Android Tablet for Photography

[koffiejunkie]

Does it have to be android? I would suggest getting an intel powered windows 8 tablet instead. You have full photoshop and other programs on the go. Also has a proper usb port

As I said before, I have other non-photographic reasons for wanting Android. That said, I haven't given Windows 8 much thought. If the desktop apps work fine on a tablet, that might be a worthy option.

At the end of the day a tablet is just not a suitable device for this.

The iPad seems 100% capable.

I would rather invest in an Air or an Ultrabook.

I'm giving that some serious thought. The 11" Air is perfect. The ultrabooks that are available are all heavier. The ones that actually compete on weight are all launched, but not available anywhere (like the Gigabyte I mentioned).

Netbooks are not suitable for this line of work. The atom processor, poor resolution and Windows basic edition sux donkey balls.

Atom is rubbish for RAW work. What my 2.4GHz C2D MBP took 8 seconds to do, the dual core 1.6GHz Atom netbook I had too 2 minutes. And for those 2 minutes you could barely move the mouse.

Been using my Samsung NC10 for just the purpose Koffie wants it for for more than three years. I use Linux anyway.

This deserves a dedicated thread. I'm interested to know what software you use. 2-3 years ago when I tried this, the options were awful.

Koffie, have you considered a portable storage device? It could work with an Android tablet if you find the right app.

I do have one, and will probably take it. Maybe replace the spinny disc in it with an SSD. But I want to be able to duplicate my cards once they're full, and post a copy home - in case i get robbed or my bag falls in water or whatever.

I'm more than happy with the way Aperture is handling high ISO shots these days - and doubtless it's only going to get better. I rarely find myself having to roundtrip to dfine, even at 6400. Then again I'm probably less pedantic than some when it comes to noise.

I think the difference might be that your work tend to be in good light (I'm thinking the sport?). I'll make some screen grabs of what I'm dealing with at the moment, and post that separately.

Aperture is also fast, Photomechanic fast, which might not be important to you but for me it's one reason why I could never switch to the lethargic Lightroom.

I don't see any speed differences between the two? I did, back in the LR 1 (or maybe LR 2) days, but not with LR3.

 

[Jola]

ASUS UX32VD-DB71 Zenbook 13.3" Ultrabook Computer would be my choice.

You can remove the 2GB socketed chip and replace it with an 8GB for total RAM of 10GB.

If you really want to you can replace the hard disk with a 256 or 500GB SSD, and use the 24GB built-in SSD as an Adobe cache drive.

 

[bwana]

I think the difference might be that your work tend to be in good light (I'm thinking the sport?). I'll make some screen grabs of what I'm dealing with at the moment, and post that separately.

Despite what you might see on TV the light is not good by any stretch of the imagination. It's not just sports that I do though. Concerts and other events are a big part of my job.

I don't see any speed differences between the two? I did, back in the LR 1 (or maybe LR 2) days, but not with LR3.

Our worlds differ - when it comes to speed this is what I'm talking about - http://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/...-aperture-vs-lightroom-vs-photo-mechanic.html

Truth be told I haven't really tested the latest version of PM yet, but I see no compelling reason to considering that workflow would necessitate a great deal of round-tripping which takes even more time. I've got precious little time, particularly during the half time break when I'm expected to upload my second batch during a match.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Despite what you might see on TV the light is not good by any stretch of the imagination. It's not just sports that I do though. Concerts and other events are a big part of my job.

Our worlds differ - when it comes to speed this is what I'm talking about - http://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/...-aperture-vs-lightroom-vs-photo-mechanic.html

Interesting. I see how this matters to you. I don't get paid for anything (yet) so have no deadlines. I tend to have enough other stuff to keep me busy while waiting for large imports anyway. That said, I'm suspicious of the time listed for LR - maybe 4.1 is still buggy. I just tried the same thing with LR3, but a much smaller sample set - 50 - and I can't say I see such a dramatic difference.

Truth be told I haven't really tested the latest version of PM yet, but I see no compelling reason to considering that workflow would necessitate a great deal of round-tripping which takes even more time.

Exactly why I've never bought into the PM idea. For all the things that's nice about it, it just complicates my workflow.

I've got precious little time, particularly during the half time break when I'm expected to upload my second batch during a match.

That's quite brutal. Doing my selects is my weakness - it takes me forever.

 

[koffiejunkie]

ASUS UX32VD-DB71 Zenbook 13.3" Ultrabook Computer would be my choice.

Too heavy. I'm looking for something to spend a month travelling with - in addition to my already heavy camera kit.

Also, it's almost as expensive as a MacBook Air. And it's ASUS - I've had about a 50% rate of utter misery with their products. Nevertheless, I'm not asking about laptops. I'm interested in tabs.

 

[Jola]

I'm using an Asus TF700T, great tablet with full HD display.

Keyboard has a full USB port and a SDXC slot - mine presently has 192GB of storage (3*64GB).

Need to check whether a 128GB SDXC card will work in the keyboard.

BTW I have had more trouble with Apple than with Asus. YMMV.

 

[AlphaJohn]

How well does it handle RAW?

Not at all.

PS: Please note I have an old "Demo" version, so might have been fixed/updated.

 

[bwana]

Not at all.

