|Click on the img to see the new interface|
Today, Flickr launched a mayor interface update and finally - and I mean finally - eliminated their measly 200 picture limit for free accounts, something that was way overdue.
Yahoo / Flickr now give you one Terabyte (1.000 Gigabyte) of space to show off your stuff, which makes them look a little like a pendulum: either hardly anything or way too much.
Anyway, space is cheap and since they now encourage us to upload hi-res stuff, the first, say, 20 Gigs may fill up quicker than you expect.
That is, if you don’t mind that other people have access to your hires files, which I – for one – do definitely not want.
There is a way to avoid that others steal your images, however, there is no guarantee whatsoever that they will not be able to capture them at at least their native screen resolution, while your Flickr account is also not configured by default from preventing other people to rip you off.
Access to original files sizes must be configured in the Settings menu > Privacy and Permissions > Who can access your original image files?
If you want to avoid losing control over your work, access must be set to “Only you”. Alternatively it can be set to “Friends and Family”, “Contacts”, “Any Flickr Member” or “Anyone”.
Interesting enough, Flicker have either not overhauled their interface completely, or are unaware of the security problems the uploading of hires files implicates, because the latter option is still “Recommended”.
You might also want to lower the max resolution under the “Largest shared image size” item, from the default “best display size” (2048 px.) to a lower value, since this also brings down the maximum size of the files that can be downloaded by others.
Since my only concern is that people get their hands on “reproduction resolution”, i.e. 300 dpi sized images, I have set this value to 1600, but you may opt to set it even lower; 1024 max.
You can access the settings menu by rolling over your buddy icon in the right-hand top corner of the screen and click “Settings” in the associated menu.
Versión en Español
Adobe recently announced that they will not continue the development of their Creative Suite (CS) “perpetual license model” software as we know it, and – instead – pursue a new, cloud-based licensing model, called CC: Creative Cloud.
This model offers various different licenses, from a single application license for $ 19.99/mo to educational licenses for the same amount, and a variety of personal and corporate licenses starting at $29.99/mo (temporarily) for current CS3 or later customers up to $ 69.99/mo for teams (US pricing, values may be higher in other countries).
Although this may sound like an attractive deal to some, most of us are focusing on the License Agreement to find that all the chips fall the way of Adobe and none our way, much as in a casino.
For starters, if you decide to go with this licensing model, you’re stuck for life. Not only will Adobe not grant you access to the application once you’ve decided to end your contract, but they will also deny you access to your content, thus – in effect – appropriate any and all of the proprietary and copyrighted materials you may have created with these applications, if and when located on the 20 Gb. space that Adobe allocates to your account on their cloud servers – as part of their “service”.
Moreover, the company reserves the right to assign the unique URL you created when you signed up (e.g.: your_name dot adobe.com) to another user, meaning that you permanently lose access to your content, even if you change your mind later on.
Some might argue that Adobe is unlikely to use or sell your proprietary materials, since this would be a breach of common sense copyright law.
However, the CC License Agreement not only disallows you to bring such charges, but also establishes the Santa Clara (CA) court for the US and Dublin, Ireland for users outside the US, as the one and only places where you might file them, which means – in short – that any user, be that from India, Chile or Russia will have to travel there to be able to file.
Not even to mention that they might sue you in return for up to $ 1.000 in legal fees for what they call an “ill-filed” complaint.
Moreover, trying to sue a lawyer clad dinosaur like Adobe for copyright infringement or otherwise by any individual or cash strapped small company, is like David against Goliath, except that David is extremely unlikely to win, this time around.
After all, David signed the License Agreement, which has been concocted by bloody Adobe lawyers who would easily outsmart the Devil himself.
|Promote GPS-N1 converted to CA90|
All flagship and semi-pro Nikon cameras since the D1X and D200, mid-range models since the D90 and “Baby-Nikons” since the D5K/D3100 are capable of automatically recording geo-referenced meta-data into image headers (Exif), a practice popularly known as “geo-tagging”.
Geo-tagging has become increasingly fashionable over the last couple of years, and many sites, like Flickr, Facebook and Google Earth/Maps – for example – can now extract and show these data, either automatically or manually.
