I’m seeing hundreds of shots per charge with a Rebel XT. I haven’t clocked it precisely, but based on a recent trip to Hawai‘i with two aspiring photographers (and accomplished FlickrWhors) sharing it, we could easily exceed 400 shots per charge without flash. Under normal circumstances, pulling it out and shooting a few shots of something, occassionally taking it to the beach or some such, I put the battery in the charger every few weeks whether it needs it or not.
I worried about whether or not I should get a battery grip before that trip, but it just wasn’t an issue. Now having either ATA Airlines or the TSA swipe most of our battery chargers from our luggage on the way home, that was an issue. Perhaps a lead weighted battery grip would help in situations like that...
Ya know, he might be. I’m just not sure. Despite the statist image he put forth in the early Bond movies, I’ve always suspected he might be some sort of closeted liberal. Especially with that whole Penis Mightier thing. But that’s neither here nor there.
People get paid what they are willing to get off the bench for.
Cortana is willing to show up for ~$400 and Sean Connery is not.
Same for NFL players and school teachers. And for you.
If my boss offered me $1,500/hour, I’d sure as hell show up to collect it! But what does that prove? I don’t think anyone doubted that I’d accept such a wage, so all that demonstrates is that my boss, if he were to offer such a wage, is an idiot awash with other people’s money that he has proven himself incapable of responsibly managing. Which is kinda what I was implying about the movie business.
As to whether or not Mr. Connery would show up for a salary that is merely a hundred times what I make, I can’t say for sure. But I doubt he would. What does that prove, other than the fact that he’s quite wealthy? He’s accustomed to making a certain amount for every movie. That ain’t gonna change. But if the next generation of leading actors were accustomed to making, say, $250,000 for a year’s work, what incentive would there be to pay one of them ten times that? Would he, as a very popular movie actor, still be worth ten million per picture? Would you counsel him to stay home until they offered him what he was worth? And if so, what would you think of the actor that took his place for $250,000/year?
It's not really anyones business what anyone gets paid for anything.
Interesting timing. I'm currently about halfway through cleaning up and chopping into bits the product of two four hour voiceover sessions. It is amazing how much of a difference good voiceover talent can make. Our primary female voice talent (we alternate between male and female voices throughout each lesson) is a local morning DJ who is simply awesome. It is just astounding what she can get right on a single take, and we deal with some rather technical tongue-twisters with all sorts of little-known jargon. In general, these people don't get paid well enough (although the male whose work I am attempting to salvage was paid entirely too much, seeing as how he can’t correctly pronounce the word “oxygen”).
But as to the yawning chasm between the wages of on-camera and voiceover talent, are the vocal artists paid too little or are the folks with the perfect teeth paid too much? I lean toward the latter. I’m not saying Sean Connery shouldn’t make more than I do, but should he make fifty times what I do? Five hundred? Ten thousand times my salary? (And before you respond with something involving the words “what the market will bear,” look at everything going on with Hollywood and see how well the market seems to be bearing such cost structures.)
And I’m young enough to occasionally frequent stores with products that are labelled as being “FOR TOBACCO USE ONLY.” I think that signage carries about as much weight.
Neither of those laws you mentioned actually exist.
A business can ask for an SSN when you attempt to buy a nine volt battery with exact change. Perfectly legal. You can, of course, refuse such a ridiculous request. Also quite legal. They can then decline to do business with you. Just as legal.
It’s only the government folks that are prohibited by law from demanding SSNs.
What if we invent a politician whose speech patterns change when he’s bullshitting you? Perhaps we could chemically engineer his brain to stumble over words and become maddeningly misunderarticulate whenever he strays from reality.
Nah, it’d never work, he’d end up sounding too addled to get himself elected.
I just heard the other day about some kind of 'mark' that digital cameras put on all images, that notate what type camera you have...and some of the programs put registration information on the images (name, etc).
I forgot the name of that tag..starts with an "E" I think.
