Slashdot Mirror
The Presidential Portrait Goes Digital
alphadogg writes "Barack Obama's election to US president has already brought a string of firsts, and on Wednesday there came another. The official presidential portrait was shot on a digital camera for the first time. The picture was taken by the White House's new official photographer, Pete Souza, and issued by The Office of the President Elect through its Web site. It was taken on Tuesday evening at 5:38 p.m. using a Canon EOS 5D Mark II, according to the metadata embedded in the image file."
Just heard an interview with the photographer on NPR. It's semi-off-topic in that it doesn't have to do with the medium used for photographs but still an interesting piece I think. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99353598
Unless you get an eye upgrade or suddenly make it an habit to "browse" photographs with something akin to Google Maps, then no, 16 MP will always be enough. The human eye has at its best (a cone of vision of about 2 degrees of arc) a resolution of about 28 seconds of arc. Do the math to find out how much resolution you really need depending on the size of the photograph and its distance from your eyes.
You just got troll'd!
...what about the Geotagging? THAT's what we really want to know... WHERE was it taken? ;P
He does actually have some power, unlike us mere mortals he's allowed to order "off the menu" at the White House, a privilege reserved for past, present, and future presidents.
I want the .raw for manipulatory purposes.
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
Just get an Android phone and be done with it.
The reign of Photoshop started years ago. It's no harder to manipulate a scanned negative or print than a digital original. Ken Rockwell is always touting how great his 175MP film scans look compared to anything digital has to offer, including the amazing 21MP shots from the EOS 5D mk II. His reviews wreak of flip-flopping bias both ways, but the numbers don't lie.
Should we ever be cheerleaders for the success of failure of any President?
I dunno. It seemed to me like half of the country was rooting for the failure of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush from the moment each one of them took office. I suppose this probably had a lot to do with the fact that Clinton never won a majority of the popular vote (in 92 he only got 43%) and neither did Bush the first time around (plus the Florida mess).
A friend of mine who is a staunch Republican said something to the affect of: "I wish it had gone the other way but I'm glad that the margin was as big as it was". For better or worse nobody can dispute that the majority of the American electorate and states wanted Obama as our next president.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.