Similarly, the Nikon View NX2 software includes a (Google) geo-location module, which allows reviewing photos per their shooting location and shows so-called “path-views”; the route(s) along which these were taken, while a program like Adobe Bridge – amongst many others – is also capable of extracting these data from Exif.
UPDATE (08-01-2013): The Nikon D5200 is now available in the USA. It sells at Adorama for USD 799,95 and at Amazon for USD 896,95.
On November 5, 2012, Nikon officially announced the D5200 mid-entry-level camera or “Baby-Nikon” in Europe, Asia and Australia, with a launch price of € 899 (body alone); approximately 1.150 dollars.
Even if the MSRP of the camera in the USA – where it is rumored to come to market as late as January 2013 – is likely going to be below the euro equivalent, this would still bring it into the D90 and D7000 price bracket: from 900 to 1200 dollars.
The D5200 features a 24,1 Mp. CMOS sensor, an articulated, 3", 910K dot monitor and a 39/11-point Multi-CAM 4800DX focus module, a slightly less sophisticated implementation of the one found in the D7000.
However, it lacks some key features that make the D7000 or D90 worth their money. The D5200 has:
• No built-in focusing motor. Motorized AF-S or AF-I lenses must be used for full AF and 3D Color Matrix II metering compatibility.
• No metering with non-CPU lenses (D90 neither).
• No commander mode to remotely control external flashes.
• No Auto FP high-speed sync.
Even without counting new Coolpixes, lenses and accessories, Nikon's 2012 is one of – if not the – most proliferous year in its history.
Sofar, the company has launched no less than 5 new DSLR cameras: the D4 in January, the D800/E in February, the D3200 in April, the D600 in September and the D5200 – in Europe, Asia and Australia – on November 5, last.
By now, the only thing lacking in Nikon’s renewed line-up are a D7000 and D300S refresh or – possibly – a merge of both, which would sound the end for the DX00 APS-C series as we know it.
We will take a closer look at Nikon’s latest in this post, but for now I'd like to examine how Nikon’s line-up reshuffle is panning out.
Together with the upgrade of virtually all of its models – from flagship to entry level – there are two, clearly emerging trends.
One: Nikon has roughly doubled or even tripled the resolution of all its new cameras in comparison with the previous generation and two: this is resulting in considerable price hikes across the board.
I believe it is fair to say that $ 700 (D3200) is not really an “entry-level” price tag anymore, while I also doubt whether its users will be able to take advantage of its 24,1 Mp. resolution, or rather experience it as an impediment, because of the huge file sizes.
Canon is offering at least one camera, the 12,2 Mp. EOS Rebel T3 (kit, incl. 18-55 mm lens: $ 550) below this price point or even the D3100's $ 650, and it is reasonable to assume that Nikon will have to as well, eventually.
Edited to add: Nikon may have heard me, because today I got a Nikon Promotional email, offering the D5100 (Body alone) for $ 450.
The latest release of Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) adds - preliminary - support for the Nikon D600 and a host of other cameras, plus profiles for 43 lenses.
Apart of the D600, ACR v.7.2 also adds support for the Coolpix P7700 and Nikon 1 J2 plus the following cameras:
• Canon EOS 650D / Rebel T4i, EOS M
• Fujifilm XF1, X-E1, FinePix F800EXR
• Leaf Credo 40, Credo 60
• Leica S, D-LUX 6, V-LUX 4
• Panasonic DMC-G5, DMC-LX7, DMC-FZ200
• Pentax K-30
• Samsung EX2F
• Sony Alpha NEX-5R, Alpha NEX-6, Alpha SLT-A99V, DSC-RX100
Lens profiles include the new 24-85 mm f/3.5-4.5G, 18-300 mm f/3.5-5.6G and the Nikon 1 11-27.5mm f/3.5-5.6 Nikkors, plus lenses from Canon, Hasselblad, Leica, Pentax, Sigma, Tamron and Zeiss.
For more information click here.
Compatibility chart for Nikon DSLR and Adobe Camera RAW & DNG Converter (Updated)
Adobe recently posted the first update for the Adobe Camera Raw CS6 plug-in - ACR v.7.1 - and a new version of the stand-alone DNG Converter.
