but sounded way better overall. The quality of modern soft synths is amazing…
[Meanwhile, my music directories expanded to 350Gb - Spectrasonics alone is 120Gb]
However, the trend to hardware controllers (as discussed in recent posts, and my links to the likes of Neon Vines shows the physical boxes count growing again - is the shrinking reversing ?
My external controllers are
My latest lunatic project is to use the 58 sliders and 60 switches on the Roland JD800 to enhance the Arturia Keylab, by mapping the sysex they push out to do useful things in Live …
PS: In / on the rack MOTU M4 / iConnectivity mioXM / MOTU 828 / Art MX822 / LIne 6 PodXT guitar modelling preamp / Cambridge audio amp and sub to desk min-speakers/ out of sight 260w amp and Spirit nearfield monitors. / Asus Z390-Prime mobo with i9-9900 cpu, 32Gb; 3 x Western Digital hard drives; Samsung EVO 970 SSD/ Sennheiser HD650 headphones for wife pleasing mixing ( otherwise “tell me again, my love, why do you keep playing the same 20 notes over and over?”)
I love smartphones for their versatility, but I hate their sub-standard picture quality, so my pictures are made with this camera and a trio of good lenses, that is my best compromise between quality and weight
(try to do this with a smartphone )
I’ve gone from 17 crates at 374 kilos to a few racks although I am know expanding again, with some new desks like the Neve 8424 and recallable automation it may be time to go back out for some inimitable headroom!
Actually, you can get quite some good shots with smartphone cameras. I always say that photographic artistry is in the photographer themselves, as the artist, regardless of the equipment. I had an LG G2 smartphone back in 2014, which already took the kind of high quality pictures that Apple has since brainwashed people into believing is only possible with iPhones (literally people ask me all the time “if I took that with an iPhone”). Foto Galerie
But I do hybrid, I also use a DSLR, mostly for extreme zooms and low light conditions. But the Bokeh effect that you illustrated with the butterfly picture is possible with modern phone cameras.
sure, the bokeh, but the image quality, notably if you see it enlarged on a monitor, is poor to my eyes
The sensor is small, you cannot raise ISOs so much, and denoise algorithms do miracles but killing details
Butterflies, and above all flowers, move constantly, so you must set a very short time, let’s say 1/1000, and aperture cannot be too much low otherwise the subject is mostly out of focus, so ISO leap out; moreover butterflies are shy, and you cannot be too close, so a smartphone is out
I attended a photography forum and there was a consensus about that
Nevertheless, there was a consensus that smartphones are enough for most people nowadays, and can give nice shoots in the hands of a skilled photographer, so I agree with you about that
As my photography mentor once told me…the best camera in the world is the one in your hands when you need it.
I should have said…I didn’t have a camera handy as I still generally prefer my DSLRs and hybrids for anything more than snapshots. (not that they can’t take great photos ( as @Bernd showcases in his amazing images) Unfortunately, like my VSTs these days, I probably have more cameras than I need, and only fully understand a few of them.
I do like to post once in a while to a gallery toddwmac | Pixabay and use it to get a general feel for society’s current state of mind. So far, flowers and dogs are winning over jet fighters and transports, but just by a bit.
While my video and music hobby has captured much of my time and imagination, this time of the year I still keep a tripod in the corner with 200mm 2.8 and a charged battery…for when these guys return. And to your point point Claudio, if you know anything about hummingbirds, catching these guys with my phone from a hundred feet away would be tough…at least for me.