs, including the exotic requests - like Firewire, super Bright Outdoor touch screens, convertible tablet forms that can hang from a tripod, solid state drives, 8Gb memory and the same range of fast to ultra fast intel processors that are in Powerbooks. Two hard-drives if you want mirror back up? - yes; removable extra batteries? - yes.
I like Apple too, but.. its time to stop being a zombie and realize what we want is here already, and ready to use.
Windows 7 is great, set up for mobile/touchscreen, and works with C1Pro right away. why are we bothering discussing the disappointing iPad?
Look at Fujitsu, Lenovo and HP. all have the answers out now, at bearable prices.
-
The ExoPC is another tablet with a netbook processor:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/06/exopc-t...e-world-to-see/ (http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/06/exopc-tablet-opens-up-for-the-world-to-see/)
http://www.exopc.com/en/exopc-slate-comparison.php (http://www.exopc.com/en/exopc-slate-comparison.php)
-
I mostly agree: many iPad Apps will come, but photographic Apps will be limited by factors like lack of multi-tasking and the low-power, lower-performance processors. Indeed, Apple clearly has no interest in the iPad displacing sales of its more expensive MacBooks, let alone replacing MacBook Pros.
One iPad use I can see is as a "thin client" (VNC): as a highly mobile interface to a "real" computer over WiFi or 3G connection. The hand-holdable mobility could be useful even if the other computer is in the same room. And there are already VNC Apps for iPod, which will surely be enhanced for iPad.
My guess: Apple will soon add touch features to Mac OS X (at this year's Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, June/July), catching up with Windows 7 on that front, and with that will launch an iPad App to allow remote use of Mac OS X computers. And maybe also some touchscreen Mac OS X hardware products; even a higher-end, full-featured Mac OS X "iSlate"?
How are photographics apps limited by the lack of multitasking?
As for your guess: I'm pretty sure that won't happen. Mac OS is a desktop OS that doesn't present itself to a tablet format in its current form (just as Windows doesn't IMO). Honestly I don't see the point of having a full blown laptop running a desktop OS but without keyboard and you have to navigate it with your finger. Why not just use a laptop then?
If I'm ever going to buy a tablet, it has to (in the words of Steve Jobs) do things better than my laptop does. A tablet running a desktop OS won't do anything better than my laptop - in fact quite the opposite.
-
How are photographics apps limited by the lack of multitasking?
I do not know for sure that this is a fundamental problem (I hope not!), but many important photographic apps seem to use multitasking, so might be hard or slow to port.
As for your guess: I'm pretty sure that won't happen. Mac OS is a desktop OS that doesn't present itself to a tablet format in its current form (just as Windows doesn't IMO).
I was thinking about adding touch (and multi-touch) to run on computers that also have a keyboard and mouse, for use with:
- external graphics tablets
- smart boards, now fashionable in education
- possible touch screen iMacs
- an iPad as a mobile "remote control and display", for example to display content that is stored on the Mac OS X computer, not the iPad.
- maybe someday a "MacBook Touch", a different and more expensive animal than the iPad.
Windows 7 already supports touch, so why would OS X not add it?
-
New netbooks coming out in the future based on the new D410 Atom processor might show some promise for those wanting to use Phocus on a netbook, although don't count on performance being stellar. The new Intel D410 Atom features a number of functions integrated directly into the processor die, dissipating 10W, compared with 24W + 4W in the case of the N270 Atom paired with the 945G chipset, so battery life should be better too and the netbook shouldn't get so hot. But most pertinent to Phocus is that the D410 Atom features an Intel GMA 3150 integrated graphics. Phocus apparently has limited compatibility with Intel's 3100 integrated graphics, which give some hope that it could be usable on a netbook based on a D410 Atom. However, most netbooks don't have any means to add a Firewire port, so in that sense, you will still have to keep a lookout for a model that has an ExpressCard slot so that you can add a Firewire card to it. Plus those 1024 x 600 displays would be rather cramped for Phocus... Processor performance is the same as an Atom N280 though. No increase in clock speed.