Apart of support for the new Nikon D3200, it adds the following cameras:
• Canon EOS 1D X, EOS 5D Mark III, EOS 60Da, PowerShot G1 X, S100V
• Fuji X-Pro1, Fuji FinePix F505EXR, F605EXR, F770EXR, F775EXR, HS30EXR, HS33EXR, X-S1
• Leaf Credo 80
• Leica M Monochrome, X2
• Olympus E-M5
• Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF5
• Pentax K-01
• Samsung NX20, NX210, NX1000
• Sony Alpha NEX-F3, NEX-VG20, SLT-A37, SLT-A57
With he launch of the Nikon D600 – on September 13, last – the waiting has finally ended for whoever wanted to either “go” full-frame or was looking to upgrade from the, by now, legendary D700.
Legendary, because it was the first more or less affordable full-frame Nikon DSLR to break the Canon low-noise hegemony with stellar high ISO performance.
Legendary also, because Nikon never gave up that lead again. At the time of writing, there are six Nikon cameras in the DxO Mark top-10, while the D700 is still 16th, in spite of its respectable age of 50 months.
By now the D800E and D800 top the DxO charts (1 and 2, respectively), closely followed by the D4 (5th).
On September 18th, 2012, the D600 snatched up 3rd place, with an overall score of 94 and a Low Light ISO score only second to category leader D3S (10th overall).
With the D700 being fazed-out, semi-pros and advanced amateurs are left with two full-frame cameras to choose from in Nikon’s semi-pro price bracket, the D800E and D800 costing $ 3.300 and $ 3.000 respectively, while the D600 will set you back $ 2.100, a 25% premium of $ 400 over the aging D300S APS-C camera.
Yet in the absence of independent tests of the D600, it is interesting to compare it against the D800, to figure out how much more camera $ 900 buys us, and ask ourselves whether or not it is worth spending the roughly 50% extra.
|Nikon D800 & Nikon D600|
If I could afford to spend the additional cash for the D800E without thinking, I probably would. However, I cannot.
Also, after the D1X, I swore to never ever again spend that kind of cash on a body ever again. And $3.000 plus is a tad too close for comfort to the amount I once swore to never ever spend again.
Since I also need to replace my stolen D200, MB-D200, SB-600, AI 50 mm f/1.4, AF 35-70 f/2.8D and 18-200 f/3.5-6.3, 900 bucks will go at least some way into the right direction...
- From the Nikon USA website -
Nikon Inc. is asking your cooperation in connection with a voluntary recall of certain lot numbers of its Nikon Model EN-EL15 rechargeable lithium-ion battery pack.
The battery pack can experience a short circuit causing it to overheat and possibly causing the outside casing to become deformed, posing a potential hazard to consumers.
There have only been seven (7) confirmed reports of incidents of the problem worldwide, and while no injuries have taken place, Nikon Inc. has initiated this recall of the affected lot numbers as a reflection of its commitment to safety and product quality.
We are asking that owners of the affected battery pack contact Nikon Inc. to initiate a free product exchange.
I am not going to nag about how my search traffic has dropped off to virtually nothing.
I'm sure I deserve it.
One can hardly pretend to know better than a few hundred Google engineers, Pandas or Penguins, right?
Only a month ago I was about to post on having reached 8.000 monthly visitors and 12.000 page views, which I think is a lot for a niche site like this one.
Good thing I didn't...
On April 24 my browser hits dropped off to 98, compared to 204 on the previous day and then kept dropping off to reach an all-time low of 4, on June 22.
By now, Flickr is well on its way to replace G. Almighty as my most important referrer.
Maybe I should not have bashed them as I did in a previous article, but still: what’s true is true.
Google reps have been going on and on about “capital sins”, such as keyword stuffing, over-optimizing SEO and bad external links, amongst others, none of which I am guilty of – as far as I know.
They also talk about “Quality Content” and a better “User Experience”.
Those are very big and very generic words, and the Goog does not go into detail on what that means – much like praying to the true Almighty goes mostly unanswered.
