"Black holes are where God divided by zero"
- Steven Wright
More pages: 1 ... 11 ... 21 ... 31 ... 41 ... 51 ... 61 ... 71 ... 81 ... 91 ... 101 ... 111 ... 121 ... 131 ... 141 ... 151 ... 161 ... 171 ... 181 ... 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 211 ... 221 ... 231 ... 241 ... 251 ... 261 ... 271 ... 281 ... 291 ... 301 ... 311 ... 321 ... 331 ... 341 ... 351 ... 361 ... 371 ... 381 ... 391 ... 401 ... 411 ... 421 ... 431 ... 438
Query FailedMichael
Monday, March 30, 2009

there's a joke about "women drivers" and crashing in there somewhere....
Michael
Monday, March 30, 2009

that...was....friggen...long. good. but long. I wonder sometimes if Stephan has any time left to do any real work after writing blog posts like that.
lone
Saturday, March 28, 2009

>and because the highest resolution displays out
>there are about 4MP, so if you're targetting any
>digital medium there's not much use of anything
>higher than that anyway

Well that's a rather big if, a lot of people still print and sometimes, quite large. Besides, even if you don't print, resizing a large image to a smaller one will make the circle of confusion smaller. Remember that the size of the CoC determines your depth of field, which is why the DoF is calculated for a specific print size (usually 4x5), so resizing down gives you a larger *usable* depth of field. For the same reason, and assuming your original image captured more resolution than your target image size, resizing down will make your overall image crisper to the eye, something that can very easily be seen in stitched panoramas that have been resized down to screen resolutions: they are much (MUCH!) sharper than they would have been had they been photographed with a very wide lens and kept as-is.

Also, targetting digital mediums does not imply that images will never be zoomed in, in fact stitched panoramas can only be truely appreciated digitally through zooming and panning, because their resolution is often way beyond what an actual print would let you see (well, unless you print several meters large, I suppose).

None of this really counters your original argument that high Mpx numbers on compact cameras are somewhat silly for most people's use. Lots of Mpx isn't entirely useless though, if you know why you want them and what to do with them.
Shd
Saturday, March 28, 2009

Only available for shoes express 2.0 compliant women... xD
Overlord
Friday, March 27, 2009

I havn't actually seen the driver specs yet, but i guess full compatibility is just around the corner.

I like the geometry shaders, i just don't use them that often because they are a bit to limited for what i like to use them for.
What i would like is a fully programmable pipeline, just drop in any shader you like in whatever order you like.
Groovounet
Thursday, March 26, 2009

Have a closer look on the drivers and you will see that the big new feature of OpenGL 3.1, GL_ARB_uniform_buffer_object, isn't supported. Well, it's not full support at all, just marketing!

But to be fair, it's coming quickly and even AMD have done good progress.

I don't like this so called geometry shaders so I don't really care about it. I like it this way, no need to poluted OpenGL core specification with a feature that is going to be deprecated in few month or a year.
Overlord
Thursday, March 26, 2009

It's a good release, though a bit anemic, i was hoping for the geometry shaders and a few other things but you cant get everything at once.
It's also good to see drivers out already with full support.
Groovounet
Thursday, March 26, 2009

lol, quite some enthusiast news XD
More pages: 1 ... 11 ... 21 ... 31 ... 41 ... 51 ... 61 ... 71 ... 81 ... 91 ... 101 ... 111 ... 121 ... 131 ... 141 ... 151 ... 161 ... 171 ... 181 ... 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 211 ... 221 ... 231 ... 241 ... 251 ... 261 ... 271 ... 281 ... 291 ... 301 ... 311 ... 321 ... 331 ... 341 ... 351 ... 361 ... 371 ... 381 ... 391 ... 401 ... 411 ... 421 ... 431 ... 438