-
I do not know for sure that this is a fundamental problem (I hope not!), but many important photographic apps seem to use multitasking, so might be hard or slow to port.
I think you are confusing multitasking with multithreading. Multitasking is the ability to run several processes or applications at once, whereas multithreading allows an application to perform several tasks at the same time or distribute a task over several processor cores. I think the iPad supports multithreading, but you still shouldn't expect it to run heavy duty photo apps, just as a netbook can't. Applications doesn't support multitasking, operating systems does.
Windows 7 already supports touch, so why would OS X not add it?
Because it's a bad idea. The interface in Mac OS and Windows are not made to be navigated by fingers, but by keyboard (shortcuts) and a mouse/trackpad. It just gives users a bad experience if they have to navigate a desktop OS with their fingers.
Mac OS already have some touch support in its development frameworks and the trackpad on the MacBooks also have multitouch support, but if Mac OS ever (and I have a hard time believeing that it will happen) will end up on a tablet, it will be with a vastly different interface and developers would still have to rewrite their apps to support the (multi)touch interface properly - and then we're pretty much back to the iPad.
-
Because it's [adding touch] a bad idea. The interface in Mac OS and Windows are not made to be navigated by fingers, but by keyboard (shortcuts) and a mouse/trackpad. It just gives users a bad experience if they have to navigate a desktop OS with their fingers.
Please reread what I said: I am talking mainly about _adding_ support for touch to the OS on top of the mouse and keyboard interfaces that are already present. How is _adding_ an extra interface option a bad idea?
Some people are using Wacam Bamboo Touch tablets in place of a mouse, apparently liking the touch control options. Perhaps many of these are people who, unlike you, have got used to using touch controls on MacBooks or such and at least sometimes prefer them to keyboard and mouse controls. Anyway, I will trust the judgement of MicroSoft and Apple over yours on whether there is a market for touch interfaces in computers.
Of course, device drivers can already do this, but once many Mac OS X users are using touch interfaces, providing common tools for it in the OS is a natural step.
-
Please reread what I said: I am talking mainly about _adding_ support for touch to the OS on top of the mouse and keyboard interfaces that are already present. How is _adding_ an extra interface option a bad idea?
It's a bad idea because it doesn't help the users. Being a software developer myself, I know the value of not adding a feature for the sake of the feature. There is no purpose of adding a feature unless it makes sense. In its current form, I don't think Mac OS is ready for it, just as I don't think Windows is. That is how adding and extra interface option is a bad idea and that is why the tablet concept died many times in Microsoft's hands.
Some people are using Wacam Bamboo Touch tablets in place of a mouse, apparently liking the touch control options. Perhaps many of these are people who, unlike you, have got used to using touch controls on MacBooks or such and at least sometimes prefer them to keyboard and mouse controls.
The Bamboo Touch is basically just a trackpad like the ones on the Macbooks (which I am very familiar with). It's great for pointing and clicking, but it's not your finger that is on the screen, it's a small arrow controlled by your finger. If you put your finger on the screen, it's a very different game because your finger is big and doesn't end in a point. Also, I don't think that those people use the Bamboo Touch to write an e-mail or a 10 page report.
-
Occasionally for amusement I demonstrate Phocus exporting fast JPEGS to an iPhone during tethered shooting.
It started off as a bit of a joke but a few photographers who have seen me do it, have started to use it for real in the studio.
It keeps others away from the shooting computer and the piece of software I use (Airsharing) also acts as a webserver so you could have multiple computers/iphones/iPads all looking at the same shoot as it progresses.
Most of the time of course they export to something decent like another laptop, but the principle is the same.
The benefit of the iPad is larger screen, easier to pass round than a laptop...etc etc.
Also I believe the iPad is a gift to many home automation companies... Large colour display, touchscreen, SDK for developing Apps, WiFi... All for less than a price they could build if for themselves. I imagine we will see quite a few bolted to peoples walls, controlling media / music, one in the kitchen for recipes...
