Can the iPad improve your photographs?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David Taylor, May 23, 2013.

  1. David Taylor

    David Taylor Guest

    I find that the physical act of using the iPad to take photos seems to
    force you into taking more care over the composition before pressing the
    button than when using a DSLR or bridge camera where you tend to be
    faster, and want to get at least a "banker" photo just in case. At
    least, that's when you can see the iPad screen well enough!

    Perhaps it's just me, but is there anything to be said for being slowed
    down when taking photos? Is it advice we might all follow with some
    benefit to our results? Is it having the large format framing screen
    which makes the difference?
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, May 23, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Taylor

    DanP Guest

    On Thursday, May 23, 2013 4:26:35 PM UTC+1, David Taylor wrote:

    > Perhaps it's just me, but is there anything to be said for being slowed
    > down when taking photos? Is it advice we might all follow with some
    > benefit to our results? Is it having the large format framing screen
    > which makes the difference?


    Sure, same holds for film. You have 36 shots, use them wisely and think well.

    DanP
    DanP, May 23, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Taylor

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Thursday, May 23, 2013 4:26:35 PM UTC+1, David Taylor wrote:
    > I find that the physical act of using the iPad to take photos seems to
    >
    > force you into taking more care over the composition before pressing the
    >
    > button than when using a DSLR or bridge camera where you tend to be
    >
    > faster, and want to get at least a "banker" photo just in case. At
    >
    > least, that's when you can see the iPad screen well enough!
    >
    >
    >
    > Perhaps it's just me, but is there anything to be said for being slowed
    >
    > down when taking photos? Is it advice we might all follow with some
    >
    > benefit to our results? Is it having the large format framing screen
    >
    > which makes the difference?
    >


    For me I find it quick and easy, there's no focusing beam, no bleeping and nothing to setup. It's rather difficult to hold but sometimes that's an advantage because it encourages you to steady yourself. I can also place it within a few inches of my subject mostly my cat without stressing her to much..
    Being so large (I have the retina version of the ipad3) it's pretty easy tosee what you'll get regarding possible distortion due to angles.
    Another nice option is being able to have the lens less than a cm or so from the floor and by altering the ipads position can get many differnt anglesjust by rotating the ipad.

    But I don;t think it can imporve my photos as such unless you're talking about editing other than the basics which are done on the ipad.
    Here's some or most of my ipad photgraphy.


    http://www.flickr.com/photos/whiskydave/sets/72157629917976050/
    Yes I know it's sad but she wants her photo taken honest.
    Whisky-dave, May 23, 2013
    #3
  4. David Taylor

    nospam Guest

    In article <>,
    DanP <> wrote:

    > > Perhaps it's just me, but is there anything to be said for being slowed
    > > down when taking photos? Is it advice we might all follow with some
    > > benefit to our results? Is it having the large format framing screen
    > > which makes the difference?

    >
    > Sure, same holds for film. You have 36 shots, use them wisely and think well.


    same holds for any camera.
    nospam, May 23, 2013
    #4
  5. David Taylor

    David Taylor Guest

    On 23/05/2013 17:18, Savageduck wrote:
    []
    > Regardless of the camera you use iPad, SLR, DSLR, view camera, or
    > whatever, there is everything to be said for being slowed down. It gives
    > you time to think regarding composition, exposure, etc. (not so much
    > exposure, etc with the iPad).
    >
    > As far as the iPad as a camera goes, it is not any better that many of
    > the mobile device cameras available today. Certainly the size, and
    > unwieldily awkwardness as a camera is what forces the iPad photographer
    > to take advantage of the big display. With that big display one can
    > easily compose and visualize the results far easier than with a phone or
    > compact camera.
    >
    > The important thing is, you find it useful and get results which work
    > for you.
    >
    > Personally, I find little use for the camera in my iPad, but I find it
    > to be a good way to have a handy portfolio of my DSLR shots.


    Yes, that's certainly very useful. As you will have gathered, it wasn't
    the technical quality of the camera itself, but more the restrictions
    and limitations it places on you because of its size and shape. Having
    been a (D)SLR user most of my life (with some bridge camera and a little
    P&S experience), I was surprised how good the results from the iPad were
    when I /had/ to use it, and was wondering why that might be.

