JAT
May 3, 05:10 AM
It's pretty clear that the lens is in a deeper "well" in the white model. This is consistent with the rumor that light was impinging on the camera in the white model. What you need to do is limit all light that isn't coming from directly in front of the lens. No light from the side, and definitely no light from the inside of the camera. The way to fight it if you have an SLR? Invest in an old fashioned thing called a bellows, which shields the lens from any light that isn't coming from the area you can focus on, and which doesn't do anything but add glare or make blacks in the picture more like dark gray. This deeper camera acts like a bellows, I presume, blocking any light coming through the white, more translucent body.
As mentioned, a bellows does not surround a lens, it is a means to alter magnification. In fact, a bellows (or the portion of a modern macro lens that is equivalent to a bellows) will not have any lens elements in it at all.
I believe that's also what the little aluminum trim ring around the camera sensor is used for too to block out the light from the translucent body and the LED flash. The prototype iPhone 4 never had that ring I believe.
It's all just ridiculous. The lens blocks light itself. No lens is simply glass, it would never work at all, who would make such a stupid product? How would it hold together? A lens, esp in the case of a large SLR lens, is many glass/plastic elements. Here's a standard lens (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/50mm-f14-ex-dg-hsm-sigma), look at the diagram at the bottom of the 8 elements and the positioning. (and there must be at least 2 in the iPhone lens) They have to be held in their respective positions by something around the outside. The suggestions of "light leakage" imply that the surrounding material would have to be translucent....what, more glass? Transparent aluminum? :rolleyes: The photo in the OP clearly shows black plastic and silver metal as the lens surround, independent from the rest of the phone or the color of the phone.
Look at that picture. The lens on the left has more plastic in it, which I suppose could block light more easily than less, but that's the one from a black phone. Shouldn't it be the other way around for this theory to have any teeth at all? It's probably just a newly or differently sourced lens, and if they took apart new black phones they'd find the same newer one in some of those.
The thickness issue is within manufacturing tolerances, I would guess. Again, if we could measure each and every brand new phone, we'd no doubt be able to find a black one that is thicker than a white one. This is the problem for case makers, always has been. What no one is thinking about is the size of the cases, those also will have some size variation within the same model line.
As mentioned, a bellows does not surround a lens, it is a means to alter magnification. In fact, a bellows (or the portion of a modern macro lens that is equivalent to a bellows) will not have any lens elements in it at all.
I believe that's also what the little aluminum trim ring around the camera sensor is used for too to block out the light from the translucent body and the LED flash. The prototype iPhone 4 never had that ring I believe.
It's all just ridiculous. The lens blocks light itself. No lens is simply glass, it would never work at all, who would make such a stupid product? How would it hold together? A lens, esp in the case of a large SLR lens, is many glass/plastic elements. Here's a standard lens (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/50mm-f14-ex-dg-hsm-sigma), look at the diagram at the bottom of the 8 elements and the positioning. (and there must be at least 2 in the iPhone lens) They have to be held in their respective positions by something around the outside. The suggestions of "light leakage" imply that the surrounding material would have to be translucent....what, more glass? Transparent aluminum? :rolleyes: The photo in the OP clearly shows black plastic and silver metal as the lens surround, independent from the rest of the phone or the color of the phone.
Look at that picture. The lens on the left has more plastic in it, which I suppose could block light more easily than less, but that's the one from a black phone. Shouldn't it be the other way around for this theory to have any teeth at all? It's probably just a newly or differently sourced lens, and if they took apart new black phones they'd find the same newer one in some of those.
The thickness issue is within manufacturing tolerances, I would guess. Again, if we could measure each and every brand new phone, we'd no doubt be able to find a black one that is thicker than a white one. This is the problem for case makers, always has been. What no one is thinking about is the size of the cases, those also will have some size variation within the same model line.
nickisgame69
Mar 24, 12:03 PM
ATV quality is in Apple's control but T quality is not. If they do decide to license the software technology then every tv manufacturer will implement with their own hardware. Its possible that Airplay will work better on one device versus another. I believe that will taint the Apple brand. Apple should stick with its guns. ATV works well because it fits in Apple's model. Licensing software that is so hardware dependent is just a bad idea.
SockRolid
Apr 5, 01:08 PM
A touch- or proximity-sensitive home button would cause enormous grief. Just imagine playing a game in portrait mode. Move your thumb too close to the home button and boom: back to the home screen. Unacceptable.
thisisahughes
Mar 25, 01:53 AM
Crap... that is a freaking steel and well there just went the resell value of everyone's first gen iPad, including me. Oh well.
I agree with you... but, steel?
I agree with you... but, steel?
more...
redeye be
May 25, 02:40 PM
I think you deserve the stubeeef, semi weekly, "Darn Good Job Build'n Sumthin" award. You earned it! :D
Thank you very much!
