accideath @ accideath @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

603

Joined

2 yr. ago

For example (and that is only one out of many over the years), on my one PC search just refused to work. Windows search isn’t great but not having it is even worse than that and no matter what I did, neither the search in the Start menu nor in the Explorer worked. Couldn’t type in anything. If I opened the on screen keyboard, it did work but not with my physical one. I even reinstalled Windows from scratch and it worked for a few weeks and then stopped again. No one why. Only got fixed once I went back to Win 10.

Another Example is Microsofts over-insistence to force Edge, bing, OneDrive, Office365, etc. on you. It feels like, once a month, when I log in, I get a splash screen to please subscribe to one of those services and also use Bing and also, they put the Edge icon back onto my Desktop.

It’s things like those that just annoy the shit out of me. I want to use my PC, not to constantly fix it. And it’s a myriad of other thing like that. Some small, some bigger.

It’s not that macOS is better in every way, there are a few things Windows undoubtedly does better (like having a keyboard shortcut to open the file explorer) but for my day to day use, macOS has kept out of my way and just done what it’s supposed to. And sadly macOS is a package deal with Macs, which are great, hardware wise but also very expensive. But considering the software advantage, the Apple tax is worth it, at least to some extent

As an Apple user: I do care. However, the alternative is using Windows, which makes me wanna punch my monitor at least once a month. And I’m not even using it as a primary OS.

I don’t prioritize design and don’t care about brand at all but I care about a frust free experience and I just don’t have that with windows.

Running a hackintosh was less frustrating than using windows on the very same hardware…

If Linux supported the software and the features I need/want, I would very much just use that

If Windows didn’t wanna make me punch my monitor at least once a month, that’d be a good deal…

Interesting. I can attest to analogue IMAX having great sound, however, if you watched an analogue film projection of a current film in the last 20 to 30 years, the audio was most likely digital anyways and I believe that is also true for IMAX, since the film itself does not even have audio on it. I suppose, a good audio master and especially a good audio system do a lot of heavy lifting.

And yea, hfr is meh. The effect it has on film is very underwhelming. The only film I have seen where it worked was Avatar. In Avatar 2 it works well in the scenes it’s in, however, the transition between the hfr and normal parts is extremely jarring and takes you out of the movie. The film you saw in hfr was probably one of the hobbit films, since it was a big marketing thing for them.

If we‘re talking IMAX, sure. No digital camera can reach that kind of resolution. But the standard 35mm film and even regular 70mm has been surpassed by digital cameras for a little while now, if we’re talking pure quality. Digital has higher resolution, higher dynamic range, higher sensitivity, etc.

What analogue film has is a texture and a feel that digital cannot emulate. It’s not objectively better but subjectively, it’s nicer. It has a certain look. It’s like vinyl records. They’re objectively worse than the digital masters but many still prefer them.

Digital video is not necessarily more compressed than analog film. The way your phone shoots it, yes. Modern digital cinema cameras however are both higher resolution and have a higher dynamic range than motion picture film. They shoot raw imagery that is incredibly high quality and detailed (and indeed needs large SSDs and hard drives) and is not behind film in any way, quality wise. This was different, even 10 years ago but by now, if all you care about is quality, digital is more than enough.

However, what digital cameras cannot reproduce is the the texture the feel and the specific look of film. Post processing gets close today but not all the way. Besides, the process of shooting film is very different and some directors and photographers prefer the more difficult yet more down to earth process.

Btw, in practice, most blockbuster films today are actually shot on digital cameras, especially the likes of RED, ARRI and Sony. Analog is only used by some productions although they are a minority now. Fanatics like Tarantino and Nolan are doing their best though to keep film alive and in the case of Nolan, push it to the limits by shooting 70mm and 70mm IMAX film. Especially the latter is better than any current digital camera but due to IMAX being much more difficult and expensive to shoot, almost no one besides Nolan uses it.

Mercedes-Benz is. And others will certainly follow since Mercedes-Benz are the first to reach L3 autonomy

Well, doesn’t seem to bother any other car manufacturer much. Probably because the benefits outweigh the complexity disadvantages

Humans don’t just use eyes when driving. Sound, and touch also play big roles, for example when it comes hearing ambulances nearing or to feel road conditions. And we have a really good sense for depth and distance, that’s much harder to replicate with just cameras. And even Humans aren’t allowed to drive with headphones on (at least here in Germany), because it’s dangerous to limit the amount of sensors available to us.

Besides that, even our sight is faaaar from perfect either and there are quite a lot of accidents caused by drivers just not seeing another driver or some other obstacle. Our vision is pretty good, yes, but the amount of guessing our brain has to do for us to actually see what we do isn’t exactly small.