    I use the Guardian Eye-Witness program and very much enjoy the daily
    images, but 500px is new to me so I will play with that. Thanks for the
    pointer.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, May 23, 2013
    #5
  6. David Taylor

    Mort Guest

    David Taylor wrote:
    > I find that the physical act of using the iPad to take photos seems to
    > force you into taking more care over the composition before pressing the
    > button than when using a DSLR or bridge camera where you tend to be
    > faster, and want to get at least a "banker" photo just in case. At
    > least, that's when you can see the iPad screen well enough!
    >
    > Perhaps it's just me, but is there anything to be said for being slowed
    > down when taking photos? Is it advice we might all follow with some
    > benefit to our results? Is it having the large format framing screen
    > which makes the difference?



    Hi,

    I think that part of the equation is a generational difference. I
    started taking pictures many decades ago, when Kodachrome was ISO 12,
    and focus, f-stop, and shutter speed were set manually. I did slides,
    and projected them. Occasionally, I made prints upon request. I find now
    that many younger people prefer on-screen images for viewing and
    e-mailing, and seldom want or make prints. Many smart-phone photos look
    reasonably good on a cellphone screen or even an I-pad screen. However,
    when I occasionally try to print them for friends, then even the images
    from new and highly touted smartphones seem to fall apart at 5x7" prints
    and larger. I usually use a small Canon S-100 digital camera, usually
    set at ISO 200, and get brilliant and sharp enlargements at 8x10" even
    after some cropping. I print them myself. Yes, cellphone pix are handy,
    as are McDonald hamburgers, but some people want something better in the
    way of images. To each his own.

    Regarding aiming and cropping, I usually shoot a bit wider than
    necessary, and then crop a bit in my PC for the final prints.

    Those are my ideas, for my own needs.

    Mort Linder
    Mort, May 24, 2013
    #6
  7. David Taylor

    David Taylor Guest

    On 23/05/2013 22:16, Alan Browne wrote:
    []
    > Except the camera is a tiny sliver of nothing and not all that good
    > compared to an ordinary 35mm camera with a 28 or 50mm lens.
    >
    > A cheap DLSR with an APS-C sensor and a cheap zoom lens BLOWS AWAY the
    > iPad camera.
    >
    > But an iPad is a great way to show off a photo collection.


    Your are right that the sensor in the iPad camera, and its optics, are
    not as good as those in a DSLR, but even so, they are capable of
    producing surprisingly good images both outdoors and indoors. It's the
    picture-taking process with that size and shape of camera I was
    commenting on, not the pixel-peeping quality.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, May 24, 2013
    #7
  8. David Taylor

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <knn0ke$1ko$>, david-
    d says...
    >
    > On 23/05/2013 22:16, Alan Browne wrote:
    > []
    > > Except the camera is a tiny sliver of nothing and not all that good
    > > compared to an ordinary 35mm camera with a 28 or 50mm lens.
    > >
    > > A cheap DLSR with an APS-C sensor and a cheap zoom lens BLOWS AWAY the
    > > iPad camera.
    > >
    > > But an iPad is a great way to show off a photo collection.

    >
    > Your are right that the sensor in the iPad camera, and its optics, are
    > not as good as those in a DSLR, but even so, they are capable of
    > producing surprisingly good images both outdoors and indoors. It's the
    > picture-taking process with that size and shape of camera I was
    > commenting on, not the pixel-peeping quality.


    The notion that so and so "blows away" such and such really depends on
    the subject and the target audience.

    If you're shooting wall-sized murals of diamond rings an ipad isn't
    going to cut it. If you're shooting photos of houses to appear in
    column-width newspaper ads it's another story.
    J. Clarke, May 24, 2013
    #8
  9. David Taylor

    Mr. Strat Guest

    In article <knlc7j$34g$>, David Taylor
    <> wrote:

    > I find that the physical act of using the iPad to take photos seems to
    > force you into taking more care over the composition before pressing the
    > button than when using a DSLR or bridge camera where you tend to be
    > faster, and want to get at least a "banker" photo just in case. At
    > least, that's when you can see the iPad screen well enough!
    >
    > Perhaps it's just me, but is there anything to be said for being slowed
    > down when taking photos? Is it advice we might all follow with some
    > benefit to our results? Is it having the large format framing screen
    > which makes the difference?


