[Aristophanes]

The whole point is really for camera companies to emphasize the strengths of ILCs in comparison to phones. Telephoto is one such area, shallow depth of field photography another, and high dynamic range images a third. Most of those things do not need any third party software for processing at all -- out of camera jpegs will probably be fine -- although you can get an extra 10 to 20 percent of detail with post processing versus straight out of camera jpeg.

Maybe micro four thirds lenses are different, but I seldom use lens corrections -- whether in camera or in post processing. They just aren't needed in general.

My point is post is increasingly being done on mobile OS's not PCs.

PC sales and dedicated processing software like Lightroom are actually a declining part of the photographic industry.

So wither ILC sales will accommodate post on Mobile OSs or they will hitch their decline to sales of PCs.

That means RAW translations will need to be done on mobile OS. The industry has no choice, really.

[Rondec]

My point is post is increasingly being done on mobile OS's not PCs.

PC sales and dedicated processing software like Lightroom are actually a declining part of the photographic industry.

So wither ILC sales will accommodate post on Mobile OSs or they will hitch their decline to sales of PCs.

That means RAW translations will need to be done on mobile OS. The industry has no choice, really.

My whole point is that people are really going to separate into two camps -- those for whom straight out of camera jpegs (and instagram filters) are adequate for their needs and those who want to really do more significant post processing. Those in the second camp will seldom be satisfied with a mobile OS due to the inadequacies of the screen and lack of things like keyboard and mouse, while those in the first camp are completely fine with the jpegs their camera puts out.

The only issue is how easy it is to connect cameras to mobile devices via wifi for easy upload, but with newer cameras it is pretty simple to do -- but it won't ever be as simple as shooting with your phone's camera and uploading straight to Instagram.

[clackers]

My point is post is increasingly being done on mobile OS's not PCs.

I doubt this, Aristophanes.

Soccer moms might put on a filter in Snapseed, any prosumer who's spent thousands on cameras and lenses won't be throwing their PC or Mac away because their expectations of pictures are different.

Will you?

[camyum]

So basically the norm is to spend 4 time less than you said on phones.

I know, this, that, I - you. hm? what do you want to say exactly?

Fact is, you mistake the average for the norm.

What I stated was about people wealthy enough to even think about buyin into a photographic hobby.

For sure, there are people that keep their mobiles a bit longer. but thats NOT the consumer-mass-norm.
Thats an average of statistic evaluations where people that really earn nearly nothing also play a role in its calculation, this doesnt get into account of the issue.
But go on. What was this about again?

Innovation&Information will bring back customers to that photographic company that invests and risks money in both areas:

FEATURE INNOVATION/UPGRADING and ADVERTISING


as a reminder for any rep that may read that:

missing for success:
a WG pendant to Sealife DC 2000
a simpler but better(in Terms of IQ) WG-M
faster DSLR electronics(autofocus - framerates) and firmware
better af in lenses
maybe a High-quality compact-zoom like the RX100 thing from the S

advertising on major TV channels. (around the world)
at least more product placements

appreciating:
Product Placements on several minor shows -- Bones, Stranger Things(NETFLIX! - this show is soo Stephen King! BIG LIKE)
Pentax K-70
Pentax K-S2
Ricoh Theta
PLM drive
- get done something alike PLM for FF lenses - professionals appreciate speed in terms of AF... otherwise one could stay with MF, ya'know?

---

Last edited by camyum; 08-24-2017 at 03:36 PM.

[Aristophanes]

I doubt this, Aristophanes.

Soccer moms might put on a filter in Snapseed, any prosumer who's spent thousands on cameras and lenses won't be throwing their PC or Mac away because their expectations of pictures are different.

Will you?

Thew vast majority of household "prosumers" in Asia don't have PCs.

Same for the rest of the developing world where growth is.

They've skipped straight to mobile OS, same as they did when cellphones did away with landlines.

The idea that a prosumer ILC purchaser is going to also fork out $1,500+ for a PC, and then walk their photos back via an SD card (look at the Nikon D850 for their take on this) and plug it into same PC for "post" is archaic.

The vast majority of top photographers in the films days relied on a lab to do the processing. The 1% niche part of the industry was those who took up the darkroom "hobby", and no serious camera manufacturer based their body and lens sales on that market for survival, same as for today's ILC makers relying on home PC "darkroom" users.