Thank you very much!
Spacedust
May 1, 03:53 AM
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0xWQK18Zfw&feature=related
They should come easily.
They should come easily.
more...
clientsiman
May 5, 10:35 AM
The eu client is up now.
In my late 2009 13 pro starcrart 2 is really slow in OS. I hope Apple to give us new Nvidia drivers with 10.6.4 and Blizzard to do some optimizations.
Good think is that it runs great in Windows 7 64bit. Back to bootcamp again...
In my late 2009 13 pro starcrart 2 is really slow in OS. I hope Apple to give us new Nvidia drivers with 10.6.4 and Blizzard to do some optimizations.
Good think is that it runs great in Windows 7 64bit. Back to bootcamp again...
wordoflife
Mar 24, 02:43 PM
$299 is a steal.
more...
dasmb
Apr 5, 09:04 AM
So I guess this means there's nothing wrong with the antenna?
rhett7660
Apr 1, 08:48 AM
Wow... short sighted on the networks part. I'm surprised.... no difference than just having another TV in your house, just on your Tablet. It would be interesting to know more about their motivation behind this... maybe they want to go direct? In other words, maybe Discovery and the other channels want to sell direct subscriptions and not go through channel partners like Time Warner?
If that is the case... I smell disaster for the networks. Who wants to buy individual channels for their computers, iPads or other devices? Not me? It would have to be dirt cheap.
Hummm.... thinking about it... maybe it's not so dumb? If each channel was $.99 and I could pick Ala-carte who I wanted, I know my Cable bill would go from $40 per-month to less than $10. Maybe they are onto something thinking about it?
This is probably why they WON'T do this. I am with you. I wish I could scrap 90% of the channels I get and just get that I watch. Lower my bill by a few bucks, I would be a happy camper. But I don't see that happening anytime soon thou. Who knows though. Maybe this is the beginning!!
If that is the case... I smell disaster for the networks. Who wants to buy individual channels for their computers, iPads or other devices? Not me? It would have to be dirt cheap.
Hummm.... thinking about it... maybe it's not so dumb? If each channel was $.99 and I could pick Ala-carte who I wanted, I know my Cable bill would go from $40 per-month to less than $10. Maybe they are onto something thinking about it?
This is probably why they WON'T do this. I am with you. I wish I could scrap 90% of the channels I get and just get that I watch. Lower my bill by a few bucks, I would be a happy camper. But I don't see that happening anytime soon thou. Who knows though. Maybe this is the beginning!!
more...
BrettJDeriso
Jun 19, 08:51 AM
Pour all their R&D into technologies that don't even exist yet, while continuing to throw up excuses for why they can't include technologies that do. Like Blu-Ray.
wdlove
Sep 13, 10:54 AM
I wish you all the best iGary. Having a good sense of humor is important. Since I'm a nurse and worked on a surgical floor, I've had a lot of experience with patients before and after surgery. You can PM if you would like to ask specific questions via iChat. I personally had general anesthesia three times T&A, wisdom teeth, and bronchoscopy (looked into my lungs with a tube.)
more...
randallking
Jan 8, 04:37 PM
Oooh, what sound does it make? I'm always intrigued by new push notifications. I hope it's the noise the website makes. Pop!
I think it was the same sound that is used for SMS and MMS alerts. It has stopped working today for some reason.
I think it was the same sound that is used for SMS and MMS alerts. It has stopped working today for some reason.
bilbo--baggins
Sep 27, 11:06 AM
All I need to know is whether it will update iSync to support the Sony Ericsson M600i...
more...
puuukeey
Sep 1, 05:20 AM
I kinda feel like we should at least have the option to not have every element of our gui bogged down with image files.
I was thinking that it would be cool if more of the UI was plain openGL and less image based. how cool (although impracticle) would it be if the entire gui was 5 channels. R, G, B, alpha, displace. Then the os could load ONE metal image, and all the sliders, buttons,wells could be smokey glass(slightly transparent, dark grey, and displaced the image behind it like a glass of water.) that would be more open gl work but less loading of images.
that would reflect the realitive increase in graphics processors comprared to regular ones.
sometimes I just wonder how quick an update to the classic interface would fly on a modern machine
I was thinking that it would be cool if more of the UI was plain openGL and less image based. how cool (although impracticle) would it be if the entire gui was 5 channels. R, G, B, alpha, displace. Then the os could load ONE metal image, and all the sliders, buttons,wells could be smokey glass(slightly transparent, dark grey, and displaced the image behind it like a glass of water.) that would be more open gl work but less loading of images.
that would reflect the realitive increase in graphics processors comprared to regular ones.
sometimes I just wonder how quick an update to the classic interface would fly on a modern machine
carlgo
Nov 18, 10:52 AM
Great, now they will seal up all the doors and windows at Foxconn and cavity search the employees when the are allowed out. And some employees will just mysteriously disappear.
more...