    I would never use an iPad for serious photography. But taking time to
    think about the resulting image has been with us since the beginning of
    photography. Take a view camera out and put the focusing cloth over
    your head. Then figure out your composition while looking at it upside
    down and backwards.
    Mr. Strat, May 24, 2013
    #9
  10. Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    > Regardless of the camera you use iPad, SLR, DSLR, view camera, or
    > whatever, there is everything to be said for being slowed down.


    Yep, tell that to a sports photographer that can't depend on
    his subjects following a predetermined track. Or when catching
    birds in random flight. (you /said/ 'everything')

    > It
    > gives you time to think regarding composition, exposure, etc. (not so
    > much exposure, etc with the iPad).


    Remove the battery from your camera and use a hand-driven
    generator to charge a capacitor so you get about enough power
    for a single shot. And carry and use a disassembled tripod. :)

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 24, 2013
    #10
  11. David Taylor

    David Taylor Guest

    On 24/05/2013 21:25, Alan Browne wrote:
    []
    > It will provide nice looking photos when the scene is in its sweet spot
    > - that sweet spot is very narrow.
    >
    > The camera in there does not even warrant pixel peeping. When you have
    > a noisy image it will be self evident. When you have a blurry image it
    > will be self evident. There is no need to pixel peep at all.
    >
    > I take grab shots with my iPhone and it is - at best - an awkward
    > process that usually results in some camera movement when depressing the
    > on screen shutter or the volume buttons as shutter release. The
    > ergonomics of it are not great at all.
    >
    > The built in "flash" (a LED) will help out to a couple metres and even
    > then the illumination is lost in the corners.
    >
    > If you need a walk-around camera there are plenty of good P&S with
    > decent enough zoom lenses for under $500 that will produce blow-away
    > images compared to the iPad or iPhone.


    Yes, if you carry a DSLR round everywhere, that's great, but you are
    perhaps more likely to have your iPhone to hand for the unexpected
    event. I do agree about the need for stability when taking the shot -
    again perhaps the physical features of the iPad as a camera are forcing
    you into better practices from camera stability. It's even truer with
    the iPad than the iPhone as there is no flash assistance.

    I thank others in the thread for their comments - perhaps slower is
    better after all, at least some of the time!
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, May 25, 2013
    #11
  12. David Taylor

    David Taylor Guest

    On 26/05/2013 16:43, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2013.05.25 03:27 , David Taylor wrote:
    >> On 24/05/2013 21:25, Alan Browne wrote:
    >> []
    >>> It will provide nice looking photos when the scene is in its sweet spot
    >>> - that sweet spot is very narrow.
    >>>
    >>> The camera in there does not even warrant pixel peeping. When you have
    >>> a noisy image it will be self evident. When you have a blurry image it
    >>> will be self evident. There is no need to pixel peep at all.
    >>>
    >>> I take grab shots with my iPhone and it is - at best - an awkward
    >>> process that usually results in some camera movement when depressing the
    >>> on screen shutter or the volume buttons as shutter release. The
    >>> ergonomics of it are not great at all.
    >>>
    >>> The built in "flash" (a LED) will help out to a couple metres and even
    >>> then the illumination is lost in the corners.
    >>>
    >>> If you need a walk-around camera there are plenty of good P&S with
    >>> decent enough zoom lenses for under $500 that will produce blow-away
    >>> images compared to the iPad or iPhone.

    >>
    >> Yes, if you carry a DSLR round everywhere, that's great, but you are

    >
    > What part of "good P&S with decent enough zoome lenses" did you miss?
    >
    >> perhaps more likely to have your iPhone to hand for the unexpected
    >> event. I do agree about the need for stability when taking the shot -
    >> again perhaps the physical features of the iPad as a camera are forcing
    >> you into better practices from camera stability. It's even truer with
    >> the iPad than the iPhone as there is no flash assistance.