---------- Post added 08-24-17 at 10:59 PM ----------

My whole point is that people are really going to separate into two camps -- those for whom straight out of camera jpegs (and instagram filters) are adequate for their needs and those who want to really do more significant post processing. Those in the second camp will seldom be satisfied with a mobile OS due to the inadequacies of the screen and lack of things like keyboard and mouse, while those in the first camp are completely fine with the jpegs their camera puts out.

The only issue is how easy it is to connect cameras to mobile devices via wifi for easy upload, but with newer cameras it is pretty simple to do -- but it won't ever be as simple as shooting with your phone's camera and uploading straight to Instagram.

"Inadequacies of the screen?"

You're kidding, right.?

An iOS Retina screen is substantially superior in resolution to most monitors sold today until you get tot eh 5k beasts.

Have you edited with an Apple Pen? MUCH faster than a mouse. Graphic artists using Wacoms knew this years ago. Most pro photo retouchers have used pen input for years now. Same for animation illustrators etc. And you can get keyboard shortcuts with iOS as well.

The camp of people who do "significant post-processing" couldn't even keep half of Nikon afloat without the rest who don't, but who need more than JPEG SOOC and crappy RAW handling of mobile OS iterations.

[Reed]

An iOS Retina screen is substantially superior in resolution to most monitors sold today until you get tot eh 5k beasts.

Resolution is not the thing that matters.
Don't take that as an insult but you probably belive to much into apple marketing BS and their "die hard fan base" opinions that will never accept any other truth than those from their favorite brand leaflets.
Any pro graphic work display, even cheapest Eizo CS230 with 6Bit FRC display is mile ahead of every apple retina model in terms of color accuracy and backlit evenness across the panel.And it is hardware calibrated.
Most retina displays are totally not suitable for serious print or color accurate work even in sRGB range. iOS color profile ts by default over saturated to look good and display appealing photos from websites, not to be accurate. From 2015 some advanced apple macbook PRO models feature retina screen with color range covering a bit more than sRGB but still nothing even close to AdobeRGB gammut, and you can't crop that range to display only sRGB because there is no hardware calibration nor software option to do that. Of course you can play with toys like Spyder etc, but that will not solve the problems of lightbleed on corners and darker spot in the middel of that side lit panels.
Apple got one thing that is appealing to make their product fit "pros" and "to be pros wannabes" - their software and OS is totally idiot-proof,easy to use, and that is the main reason it was chosen by total amateurs that believe its made for pros-you can't get wrong with that out of the box.

[Rondec]

Thew vast majority of household "prosumers" in Asia don't have PCs.

Same for the rest of the developing world where growth is.

They've skipped straight to mobile OS, same as they did when cellphones did away with landlines.

The idea that a prosumer ILC purchaser is going to also fork out $1,500+ for a PC, and then walk their photos back via an SD card (look at the Nikon D850 for their take on this) and plug it into same PC for "post" is archaic.

The vast majority of top photographers in the films days relied on a lab to do the processing. The 1% niche part of the industry was those who took up the darkroom "hobby", and no serious camera manufacturer based their body and lens sales on that market for survival, same as for today's ILC makers relying on home PC "darkroom" users.

---------- Post added 08-24-17 at 10:59 PM ----------



"Inadequacies of the screen?"

You're kidding, right.?

An iOS Retina screen is substantially superior in resolution to most monitors sold today until you get tot eh 5k beasts.

Have you edited with an Apple Pen? MUCH faster than a mouse. Graphic artists using Wacoms knew this years ago. Most pro photo retouchers have used pen input for years now. Same for animation illustrators etc. And you can get keyboard shortcuts with iOS as well.

The camp of people who do "significant post-processing" couldn't even keep half of Nikon afloat without the rest who don't, but who need more than JPEG SOOC and crappy RAW handling of mobile OS iterations.

As Reed says the issue is with monitor calibration and accurate colors. As far as keyboard short cuts, I am sure they exist, but how many folks editing on a tablet or a phone have one? How many have an apple pen?

You are making my point very clearly. You are trying to sell cameras to the masses. The issue for the majority of them is not going to be their ability to edit camera RAW on their i pad with mobile Lightroom. They are just going to want the out of camera jpegs to be really good and easily accessible by their mobile device.

On the other hand, professionals will always gravitate to whatever has the shortest workflow and best results.

