blurri

Your position pretty much sounds like "you can't stop it so why try" thus making it a "bad idea" which is really doesn't make any sense. Right now, they are attempting to build data centers in the worst possible places with issues such as not enough water supply, not enough energy and forcing the everyone in those communities to suffer. Clearly "forcing buildout to another area" is not a bad idea.

Because proposing legislation to ban all technology after your vote to keep Flock was not in the majority is a totally normal response?

And yet science doesn't have an clear answer here. Just conjecture and theories like the ones you stated.

Remind me to never try your pie.

In regards to your choice to focus on the necklace, all you've done is shown yourself to be a prude.

Ok, boomer.

Yeah thats not a thing.

Couldn't agree more. It took me a few tries quitting cold turkey but I haven't smoked for 8 years now and have no desire to start again.

How did we get here? We're humans. Have you not be following along through out history?

You say you're not commenting whether it's good or bad but your whole comment reads as you applying moral judgement.

And that curve allows you to process colors/contrast with way less artifacts than a file saved with a more contrast/saturated colors especially if you compound your after effects.

Btw are you a photographer or a video editor?

This is not slightly more options. Log is a lot of extra data for post processing.

Most people won't notice the difference that is true but this is true even for real cinema. Most people don't notice or care about things such as shooting on real film, aspect ratio etc.

The why is that people who create care about these things. Color grading and post shot creative manipulation, these things benefit from extra data. If I can't recover shadows or pushing white balance results in banding, those things are going to still be visible on a phone by myself and the small amount of people who do care.

Your camera (including film cameras) never could take a fully accurate picture to represent what you see. Digital sensors and film don't perceive what our eyes do. It's always been up to you the photographer to ensure that. If you choose to shoot on auto, that's your choice to let the camera guess at the accuracy. Most people don't like what is actual reality so they under, over, long and short expose to choose what reality they represent. They light things artificially and they put make up on. The might even create stage scenes. Even in pure film days, humans have been altering the output. Whether it be for realism or artistic purposes, dodging/burning were effectively retouching practices in film.

Yes smart phone cameras are using computation to get a more "correct" output, unless it's being marked as a feature to alter the image such as face smoothing. Camera makers are always trying to make their camera sensors (or film makers) better perceive the range our human eyes can or at least give use the choice through data to make the decision on realism or art.

Your bit about the police officer is 100% irrelevant to your main point.

I'm sorry but this comment its terrible. This comment section isn't YT or Tiktok.

I think these takes are just silly. Humans being gone would make the world a better place. Getting rid of social media, the internet etc doesn't make all the bad humans suddenly go away.

I see these people in the gym with all the time with them. I think your “no one’s buying them” might be rooted in a personal bias.

It's $5 man. Also, that's just like your opinion man.

To get lucky treating someone's mental illness if they allow you to treat them you mean?

Ah so leave it to the experts who can't explain it without a "full theory of aesthetics".

Come on now. How is that baffling?

They said they skimmed the website. Not the page. Go to home page and you’ll find the second item is “ NCLA is Challenging Covid-19 Regulations and Orders Imposed by Executive Decree”

I see people saying "you're gonna need to answer those questions", "brush it off", "you should be able to accept critique". If you're soliciting feedback or making a a pitch, all valid.

If it's just rando's? Nah, those founders should not just accept a high level of noise out there. A lot of people are happy to share their pessimism. That's tiring.

> You know what? I'm glad someone spoke to me that way. It got me up and motivated to work on myself. I can't imagine how poorly I would have turned out if I was coddled and allowed to stay in bed and read about all of these new pop-psych diseases I could blame. But that's just me. Maybe I can reach someone the way I was reached.

I think that is the problem. Maybe it is just you. The language you use, coddling, and how you speak of mental diseases as if it's some made up thing suggest maybe you weren't going through what others are going through.

> Maybe I can reach someone the way I was reached.

I doubt it. I read your first comment and then the edit, and thought maybe you'd come to your senses, but no. You do lack empathy and understanding. You sound very like your not trying to reach some one, instead, you're trying to tell them how it is from your point of view. No empathy. People actually suffering don't need that from you.

> The phenomenon of disliking one's parents for being too harh is much more prevalent in the West

Citation needed.

If you look a few comments up you'll see some people not from the West discussing harsh parents. They're also affected negatively.

Your idea that people complaining about how they weren't parented is them simply disliking their loving parents is not well thought out.

This is silly and pure conjecture. That's my opinion. I love taking photos and I love seeing my friends photos of the things they experience. Not some photo from the tens of thousands of photos that exist. People can do two things at once. Take a photo and enjoy the experience.

As already linked: https://xkcd.com/1314/

So you keep saying. Have you tried any of these or do you just assume that everything outside of your normal is a fad?

Yes, raw files have quite the dynamic range and the current generation of raw processors can really pull a lot of detail out of the shadows and highlights.

The strange black dots you find in the shadows are noise. Simple no data to produce any results.

The key part to in camera HDR is, automatic. No manually fixing your camera to tripod, copying them onto computer and the loading into software capable of HDR and finally manually processing them.

Nice looking plugin. Interestingly enough it runs slower in Chrome than in Firefox 3 on Vista.