Sort of off topic, but vaguely related - shrinking kit

Not too long ago my kit occupied 24 rack spaces

In switching to ‘in the box’ it shrunk to this

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?”)


Pre Scaler


Post Scaler


I think I’m headed in the wrong direction…but got to love that Arturia hardware!

1 Like

It happened the same for mobile phones: increasingly smaller, then increasingly larger

1 Like

Funny you said that… I wanted to take a picture of my smartphone with ZenBeats loaded but I don’t have any cameras any more. :slight_smile:

too sad… but you can always recover buying one

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 :wink:)

I had a professional Canon reflex since one year ago, but the weight persuaded me to lower the quality a bit, while gaining in wearability: 2,5 Kg against less then 1

Be careful with smartphone as well…

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!

1 Like

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.

1 Like

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

Nice pictures indeed, but I see enough detail and low noise with NIKON D5200 only

this is a 200% crop of the Manila shoot: the detail has gone

The butterfly above is the same crop and the detail is still preserved

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. :slight_smile:

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.

1 Like

We got so many hummingbirds in our yard, who are not shy of humans at all, so I got bored taking pictures of them when I can just stand right next to them and watch them live :slight_smile:

1 Like

Yep…they are amazing, and fun to watch. Good thing they are tiny and just eat sucrose, or we’d be in trouble.

they are fast as kingfishers or swallows I think
1/2000 and more just to stop winds movement
and almost impossible to do BIF with them, unless just before or after they jump from a pole

I was able to do BIF with a bridge, and sometimes I succeed with my Oly or my old Pana GH4, but the Canon 7D Mark II with the 300 L F/4 was totally another story

Naturalist professionals don’t carry many Kg of hardware just to make you think they are sturdy

1 Like

nice pictures
crisp, well composed, interesting subjects, e.g. tulips and old wild homes
But, do you really rode on a lama?