[Reed]

As far as people who get prints or files from me are happy with results-I'm good but I had few situations when consumer grade-marketed-as "pro" displays or cheaper mac's lcd panels was cousing more trouble. Especialy this is crucial when you have to do product photos for example color variants of same item. I had a argue for few days with one of my previous jobs marketing team leader, because she used all in one apple computer with standard retina "vivid" (and all "Apple is always perfect" attitude) rendering and everything was more saturated than the real product. I took her to Eizo calibrated display and showed real product and its pictures on that display side by side(rendered the same as real thing)from the same files she said was done wrong.

[Aristophanes]

Resolution is not the thing that matters.
Don't take that as an insult but you probably belive to much into apple marketing BS and their "die hard fan base" opinions that will never accept any other truth than those from their favorite brand leaflets.
Any pro graphic work display, even cheapest Eizo CS230 with 6Bit FRC display is mile ahead of every apple retina model in terms of color accuracy and backlit evenness across the panel.And it is hardware calibrated.
Most retina displays are totally not suitable for serious print or color accurate work even in sRGB range. iOS color profile ts by default over saturated to look good and display appealing photos from websites, not to be accurate. From 2015 some advanced apple macbook PRO models feature retina screen with color range covering a bit more than sRGB but still nothing even close to AdobeRGB gammut, and you can't crop that range to display only sRGB because there is no hardware calibration nor software option to do that. Of course you can play with toys like Spyder etc, but that will not solve the problems of lightbleed on corners and darker spot in the middel of that side lit panels.
Apple got one thing that is appealing to make their product fit "pros" and "to be pros wannabes" - their software and OS is totally idiot-proof,easy to use, and that is the main reason it was chosen by total amateurs that believe its made for pros-you can't get wrong with that out of the box.

But the average prosumers is definitely NOT spending $1,500k on a monitor + same on a PC.

So there is a discord between the mass market needed to sell ILCs and the back-end processing needed (the "lab", which is no in-sourced to the consumer and not out-sourced to Kodak/Fuji).

Adobe said as much when they moved LR to to subscription. The market for both he software and hardware is relatively tiny, but the ILC market needs to move 10-20 million units/year to stay viable with multiple competitors.

So if this market now has to play friendly with mobile OS to keep sales in the range, then mobile OS it is.

I went through this with Aperture testing for Apple. The actual number of people wanting a better camera was about 500x times what the # of consumers who actually did significant post-processing. And JPEG still didn't cut it, especially with lens profiles. The latter is what really did Aperture in; the cost and "keep up" time to profile lenses was staggering, where it is necessary for the amateur AND pro given current integrated sensor/lens designs.

Camera manufacturers offered their own PC/Mac software on CD) with their cameras, but they haven't done so for mobile OS. They need to get on that....fast.

[reh321]

But the average prosumers is definitely NOT spending $1,500k on a monitor + same on a PC.

So there is a discord between the mass market needed to sell ILCs and the back-end processing needed (the "lab", which is no in-sourced to the consumer and not out-sourced to Kodak/Fuji).

Adobe said as much when they moved LR to to subscription. The market for both he software and hardware is relatively tiny, but the ILC market needs to move 10-20 million units/year to stay viable with multiple competitors.

So if this market now has to play friendly with mobile OS to keep sales in the range, then mobile OS it is.

I went through this with Aperture testing for Apple. The actual number of people wanting a better camera was about 500x times what the # of consumers who actually did significant post-processing. And JPEG still didn't cut it, especially with lens profiles. The latter is what really did Aperture in; the cost and "keep up" time to profile lenses was staggering, where it is necessary for the amateur AND pro given current integrated sensor/lens designs.

Camera manufacturers offered their own PC/Mac software on CD) with their cameras, but they haven't done so for mobile OS. They need to get on that....fast.

Maybe they already are in some sense. What do we actualy know about the "accelerator" Pentax is putting in the K-70 and KP? Don't assume nothing is happening just because you see nothing.

[monochrome]

But the average prosumers is definitely NOT spending $1,500k on a monitor + same on a PC.

So there is a discord between the mass market needed to sell ILCs and the back-end processing needed (the "lab", which is no in-sourced to the consumer and not out-sourced to Kodak/Fuji).

Adobe said as much when they moved LR to to subscription. The market for both he software and hardware is relatively tiny, but the ILC market needs to move 10-20 million units/year to stay viable with multiple competitors.

So if this market now has to play friendly with mobile OS to keep sales in the range, then mobile OS it is.