    >
    > I do take the odd grab shot with my iPhone - and unfortunately the
    > results, in marginal lighting are just not good. So even if I see
    > something interesting, if the light is poor I'm just as inclined to let
    > it go.


    Grab shots are not what I was talking about.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, May 26, 2013
    #12
  13. David Taylor

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Alfred
    Molon <> wrote:

    > > An APC-C DSLR with a cheap zoom doesn't sound so hot - but its
    > > sweet-spot is far wider in lighting terms than the iPad - consequently
    > > it blows away the iPad.

    >
    > An APS-C with a kit zoom is also cheaper than an ipad.


    try again.

    the least expensive ipad is $329.

    which apc-c camera & kit zoom lens costs less than $329 ?
    nospam, May 26, 2013
    #13
  14. David Taylor

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Thursday, May 23, 2013 10:16:53 PM UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2013.05.23 15:28 , Eric Stevens wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > Going back to taking photographs with an iPad, particularly if I can

    >
    > > mount it on a tripod, would take me back to the peaceful days of the

    >
    > > field camera and could be expected to vastly improve the proportion of

    >
    > > keepers.

    >
    >
    >
    > Except the camera is a tiny sliver of nothing and not all that good
    >
    > compared to an ordinary 35mm camera with a 28 or 50mm lens.


    That's true but the iPad is certainly better at displaying the photos it takes than a 35mm camera with whatever lens you have. The biggest display on any 35mm camera/DLSR is a little of 3 inches IIRC.


    > A cheap DLSR with an APS-C sensor and a cheap zoom lens BLOWS AWAY the
    >
    > iPad camera.


    it will blow away the camera but nothing else, certaily not the display or other useful features of an iPad.


    > But an iPad is a great way to show off a photo collection.


    Yes and take photos which was the main point of this thread.
    DSLRs of any price are pretty crap at displaying photos, but that isn;t their main aim of course, any more than the iPads main aim is to be a camera.
    Whisky-dave, May 28, 2013
    #14
  15. David Taylor

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Sunday, May 26, 2013 6:19:21 PM UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2013.05.26 12:42 , David Taylor wrote:
    >
    > > On 26/05/2013 16:43, Alan Browne wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    > >> I do take the odd grab shot with my iPhone - and unfortunately the

    >
    > >> results, in marginal lighting are just not good. So even if I see

    >
    > >> something interesting, if the light is poor I'm just as inclined to let

    >
    > >> it go.

    >
    > >

    >
    > > Grab shots are not what I was talking about.

    >
    >
    >
    > That's all an iPhone is useful for to me. I have made some "carefully"
    >
    > composed shots with it - but the opportunity to do something useful with
    >
    > it demand the right lighting - the aforementioned sweetspot is just too
    >
    > narrow for many cases.


    I do find this a little sad in that people need the tech or better tech before they'll consider a photo can be produced. A skilled photographer should be able to use the equipment he has.


    > Photography for me is a deliberate process. I'm either "doing it" or
    >
    > "not doing it". I miss a lot of opportunities because of that. But
    >
    > that's how I'd rather do it - with a capable camera.


    I would too, but deciding on what a capable camera is, is not always that easy.
    I hate the idea that I need a 10G pixel camera to 'compete' when it come to taking pictures, I accept that fact when I have to compete not on the photgraph but on the image quality.

    > Perhaps I'll get a good P&S one day to have handy for those shots that
    >
    > are worth it but that need a better sensor and lens combo than what is
    >
    > available on an iPad or iPhone.


    Back to the tech ruling what vwe photogragh.
    Whisky-dave, May 28, 2013
    #15
  16. David Taylor

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:28:25 AM UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2013.05.28 07:52 , Whisky-dave wrote:
    >
    > > On Thursday, May 23, 2013 10:16:53 PM UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote:

    >
    > >> On 2013.05.23 15:28 , Eric Stevens wrote:
    > >>> Going back to taking photographs with an iPad, particularly if I

    >
    > >>> can

    >
    > >>> mount it on a tripod, would take me back to the peaceful days of

    >
    > >>> the

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>> field camera and could be expected to vastly improve the

    >
    > >>> proportion of

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>> keepers.