With the imminent release of Photoshop CS6 – which includes the latest Adobe Camera RAW converter v.7 – the ACR 6.7 Final Release is the last Camera Raw update for CS5.
Although this version does support the D4 and D800/E, contrary to what I expected, it does not include the Nikon D3200, which means that this camera will, at some point, be included in ACR 7.x and CS6.
Potential D3200 buyers who are planning on shooting NEF (RAW) should therefore consider that they will have to live with View NX2, upgrade either to Photoshop 6 (from $ 199), Lightroom 4 ($ 149) or Elements 10 (from $ 80) or – alternatively – go DNG (see this article) with the next upgrade of the DNG Converter (v.7.x), yet to be announced, let alone released.
Note that the D3200 is not included in ACR 7.0 (CS6 - shipping since 2012-05-07), either, even if the D4 and D800/800E are.
The Adobe Camera RAW 6.7 final release adds support for the following cameras:
· Canon EOS 1D X, EOS 5D Mark III, PowerShots G1 X & S100V
· Fuji FinePix F505EXR, F605EXR, F770EXR, F775EXR, HS30EXR, HS33EXR, X-S1
· Nikon D4, D800/E
· Olympus E-M5
· Pentax K-01
· Samsung NX20, NX210, NX1000
· Sony Alpha NEX-VG20, SLT-A57
Click here for a complete list of supported cameras, and here for my Nikon DSLR-ACR compatibility chart.
The 6.7 FR plug-in for Windows can be downloaded here, the Mac version here.
Keep in mind that ACR v.6.x plug-ins are ONLY compatible with CS5, and that installing an incompatible version will cause problems in your Photoshop, Lightroom or Elements installation.
With the launch of this lens Nikon completes it AF-S full-frame (FX) line-up of relatively fast and reasonably affordable f/1.8G primes: 28mm, 50mm and 85mm.
The lens finally fills an obvious gap left in 2006, when both the f/1.4D and f/2 AI-S versions of this wide angle were discontinued.
With the proliferation of DX at the time, this made perfect sense, because this focal length (42 mm equivalent) is all but useless on APS-C crop-cameras.
However, with the rise of FX this f/1.8 incarnation comes at long last, first of all because 28mm is the “de facto” standard wide angle for 135 format and, second, because the currently available f/2.8 versions (AI-S and AF-D) simply don’t cut it: both optically and in lower light situations.
It is fair to expect the new f/1.8 to render far better IQ while it is also a full stop faster.
Today, Nikon launched its new, “entry-level” D3200 camera, a dedicated wireless mobile adapter and the full-frame 28 mm f/1.8G wide angle lens.
The D3200 is Nikon’s third camera launch in 2012 – after the D4 and D800/800E – and most likely the penultimate, short of the D300S replacement.
The D3200 makes a D800-akin resolution jump in comparison with its predecessor, featuring a 24,2 Mp. CMOS sensor, compared to the D3100’s 14,2.
The camera has a maximum shooting speed of 4 fps., includes full HD 1020p video @ 24, 25 and 30 fps with full-time auto-focus (AF-F), manual exposure control and stereo sound, plus 720p @ 50 or 60 fps.
It is quite amazing how everything that the Yahoo boys try to do ends up dead in the water, eventually. Even if they make a truckload of money while at it.
Point in fact: strategically speaking, it should have been them who bought up Instagram, not Facebook.
However, with Yahoo just scuttling 2.000 jobs to save about one third of what FB spent on the company, clearly they were not in a strategic position nor had the balls to make such a move, even if it would have strengthened their position considerably.
When Flickr started out, it was kinda cool.
Then, it ended up contributing to the killing off of my favorite photo-sharing websites, like Web Aperture and Harphampix. Even so, the latter happened not because of Flickr, but mostly because it was bound to happen.
The people who ran these sites were volunteers who got tired of the effort, the negative economics, the nagging, infighting and everything else that makes humans interrelate on the Web the way they do.
The people who used to “live” on these sites never quite found what they were used to, afterwards, but wrote it up as just another sacrifice to tech.
Flickr unfortunately never quite understood the social role it had gobbled up and, therefore, never changed its business model - nor its interface, for that matter...