I went through this with Aperture testing for Apple. The actual number of people wanting a better camera was about 500x times what the # of consumers who actually did significant post-processing. And JPEG still didn't cut it, especially with lens profiles. The latter is what really did Aperture in; the cost and "keep up" time to profile lenses was staggering, where it is necessary for the amateur AND pro given current integrated sensor/lens designs.

Camera manufacturers offered their own PC/Mac software on CD) with their cameras, but they haven't done so for mobile OS. They need to get on that....fast.

An Instamatic buyer was never going to buy an LX or F1, Fx or Minolta or Contax. Still true today.

The great middle class dSLR BestBuy binge buy of the 2000's was the anomaly. We're simply returning to the late 80's-90's model wherein wealthy consumers bought ILC's and everyone else bought fixed lens pocket rangefinders (what an iPhone essentially is). Emerging developed economy demographics don't change that.

You're arguing that ILC camera companies change the entire camera architecture to appeal to a market that doesn't want an ILC at all. Actual ILC buyers can and will post-process on computer platforms or will upload RAWs to a PP online development lab. That's a service opportunity waiting for an aggregator.

ILC owners use phones for snapshots and post to FB and Instagram, but ALSO use ILC's by choice and preference. It isn't binary!

[mecrox]

But the average prosumers is definitely NOT spending $1,500k on a monitor + same on a PC.

So there is a discord between the mass market needed to sell ILCs and the back-end processing needed (the "lab", which is no in-sourced to the consumer and not out-sourced to Kodak/Fuji).

Adobe said as much when they moved LR to to subscription. The market for both he software and hardware is relatively tiny, but the ILC market needs to move 10-20 million units/year to stay viable with multiple competitors.

So if this market now has to play friendly with mobile OS to keep sales in the range, then mobile OS it is.

I went through this with Aperture testing for Apple. The actual number of people wanting a better camera was about 500x times what the # of consumers who actually did significant post-processing. And JPEG still didn't cut it, especially with lens profiles. The latter is what really did Aperture in; the cost and "keep up" time to profile lenses was staggering, where it is necessary for the amateur AND pro given current integrated sensor/lens designs.

Camera manufacturers offered their own PC/Mac software on CD) with their cameras, but they haven't done so for mobile OS. They need to get on that....fast.

I agree. Out of interest, I've tried to do some in-camera raw to jpeg editing on my Olympus camera. It's a crappy Windows 3.1 experience. The manual is inadequate. One can do some things but not others, there are different menus involved which mean diving back into the root menu and exiting again. There are quite a few settings to tweak all told but it's not laid out simply, logically and in one place. There is no online help in the camera editing controls, or none that I can find. Obvious gotchas like being able to rotate to set a straight horizon are not there at all. And while there is an app for mobile, it is very basic indeed. So, outcome? i will likely continue to send RAWs to my ipad for editing with Snapseed or LR mobile or use my PC for the stuff I want done right. Or put up with jpegs I know could be a lot better. And I would guess that Olympus is likely one of the better implementations among the camera-makers. Oh boy, they all have a long way to go from what I've seen. They're just giving it all away to Google, VSCO, Adobe et al. Apple's own editing app on my ipad and iphone is streets ahead, imho, and even that one is pretty simple. Why can't these camera guys get their act together???

[monochrome]

Why can't these camera guys get their act together???

Google a photo of Apple's new HQ spaceship. I'd bet they have more software engineers dedicated to image development - completely apart from camera hardware integration - than ALL THE SOFTWARE ENGINEERS employed by all the companies combined in the entire ILC industry.

[Kunzite]

Yeah, but most of them are working to prevent users from doing anything useful with their products

[Rondec]

This whole conversation makes no sense to me. It has a poor understanding of what post processing entails and what people "really want."

On one hand, it is stated that people want better image quality. That's fine. The question is how you get to better image quality. The issue for most people with regard to image quality is not a lens correction issue. It just isn't. Lens corrections straighten curved lines and fix vignetting and that's about it. The problem really has to do more with knowing how to use the camera combined with having some composition skills and visualization of how you want your finished image to look.

What I find that most people mean when they are talking about post processing is that they want the sort of results that Topaz Suite offers, or skin retouching software or even HDR effects offer. I just don't know that running an image through Snapseed --regardless of the presence of lens profiles -- is going to really give much benefit over out of camera jpegs.