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> Except the camera is a tiny sliver of nothing and not all that

    >
    > >> good

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> compared to an ordinary 35mm camera with a 28 or 50mm lens.

    >
    > >

    >
    > > That's true but the iPad is certainly better at displaying the photos

    >
    > > it takes than a 35mm camera with whatever lens you have. The biggest

    >
    > > display on any 35mm camera/DLSR is a little of 3 inches IIRC.

    >
    >
    >
    > Already asserted. Move along counselor.


    Not really as the point was whether ort not an ipad can improve your photgraphs.
    For me that means the ipad isn;t taking the photographs because they already exist whether taken with a meduim format film camer,a a 110 or a DLSR.

    I was hoping the OP meant can the ipad improve your photography, which is differnt.


    > >> A cheap DLSR with an APS-C sensor and a cheap zoom lens BLOWS AWAY

    >
    > >> the

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> iPad camera.

    >
    > >

    >
    > > it will blow away the camera but nothing else, certaily not the

    >
    > > display or other useful features of an iPad.

    >
    >
    >
    > Already asserted. Move along counselor.


    But you haven;t ot it have you, the OP askign about impoving his photographs not his photography.

    I would say his photographs will look better on the retina ipad than on thevast majority of cameras on the market and any cost.
    I don;t think there are any computer monitors of retina dispay specs but then again the ipad is meant to be viewed close up.
    Perhaps his photographs would lok better displayed at a hign end cinema with 4K or 8k projection but I doubt that's an option.

    I don;t think the ipad is the best way to edit photos either, but it's certainly easy and convient to do the basics at least.

    Perhaps the best way for the OP to improve his photographs is to not try toimprove them but to take better ones in the future. I wouldn't recommend an iPad for that purpose unless choosing a particular ebook to read on it, perhaps submiting to the SI here and getting feedback might be a better way to improve future photographs.
    Whisky-dave, May 29, 2013
    #16
  17. David Taylor

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:33:29 AM UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2013.05.28 08:40 , Whisky-dave wrote:
    >
    > > On Sunday, May 26, 2013 6:19:21 PM UTC+1, Alan Browne wrote:

    >
    > >> On 2013.05.26 12:42 , David Taylor wrote:

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>> On 26/05/2013 16:43, Alan Browne wrote:

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>>> I do take the odd grab shot with my iPhone - and unfortunately

    >
    > >>>> the

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>>> results, in marginal lighting are just not good. So even if I

    >
    > >>>> see

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>>> something interesting, if the light is poor I'm just as

    >
    > >>>> inclined to let

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>>> it go.

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>> Grab shots are not what I was talking about.

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> That's all an iPhone is useful for to me. I have made some

    >
    > >> "carefully"

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> composed shots with it - but the opportunity to do something useful

    >
    > >> with

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> it demand the right lighting - the aforementioned sweetspot is just

    >
    > >> too

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> narrow for many cases.

    >
    > >

    >
    > > I do find this a little sad in that people need the tech or better

    >
    > > tech before they'll consider a photo can be produced. A skilled

    >
    > > photographer should be able to use the equipment he has.

    >
    >
    >
    > As already asserted, one can take very nice photos with the iPhone
    >
    > camera if one shoots within the limitations of the camera.


    That goes for any device, whether it a full frame DLSR or a 'spy' camera.


    > Van Gogh could not do his sunflowers with water colour. He'd no doubt
    >
    > do very well - bit it would be very shy of the bold richness of his oils.


    Pity he didn't have a camera isn;t it.



    > >> Photography for me is a deliberate process. I'm either "doing it"

    >
    > >> or

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> "not doing it". I miss a lot of opportunities because of that.

    >
    > >> But

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> that's how I'd rather do it - with a capable camera.

    >
    > >

    >
    > > I would too, but deciding on what a capable camera is, is not always

    >
    > > that easy. I hate the idea that I need a 10G pixel camera to

    >
    > > 'compete' when it come to taking pictures, I accept that fact when I

    >
    > > have to compete not on the photgraph but on the image quality.

    >
    >
    >
    > Well then, settle for a 24M pixel camera and you'll do very well, I think.