StyxMaker
Apr 21, 06:41 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
No one is going to write an iPhone 5 (fifth gen hardware) app? You're just like the people who thought "No one is going to write retina display apps, most people have the old phones." Now if you don't support the retina display, your app is very much inferior.
There will MOST DEFINITELY be a good amount of fifth gen only apps, and even more 4th+5th generation only apps. Just like some of today's apps only support the 4 and 3GS.
There's a huge difference between SUPPORTING the a-5 (or retina display) and REQUIRING.
Look, I'm not against the A-5. Whatever. Knock yourselves out with it. I'm just saying that when push comes to shove, you're going to wish you had LTE compatability more than an A-5 processor.
All the processing speed in the world can't save you if your phone can't access content fast enough -- and with the move to cloud-based storage on the horizon, anyone carrying a 3G phone is going to have a miserable experience.
The only thing I stream to my iP4 or my iPad is Netflix on my lunch hour at work. Netflix streaming is satisfactory over 3G. I'm not going to complane if the wait another year to upgrade.
No one is going to write an iPhone 5 (fifth gen hardware) app? You're just like the people who thought "No one is going to write retina display apps, most people have the old phones." Now if you don't support the retina display, your app is very much inferior.
There will MOST DEFINITELY be a good amount of fifth gen only apps, and even more 4th+5th generation only apps. Just like some of today's apps only support the 4 and 3GS.
There's a huge difference between SUPPORTING the a-5 (or retina display) and REQUIRING.
Look, I'm not against the A-5. Whatever. Knock yourselves out with it. I'm just saying that when push comes to shove, you're going to wish you had LTE compatability more than an A-5 processor.
All the processing speed in the world can't save you if your phone can't access content fast enough -- and with the move to cloud-based storage on the horizon, anyone carrying a 3G phone is going to have a miserable experience.
The only thing I stream to my iP4 or my iPad is Netflix on my lunch hour at work. Netflix streaming is satisfactory over 3G. I'm not going to complane if the wait another year to upgrade.
MacFanJeff
Apr 1, 09:20 AM
Not surpising at all. It's all about control of content and money.
All studios, rather music or movie have always hated the idea of selling content even though it makes them a ton of money. If they could do away with all of it, including DVD sells, they would. What they truly want is for you to pay a fee every time you want to view or listen to content and you never "own" anything period. Nothing physical at all to buy, just pay for it every time you view or listen.
All studios, rather music or movie have always hated the idea of selling content even though it makes them a ton of money. If they could do away with all of it, including DVD sells, they would. What they truly want is for you to pay a fee every time you want to view or listen to content and you never "own" anything period. Nothing physical at all to buy, just pay for it every time you view or listen.
dakis
Oct 26, 11:35 PM
btw: the "sneak preview" Apple offered clearly showed a "JUNK" folder - where did that go?
barkmonster
Apr 23, 03:48 AM
This is the primary design flaw with the iPad. This tablet can't be the normal person's computer unless every normal person has a tech friend/relative to keep the tablet working/updated. So while Woz is correct that the tablet will be the normal person's computer, Apple's iPad is not yet that tablet.
Same for all the iGadgets with an iTunes account attached. Why apple doesn't make the default behaviour "charge" not "sync" and then simply verify that it's not the same iTunes account and "do nothing" instead of the hassle of it hiding all your music if you plug an iDevice into a PC and you're mate decides to click eject for you if your charging off it.
I can understand the need to only offer syncing on a device that isn't internet and wifi enabled because the only way of adding stuff to it is to sync to a computer but for all the other devices, it would be good if it was 100% self-contained.
I'd have no issues getting a used Mac Mini then turning it into a media centre through an LCD TV at a later date because I eventually know a Mac Pro would be my best choice for running Pro Tools 9. Someone who just wants to listen to and buy music or video, send emails, view youTube clips and keep in touch on social networking sites doesn't necessarily need a computer when the iPad does it all. Apple could even offer a way of interfacing their external DVD from the Macbook Air with the iDevices so you can rip your own music to the device itself without even needing a computer.
Same for all the iGadgets with an iTunes account attached. Why apple doesn't make the default behaviour "charge" not "sync" and then simply verify that it's not the same iTunes account and "do nothing" instead of the hassle of it hiding all your music if you plug an iDevice into a PC and you're mate decides to click eject for you if your charging off it.
I can understand the need to only offer syncing on a device that isn't internet and wifi enabled because the only way of adding stuff to it is to sync to a computer but for all the other devices, it would be good if it was 100% self-contained.