But as a hardcore tethered machine? No I don't think so. I am sure that was never in Apple's perspective.
Just my 0.02.
David
-
Occasionally for amusement I demonstrate Phocus exporting fast JPEGS to an iPhone during tethered shooting.
It started off as a bit of a joke but a few photographers who have seen me do it, have started to use it for real in the studio.
It keeps others away from the shooting computer and the piece of software I use (Airsharing) also acts as a webserver so you could have multiple computers/iphones/iPads all looking at the same shoot as it progresses.
Interesting. How do you set it up?
-
Interesting. How do you set it up?
1) Shoot an image tethered. Export as 'Fast JPEG Preview' to destination of your choice (Network drive, iPhone *Use Airsharing*, FTP server, iDisk, DropBox...etc etc!)
2) Set Phocus to 'Export new Images Automatically'. (File Menu)
3) Shoot!
4) Image export and transfer automatically to your chosen device.
Airsharing Ap works quite nicely, as does Dropbox which is faster than iDisk. All would work on the iPad.
Airsharing is particularly smart as it also acts as a local webserver allowing multiple users to view the shoot from any device with a browser on the same network. See screen dump...
Main Menu *Folder Structure*
[attachment=20141:Screen_s...11.01.59.png]
Image List.. *Only one in this case*
[attachment=20142:Screen_s...11.02.03.png]
Image...
[attachment=20143:Screen_s...11.02.07.png]
David
-
Occasionally for amusement I demonstrate Phocus exporting fast JPEGS to an iPhone during tethered shooting.
David
Isn't this what Leaf has already been doing for a while, first with the iPaQ Windows PC and lately with the iPhone? ;-)
-
Isn't this what Leaf has already been doing for a while, first with the iPaQ Windows PC and lately with the iPhone? ;-)
Yes.
-
Isn't this what Leaf has already been doing for a while, first with the iPaQ Windows PC and lately with the iPhone? ;-)
Errrr... yes.. I am not trying to score points, just pointing something out.
Also this does not have to reply on any other applications if you simply want to export across a network.
-
Errrr... yes.. I am not trying to score points, just pointing something out.
Also this does not have to reply on any other applications if you simply want to export across a network.
This is great. Really useful stuff! I'll rent a Blad and check it out. Phocus is a free download?
This functionality should be shouted from the roof tops, as the difference in systems really comes down to workflow.
T
-
This is great. Really useful stuff! I'll rent a Blad and check it out. Phocus is a free download?
This functionality should be shouted from the roof tops, as the difference in systems really comes down to workflow.
T
Yep, Phocus is a free download from hasselblad.com. Full version.
Hope it works out for you!
David
-
This is great. Really useful stuff! I'll rent a Blad and check it out. Phocus is a free download?
This functionality should be shouted from the roof tops, as the difference in systems really comes down to workflow.
T
Tmark
David showed me this some time ago and it's a life saver on shoots where there are a lot of people. I send the jpg previews across the network to an older machine (set up for clients to surf do email etc) and use quick look to view the jpgs. On the last shoot I did only the AD stood by the capture machine and the other 8 or so luvvies watched the images on the other machine (which is about 20ft away). BTW the previews were coming up approx 3 seconds after they were shot.
Nick-T
-
It's a bad idea because it doesn't help the users.
I suppose we just disagree on how much end-user interest there would be to adding a touch interface (touch screens and such) to the keyboard and mouse interface.
But since you seem to know something about the internals, what do you think of another possible direction: developing iPhone OS into a more capable "touch device OS" that can handle as much software as possible, and so be as much of a "laptop/netbook alternative" as possible, at least for tasks that are not too heavily keyboard dependent?
Maybe it is better approach for highly mobile device to build on the 140,000 "touch friendly" iPhone OS Apps already available, and port other apps from Mac OS X as appropriate to a "touch plus some keyboard usage" interface.