EXIF
I'm not sure I want all that meta data on pictures I take...just a simple picture thank you.
Most of the information is both innocuous and helpful (at least to other photographers). You can disable things like camera serial number and all that. But keep in mind that it is possible to prove that two pictures came from the same camera by analyzing the sensor noise, so if even one picture ever taken with your camera is positively correlated with your real identity, any entity sufficiently motivated could tie any other picture to that camera, assuming it hasn’t been altered too badly by resampling, multiple (overly aggressive) JPEG compressions, and other transformations significant enough to destroy those noise patterns.
What is this “tracking software” supposedly sent via email? A BackOrifice server named NakedPictures.jpg.exe? A single pixel invisible.GIF hotlinked from one of their web servers that they expected the reporter to blindly forward to people? Anybody have any idea what is being referred to here?
Preservation of EXIF data depends on the software you use and on its settings. In Photoshop, for instance, if you do Save As to create a JPEG you’ll preserve EXIF; but if you do Save For Web, that and everything else non-essential will be stripped out.
I don’t know of any circumstance where Flickr would prevent you from keeping that data in your photos.
Remember there ARE 32 processor versions of Windows. I have a friend who works on them, they do large SQL databases on 32-processor Itanium Superdomes (HP) running Windows.
I thought that the >4 CPU Windows systems were, in essence, specially tweaked systems to make it all worthwhile and that standard setups couldn’t really make effective use of more than four processors. If so, I stand corrected. *looks around* Err, sit corrected, sorry.
The NeXT architecture of OS X has always been more “at ease” with multiple CPUs than various versions of NT. Not that NT can’t handle them, but that OS X does a better job of dividing tasks sanely to more fully utilize the chips and from what I’ve heard is much more capable once you move past four. That being the case, as multiple CPUs/cores become more commonplace, I think OS X will end up with the reputation of being the faster of the two.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I used to live there. Grew up there, in fact.
I keep meaning to visit some day...
Jeebus, that was like trying to read a mashup between Burroughs’ cutup poetry and assembly language!
Is it available as a t-shirt?
Ten points for honesty!
At least they didn’t try to make bullshit excuses. I respect them for being up front about the real nature of the issue.
That is why we rejoice; for a while we were afraid Rummy might close in on Kissinger in that respect.
I, for one, welcome anyone else that might replace him.
Fuck, at this point, I could just about support Kissinger!
You can type them as HTML entities: < is < and > is >.
I’m seeing hundreds of shots per charge with a Rebel XT. I haven’t clocked it precisely, but based on a recent trip to Hawai‘i with two aspiring photographers (and accomplished FlickrWhors) sharing it, we could easily exceed 400 shots per charge without flash. Under normal circumstances, pulling it out and shooting a few shots of something, occassionally taking it to the beach or some such, I put the battery in the charger every few weeks whether it needs it or not.
I worried about whether or not I should get a battery grip before that trip, but it just wasn’t an issue. Now having either ATA Airlines or the TSA swipe most of our battery chargers from our luggage on the way home, that was an issue. Perhaps a lead weighted battery grip would help in situations like that...
Huh?
If my boss offered me $1,500/hour, I’d sure as hell show up to collect it! But what does that prove? I don’t think anyone doubted that I’d accept such a wage, so all that demonstrates is that my boss, if he were to offer such a wage, is an idiot awash with other people’s money that he has proven himself incapable of responsibly managing. Which is kinda what I was implying about the movie business.
As to whether or not Mr. Connery would show up for a salary that is merely a hundred times what I make, I can’t say for sure. But I doubt he would. What does that prove, other than the fact that he’s quite wealthy? He’s accustomed to making a certain amount for every movie. That ain’t gonna change. But if the next generation of leading actors were accustomed to making, say, $250,000 for a year’s work, what incentive would there be to pay one of them ten times that? Would he, as a very popular movie actor, still be worth ten million per picture? Would you counsel him to stay home until they offered him what he was worth? And if so, what would you think of the actor that took his place for $250,000/year?