I'd have no issues getting a used Mac Mini then turning it into a media centre through an LCD TV at a later date because I eventually know a Mac Pro would be my best choice for running Pro Tools 9. Someone who just wants to listen to and buy music or video, send emails, view youTube clips and keep in touch on social networking sites doesn't necessarily need a computer when the iPad does it all. Apple could even offer a way of interfacing their external DVD from the Macbook Air with the iDevices so you can rip your own music to the device itself without even needing a computer.
chrono1081
Mar 17, 07:51 PM
In response to all the "Recommend Me a Camera/Lens/Editor etc" threads, I offer this. Comments or additions?
Never Show Your Work To Anyone
Read Only "Expert Photographer" Blogs, Articles, and Books
Leave Your Camera On Auto...:eek:...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
Spend Too Much Time Mastering Photoshop
Mine is this: Fixate on one style of photography or subject.
Original stolen from PIXIQ... (http://www.pixiq.com/article/how-to-work-hard-at-photography-and-still-suck)
Dale
The one in bold is what I see the most. I've done photography for years and see new people get into the game and worry about the wrong things. Photoshop being one of them. Photoshop shouldn't even come to someones mind.
Learn the camera, learn composition, learn lighting, learn photographic techniques to get what you want such as second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing, etc. Once you can get it done right in camera then you can take it to the next level in photoshop (skin smoothing, removing hair wisps, correcting lens distortion, etc.).
Too many people want to be a pro right out of the gate, they buy photoshop, get a NAPP membership, a fancy computer (that is 99% of the time overkill), raid storage when they've only shot 500 pictures, etc but never bother to learn the fundamentals.
I'm all for learning on Digital, I think it helps someone learn better, but focus on learning the most important and fundamental things first, then learn about the post processing. A picture can still look fantastic without running it through photoshop.
Never Show Your Work To Anyone
Read Only "Expert Photographer" Blogs, Articles, and Books
Leave Your Camera On Auto...:eek:...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
Spend Too Much Time Mastering Photoshop
Mine is this: Fixate on one style of photography or subject.
Original stolen from PIXIQ... (http://www.pixiq.com/article/how-to-work-hard-at-photography-and-still-suck)
Dale
The one in bold is what I see the most. I've done photography for years and see new people get into the game and worry about the wrong things. Photoshop being one of them. Photoshop shouldn't even come to someones mind.
Learn the camera, learn composition, learn lighting, learn photographic techniques to get what you want such as second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing, etc. Once you can get it done right in camera then you can take it to the next level in photoshop (skin smoothing, removing hair wisps, correcting lens distortion, etc.).
Too many people want to be a pro right out of the gate, they buy photoshop, get a NAPP membership, a fancy computer (that is 99% of the time overkill), raid storage when they've only shot 500 pictures, etc but never bother to learn the fundamentals.
I'm all for learning on Digital, I think it helps someone learn better, but focus on learning the most important and fundamental things first, then learn about the post processing. A picture can still look fantastic without running it through photoshop.
reputationZed
Apr 25, 08:40 PM
No thanks. Looks like I'll be voting for Bill the Cat again.
http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/billthecat/858186861_umpyA-L.jpg (http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/7305329_XAcTU#858186861_umpyA-A-LB)
http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/billthecat/858186861_umpyA-L.jpg (http://thfd.smugmug.com/Other/Forums/7305329_XAcTU#858186861_umpyA-A-LB)
Nothlit
Apr 5, 09:13 AM
Ummm...no.
Consumer Reports was clearly pageview trolling with the iPhone 4.
They rated it as their BEST smartphone, but said they wouldn't recommend it.
How does that make any sense?
It makes perfect sense when you understand that "recommend" is a special term when it comes to Consumer Reports. They weren't telling people not to buy it. They just weren't giving it their highest "recommended" seal of approval.
Consumer Reports was clearly pageview trolling with the iPhone 4.
They rated it as their BEST smartphone, but said they wouldn't recommend it.
How does that make any sense?
It makes perfect sense when you understand that "recommend" is a special term when it comes to Consumer Reports. They weren't telling people not to buy it. They just weren't giving it their highest "recommended" seal of approval.
albusseverus
Mar 29, 08:13 AM
Anyone else think this is a little too public? And it's not a very comfortable place to sit having coffee�no matter how good the food is. I imagine a couple of billionaires could have found a more comfortable and more private place for coffee and a chat, unless they're being deliberately "public".
Is this how they squash a rumour in sily-con valley? Media says these two hate each other's guts. Be seen being nice to each other in public.
Is this how they squash a rumour in sily-con valley? Media says these two hate each other's guts. Be seen being nice to each other in public.
No comments:
Post a Comment