I don’t know about you, but I would prefer a self driving vehicle to be safer than a human. Because if it isn’t, why bother? And how could it be safer, if it uses less information than humans, who are shit drivers already?

And yes, lidar is more expensive but so what? It’s cheap enough to add it to phones. Expensive phones, yes but in the grand scheme of things, they’re still quite a bit cheaper than a car and Teslas aren’t exactly cheap cars either. And Tesla used to include radar in their cars until they didn’t. And the cars didn’t get that much cheaper…

And to give a positive example: Mercedes Benz are the first to launch a Level 3 autonomous vehicle. And guess what? It uses Lidar, audio sensors, road condition sensors, etc. and actually achieved L3 autonomy, while Tesla’s FSD is constantly tested to be one if the worst performing Level 2 systems in the industry, despite their claims of greatness…

Windows 10 is also nearing end of life. In two years it’s over

There are still workarounds for getting new macOS on older not supported hardware (aka the OpenCore Legacy Patcher) which works very well, even with really old macs. But yes, of course, there are no official updates.

That’s not an Apple problem per se though, that’s an industry problem. Windows 11 isn’t officially supported on Devices older than 2018 and unofficially not older than like 2015-ish, if you want full functionality and a non-hacky install (because of TPM 2.0). Also, most Android phones have a notoriously short period getting updates (although that is getting better with some manufacturers promising and delivering way more than before).

Choose a life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family. Choose a fucking big television. Choose washing machines, cars, compact disc players and electrical tin openers... Choose DSY and wondering who the fuck you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting on that couch watching mind-numbing, spirit crushing game shows, stucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away in the end of it all, pishing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than an embarrassment to the selfish, fucked up brats you spawned to replace yourself, choose your future. Choose life... But why would I want to do a thing like that?

What phone was this taken with? Because some phones have a "moon mode" where they replace the actual moon with an image that’s far better than what the actual camera sensor of the phone would be able to capture.

Well apparently not exclusively so, at least outside of the US, because the American Eagle is not just US-American.

Canada and Mexico are still America so I‘d say it does live up to its name

Yea, that’s not right, at least not in modern film. The distance to the subject and thus the resulting focal length needed to get proper framing drastically impacts the look. Every (or at least most of them) Cinematographer and Director has their own preferences.

For example, Emmanuel Lubezki, the Director of Photography for films like The Revenant, Children of Men and Birdman prefers the use of very short lenses thus he has to get close to the subject while Ridley Scott as Director prefers the use of longer lenses in his films, moving the camera further away.

And all that has nothing in the slightest to do with focus or zoom. The opposite, motion picture cameras usually do not use zoom lenses but fixed focal (prime) lenses and tape, too was rarely ever used in motion picture production. Today they usually use various types of flash media (like SSDs or CFast cards) or, if they feel fancy, still analogue film.

In TV (live) production, that’s a little different. Tape or other magnetic storage media were used for a long time up into the HD era. Nowadays, SSD or SD recording is used just as well. Also, TV cameras are indeed usually outfitted with powerful zoom lenses since the convenience of fast zoom tops the image quality of prime lenses, especially in live settings. (You can’t just swap lenses when every second counts). But even then, going as far away as possible isn’t usually what’s done. It always depends on the circumstances, the location and the needs of the shoot.

Modern TV and motion picture cameras are large for a number of other reasons. They support a whole lot more features than a good video capable mirrorless photo camera (like a Sony A7 IV) like multiple video outputs in industry standards (SDI, not HDMI), larger batteries, hotswappable redundant storage, mounting points for additional equipment, microphone ports, support for more video codecs and higher data rates, higher resolution, etc. And of course, a whole bunch of cooling for prolonged use without any hitches or glitches.

Well, not all digital but predominantly

Because it (illegally) removes the need for an Adobe CC subscription. Without the patch, the program would look for Adobe‘s services.

Perhaps but I for example hated working from home even when I lived in my own one bedroom apartment. I need the casual interactions with collegues that you don’t really get online and a dedicated workspace where I can get into „the zone“ and don’t get distracted that easily.

I was in university during the 2020 lockdowns. I hated it. Not because the teachers were technically inept (they were not, far from it) but because sitting alone in my one bedroom apartment all day with no real social interaction is just depressing af. The mixing of work and home just weakens both for me. I cannot get as productive at home as in a dedicated work space and I also cannot get fully comfortable at home if it is a work space for me. As long as I can go to a physical work location, I will. I might work from home once in a while but not primarily. I enjoy the casual interactions with collegues far too much.