Any idea how difficult it would be to adapt Mac OS X software to a non-multi-tasking OS like iPhone OS?
Would it make sense to add multi-tasking to a future "iPad OS"?
-
Any idea how difficult it would be to adapt Mac OS X software to a non-multi-tasking OS like iPhone OS?
Would it make sense to add multi-tasking to a future "iPad OS"?
The iPhone is basically running MacOS X, but the multi-tasking features have been restricted to the Apple apps in order to cut down on CPU load and memory usage.
Also, the programming model is much uglier than on Mac OS X, in particular no garbage collector seems to be provided -
Edmund
-
I suppose we just disagree on how much end-user interest there would be to adding a touch interface (touch screens and such) to the keyboard and mouse interface.
Apple isn't controlled by end-user interest (if so, Flash would have been on the iPhone years ago), they make (the right) decisions and the users follow.
But since you seem to know something about the internals, what do you think of another possible direction: developing iPhone OS into a more capable "touch device OS" that can handle as much software as possible, and so be as much of a "laptop/netbook alternative" as possible, at least for tasks that are not too heavily keyboard dependent?
I definitely believe that the iPhone OS will become much more capable that it is today, because the iPad platform calls for a lot more advanced OS features than the iPhone does. As it is now, the iPad is running pretty much like an iPhone with a more fitting user interface. As it is developed more, I think it will stand out more clearly as an alternative to laptops and its uses will become more apparant.
Any idea how difficult it would be to adapt Mac OS X software to a non-multi-tasking OS like iPhone OS?
I guess it's mostly a question of adapting the UI and power consumption, but once you do that you have to deal with how to run regular Mac OS applications satisfactory and then I think it will quickly become apparant that it's not worth it.
Would it make sense to add multi-tasking to a future "iPad OS"?
I don't think multitasking in itself is a goal, I think it would make sense if can be done without compromising battery time significantly AND if it improves the user experience significantly. The fact is that today it is extremely fast to switch from one App on the iPhone to another and since apps can save their states when you quit them, the giant leap you would get from multitasking is not that giant. However I recognize the need to run applications in the background, for instance Skype or some music streaming application. This is not possible today and on the iPad it may pose a problem in the future that apps cannot run in the background. But looking at the platform today, I really don't see how it's become such a big issue. I think many people focus more on the missing check mark on the spec sheet rather on how multitasking would impact the user experience.
-
On the last shoot I did only the AD stood by the capture machine and the other 8 or so luvvies watched the images on the other machine
I'm going in the complete opposite direction -- I'm looking for one of those Polarizing Filters for my 17", so that only the AD (who's standing in direct line of sight of the monitor), can see the laptop screen. It's tough enough with one other opinion -- I can't imagine eight others. All it takes is for the girlfriend of the client to say something like, "Oh, I don't like her hair", and everybody goes scurrying around in a panic, like a flock of geese who've just seen a predator.
Technology is good -- up to a point.
-
Also, the programming model is much uglier than on Mac OS X, in particular no garbage collector seems to be provided
The programming model is just as pretty as it is on Mac OS X. The API's provided for the iPhone OS are extremely dangerous and covers about as much as Mac OS does. It's true that it doesn't support garbage collection, Mac OS didn't until version 10.5 (Leopard). However, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Automatic garbage collection uses more memory than manual garbage collection does. If you know your ways around memory management, it doesn't pose a problem plus potentially, you save memory (which may turn out as sparse on the iPhone). Many modern applications for Mac OS doesn't use garbage collection even though it's available.
If some of you are wondering: Garbage collection is a way for the operating system to help the developer clean up memory that is no longer in use. If an operating system doesn't support automatic garbage collection, the developers have to free up memory themselves when they are done with it, otherwise it will end up in a zombie state where the system can't use it until the application quits. However automatic garbage collection have a memory overhead because it can't free up memory as quickly as the developer could if he did it himself.