Bullshit.
Interesting timing. I'm currently about halfway through cleaning up and chopping into bits the product of two four hour voiceover sessions. It is amazing how much of a difference good voiceover talent can make. Our primary female voice talent (we alternate between male and female voices throughout each lesson) is a local morning DJ who is simply awesome. It is just astounding what she can get right on a single take, and we deal with some rather technical tongue-twisters with all sorts of little-known jargon. In general, these people don't get paid well enough (although the male whose work I am attempting to salvage was paid entirely too much, seeing as how he can’t correctly pronounce the word “oxygen”).
But as to the yawning chasm between the wages of on-camera and voiceover talent, are the vocal artists paid too little or are the folks with the perfect teeth paid too much? I lean toward the latter. I’m not saying Sean Connery shouldn’t make more than I do, but should he make fifty times what I do? Five hundred? Ten thousand times my salary? (And before you respond with something involving the words “what the market will bear,” look at everything going on with Hollywood and see how well the market seems to be bearing such cost structures.)
And I’m young enough to occasionally frequent stores with products that are labelled as being “FOR TOBACCO USE ONLY.” I think that signage carries about as much weight.
Neither of those laws you mentioned actually exist.
A business can ask for an SSN when you attempt to buy a nine volt battery with exact change. Perfectly legal. You can, of course, refuse such a ridiculous request. Also quite legal. They can then decline to do business with you. Just as legal.
It’s only the government folks that are prohibited by law from demanding SSNs.
What if we invent a politician whose speech patterns change when he’s bullshitting you? Perhaps we could chemically engineer his brain to stumble over words and become maddeningly misunderarticulate whenever he strays from reality.
Nah, it’d never work, he’d end up sounding too addled to get himself elected.
Great sig.
EXIF
Most of the information is both innocuous and helpful (at least to other photographers). You can disable things like camera serial number and all that. But keep in mind that it is possible to prove that two pictures came from the same camera by analyzing the sensor noise, so if even one picture ever taken with your camera is positively correlated with your real identity, any entity sufficiently motivated could tie any other picture to that camera, assuming it hasn’t been altered too badly by resampling, multiple (overly aggressive) JPEG compressions, and other transformations significant enough to destroy those noise patterns.
Doubtful, what with Flickr being owned by Yahoo and all.
What is this “tracking software” supposedly sent via email? A BackOrifice server named NakedPictures.jpg.exe? A single pixel invisible .GIF hotlinked from one of their web servers that they expected the reporter to blindly forward to people? Anybody have any idea what is being referred to here?
Nah, IIfx all the way. I don’t care if it was “only” a 68030; the damn thing pulled like a large diesel.
Well, obviously he meant that the bicycle is the most popular vehicle in the world in America.
Duh.
There is one. I haven’t yet seen it, as NetFlix has it as “availability: unknown,” but it does exist.
Preservation of EXIF data depends on the software you use and on its settings. In Photoshop, for instance, if you do Save As to create a JPEG you’ll preserve EXIF; but if you do Save For Web, that and everything else non-essential will be stripped out.
I don’t know of any circumstance where Flickr would prevent you from keeping that data in your photos.
I thought that the >4 CPU Windows systems were, in essence, specially tweaked systems to make it all worthwhile and that standard setups couldn’t really make effective use of more than four processors. If so, I stand corrected. *looks around* Err, sit corrected, sorry.
The NeXT architecture of OS X has always been more “at ease” with multiple CPUs than various versions of NT. Not that NT can’t handle them, but that OS X does a better job of dividing tasks sanely to more fully utilize the chips and from what I’ve heard is much more capable once you move past four. That being the case, as multiple CPUs/cores become more commonplace, I think OS X will end up with the reputation of being the faster of the two.
Okay, the fuckers caught stealing elections don’t have to stand right up against the wall; they can slouch.
And the guys with the rifles will walk a few steps toward them. Is that enough compromise?