    Seems many good photographers have godden away without such tech, so why would I need it ? or is that's all that's required a 24M pixel camera.

    I think I'd also need a resonable lens.



    > >> Perhaps I'll get a good P&S one day to have handy for those shots

    >
    > >> that

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> are worth it but that need a better sensor and lens combo than what

    >
    > >> is

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> available on an iPad or iPhone.

    >
    > >

    >
    > > Back to the tech ruling what vwe photogragh.

    >
    >
    >
    > Again, being conscious of the limitations of the gear one can do
    >
    > something good with it. But as one strays further from those
    >
    > limitations then don't expect great results.


    I wouldn't, but great results compared to what exactly.

    I would expect better results from my ipad than a 24M pixel camera without a lens, even with a lens the resulting image would look better on the ipad than on the camera LCD.
    Whisky-dave, May 29, 2013
    #17
  18. David Taylor

    David Taylor Guest

    On 29/05/2013 13:18, Whisky-dave wrote:
    []
    > I was hoping the OP meant can the ipad improve your photography, which is differnt.


    I hoped it was clear from the original post, I meant the content of the
    images, i.e your photography, and not the technical quality about which
    there's no argument.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, May 29, 2013
    #18
  19. David Taylor

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 4:18:31 PM UTC+1, David Taylor wrote:
    > On 29/05/2013 13:18, Whisky-dave wrote:
    >
    > []
    >
    > > I was hoping the OP meant can the ipad improve your photography, which is differnt.

    >
    >
    >
    > I hoped it was clear from the original post, I meant the content of the
    >
    > images, i.e your photography,


    But do these images already exist befopre putting on teh iPad or do you intend to use teh ipad for taking teh images. The ipad isn;t teh best option for editing images.
    You can use the inbuilt software but it's basic stuff. Ypou could purchase iPhoto which is better but no where near as good as say photoshop or PS elements or most editors used on a computer.

    > and not the technical quality about which
    >
    > there's no argument.


    I'm not sure what you could do to improve you're photos/images on an ipad it's not really for that sort of thing, but if croping ans simple editing can improve any image then the ipad can do that pretty easily using just a finger or two.
    Whisky-dave, May 29, 2013
    #19
  20. David Taylor

    David Taylor Guest

    On 29/05/2013 17:00, Whisky-dave wrote:
    []
    > But do these images already exist befopre putting on teh iPad or do you intend to use teh ipad for taking teh images. The ipad isn;t teh best option for editing images.
    > You can use the inbuilt software but it's basic stuff. Ypou could purchase iPhoto which is better but no where near as good as say photoshop or PS elements or most editors used on a computer.

    []
    > I'm not sure what you could do to improve you're photos/images on an ipad it's not really for that sort of thing, but if croping ans simple editing can improve any image then the ipad can do that pretty easily using just a finger or two.


    Please re-read the original post. I was referring to the physical
    difference when /taking/ photos with an iPad - using its large display
    to compose, but a display which may not be too easy to see in bright
    sunlight. The physical act of using that display forces you to slow
    down, take fewer photos, and perhaps spend more time thinking about the
    composition. There's no zoom, for example, and control of aperture and
    shutter speed are virtually non-existant. As editing is difficult,
    perhaps you are encouraged to get the framing right at taking, rather
    than post-processing time.

    This was all triggered by my discovering that although I take far fewer
    photos on the iPad than on my bridge or DSLR cameras, a greater
    percentage of them might be considered "keepers", in spite of the
    technical limitations.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, May 29, 2013
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RichA

    Re: How do I delete photographs from an iPad?

    RichA, Oct 30, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    251
    PeterN
    Nov 1, 2012
  2. nospam

    Re: How do I delete photographs from an iPad?

    nospam, Oct 30, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    244
    nospam
    Oct 31, 2012
  3. DanP

    Re: How do I delete photographs from an iPad?

    DanP, Oct 30, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    269
    Views:
    2,051
  4. nospam

    Re: How do I delete photographs from an iPad?

    nospam, Oct 30, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    209
    nospam
    Oct 30, 2012
  5. nospam

    Re: How do I delete photographs from an iPad?

    nospam, Oct 30, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    264
    nospam
    Oct 31, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page