Digital cameras are losing...

[Ziltoid]

I used to use instagram but it got too mainstream

 

[BurningSkies]

I used to use instagram but it got too mainstream

I used actual toy cameras before Hipstamatic was even invented.

 

[Ziltoid]

I used actual toy cameras before Hipstamatic was even invented.

I hail before you, Hipster King

 

[BurningSkies]

I hail before you, Hipster King

I'm more the Bishop of toy cameras.

 

[Ziltoid]

As you wish Bishop.

 

[BurningSkies]

As you wish Bishop.

 

[Ziltoid]

I love you Bishop.

 

[Asa Samuel]

You can make an HDR looking image from 1 RAW, but be prepared to spend a lot of time manipulating it.

And HDR is more than 3 images if you're doing it right, try doing it with 5-7 and you'll see a vast improvement over 3.

A lot of time? Takes me less than five minutes to move the exposure slider either way and save five images

 

[sloasdaylight]

A lot of time? Takes me less than five minutes to move the exposure slider either way and save five images

Moving the exposure slider is not the same as taking 7 different pictures in quick succession at different exposures. You can think it is, and if it works for you, great, but it's not the same. Working with the same image will mean you're working with the same pixels, just at different, altered exposures, which already begins to mess with the image. Any pixels that are washed out in the original image, or are too dark to show up well, are still washed out, or too dark to show up well, so you need to manipulate the image in order to either create them, or work around them. Moving the exposure slider is a quick and cheap way to make an image look like it's HDR, but that's all it is, a cheap, quick fix.

You can take 1 RAW, or CR2, or whatever file format you want, and move your exposure sliders and create different layers in photoshop and blend them together, and some one can use proper HDR technique and take 5-7 images of the same scene at different exposures, and blend them together, and you'll be able to tell the difference. At least you can if you care about the quality of the image, as you apparently do. Which, now that I think of it, makes your argument with me mind boggling.

 

[BurningSkies]

Moving the exposure slider is not the same as taking 7 different pictures in quick succession at different exposures. You can think it is, and if it works for you, great, but it's not the same. Working with the same image will mean you're working with the same pixels, just at different, altered exposures, which already begins to mess with the image. Any pixels that are washed out in the original image, or are too dark to show up well, are still washed out, or too dark to show up well, so you need to manipulate the image in order to either create them, or work around them. Moving the exposure slider is a quick and cheap way to make an image look like it's HDR, but that's all it is, a cheap, quick fix.

You can take 1 RAW, or CR2, or whatever file format you want, and move your exposure sliders and create different layers in photoshop and blend them together, and some one can use proper HDR technique and take 5-7 images of the same scene at different exposures, and blend them together, and you'll be able to tell the difference. At least you can if you care about the quality of the image, as you apparently do. Which, now that I think of it, makes your argument with me mind boggling.

This rings true to me. You can't return detail to an image once it's lost when recorded. All of the slider adjusting won't return detail that's in blown out regions or areas that are buried in black. Multiple exposures is the only true way to do this kind of composite correctly.

 

[BogeyBass]

Wow, this keeps getting taken to further and further extremes. No one has claimed in this thread that camera phones are better than point-and-shoots and certainly no one has said that camera phones are functionally comparable to dSLRs!
bc

yes yes, ok ok it is true and the evidence is already apparent.

Lots of people just need a point n shoot. Alot of people are not pro photographers or even need to try and get close.
Some people just want pictures of friends/family.

So now yes, Cell Phones have greatly eliminated the need to buy a low cost point n shoot camera. Heck even if you dont pay your cell phone bill. The phone still works as a camera.
Data storage/calender etc and some still work as a browser if you have Wi Fi. So point n shoots and possibly other electronics are losing business now, and can expect it to continue more.

Maybe its more of a warning to manufactures and investors.
My Polaroid stock did ok in the 90's but went to complete garbage 10 years later in 2003. Polaroid lost business to the digital market. Was sold , bought came back to make....point n shoot digital cameras. well guess what....

 

[lowendfriend]

The great thing about cameras is that there are many options. This is my primary camera

and this is my "serious" camera.

Maybe I'll go digital one day. Probably when I can afford a camera or digital back that will allow me to do what I can do with my current cameras.

I always said that when I can get 4K x 4K pixels and can do swings and tilts in photoshop that it's time to retire the Linhof and huge Gitzo tripod. They are retired...

Ansel Adams would love this technology...