PS: Please note I have an old "Demo" version, so might have been fixed/updated.

Not so much of a train smash with the 7D which now allows for in camera RAW conversion but it's an added step and it takes some time.

 

[koffiejunkie]

But these days the image quality at high ISO, and in particular its noise handling, seems a lot better. I'm finding myself being able to save images in LR that I would have outright rejected in Aperture.

I guess I was wrong here. It seems I might have discovered a bug in Aperture - looks like it's been going on since 3.3. I have it set to generate previews on import, and not limit the size, so that the preview will be full resolution. I looks like it is not generating the previews at all, at least not until I make a change to an image.

This caught me, because I tend to live in fast preview mode. It's a lot quicker to flip through a collection of images, and I seldom make adjustments to the images. I noticed some extreme colour noise in an image today that I took in good light at 500 ISO. It's the same pattern - almost rice grain shaped red stains - that I see at 6400 ISO. As soon as I left fast preview mode, it re-rendered the image, and it improved dramatically!

I'm not sure why it looks that bad initially, or what it is showing me. It can't be the CR2 file's embedded preview, because that is at a lower resolution, and I see full size images in preview mode. Curious...

 

[bwana]

I guess I was wrong here. It seems I might have discovered a bug in Aperture - looks like it's been going on since 3.3. I have it set to generate previews on import, and not limit the size, so that the preview will be full resolution. I looks like it is not generating the previews at all, at least not until I make a change to an image.

This caught me, because I tend to live in fast preview mode. It's a lot quicker to flip through a collection of images, and I seldom make adjustments to the images. I noticed some extreme colour noise in an image today that I took in good light at 500 ISO. It's the same pattern - almost rice grain shaped red stains - that I see at 6400 ISO. As soon as I left fast preview mode, it re-rendered the image, and it improved dramatically!

I'm not sure why it looks that bad initially, or what it is showing me. It can't be the CR2 file's embedded preview, because that is at a lower resolution, and I see full size images in preview mode. Curious...

Of course it did. In quick preview you're not seeing the rendered master, just preview images. First the embedded jpg then the rendered one, which because you've got it set for full res it takes longer to load. Are you doing that much in iLife, iWork, etc that generating these large previews is worth it?

BTW - I'm sure you're aware of it but for those who are not - those full size/quality preview images are big - up to 17mb big with a camera like the 7D.

 

[BeVonk!]

I story I find funny ... this friend of mine who's serious into photography buys cameras and related equipment priced in the tens of thousands of Rands (he's now considering the full frame Nikon D600 at R28k) but he will not buy the Air 11" as it is in his opinion too expensive. He wants a R5k solution, bjt cannot find any that satisfies so he's still looking. All the money must go into cameras and lenses ... the equipment needed to process the product must not eat into that budget ... LOL!

 

[Jola]

Actually I use a little 12" netbook (Asus 1215N) with a 1.8GHz dual core Atom, Nvidia Ion GPU, fast 500GB drive and 4GB RAM for when I travel with my cameras.

4 hour battery life and runs Photoshop 6 like a charm

And it wasn't expensive. Got it for USD299, but upgraded RAM and HD.

Now thinking about an SSD.

 

[bwana]

I story I find funny ... this friend of mine who's serious into photography buys cameras and related equipment priced in the tens of thousands of Rands (he's now considering the full frame Nikon D600 at R28k) but he will not buy the Air 11" as it is in his opinion too expensive. He wants a R5k solution, bjt cannot find any that satisfies so he's still looking. All the money must go into cameras and lenses ... the equipment needed to process the product must not eat into that budget ... LOL!

If you're not doing it professionally it's hard to justify, you don't need a laptop - you want a laptop.

Actually, the same goes for camera gear too - it's just a lot easier to turn a blind eye to.

 

[BeVonk!]

If you're not doing it professionally it's hard to justify, you don't need a laptop - you want a laptop.

Actually, the same goes for camera gear too - it's just a lot easier to turn a blind eye to.

With a blind eye that expensive gear is a waste anyway ...

I hear what you say ... if your into photography and not into computers the camera gear wins every time.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Of course it did. In quick preview you're not seeing the rendered master, just preview images. First the embedded jpg then the rendered one, which because you've got it set for full res it takes longer to load.

Directly after import, yes. But a month later, you shouldn't ever see the embedded preview. The Aperture-generated preview at full size and high quality isn't much different from what you see rendered on the screen rendered from the CR2 file directly. The only difference really is the jpeg compression quality loss, and that's irrelevant for flipping through to delete the bad ones and check focus. Full size means I can zoom to 100% and actually see it at 100%. My battery lasts a lot longer in preview mode than generating each image from raw on demand.

BTW - I'm sure you're aware of it but for those who are not - those full size/quality preview images are big - up to 17mb big with a camera like the 7D.

You can set the quality. I have it on 8, which gives previews of 2-4MB roughly.

 

[bwana]

Directly after import, yes. But a month later, you shouldn't ever see the embedded preview. The Aperture-generated preview at full size and high quality isn't much different from what you see rendered on the screen rendered from the CR2 file directly. The only difference really is the jpeg compression quality loss, and that's irrelevant for flipping through to delete the bad ones and check focus. Full size means I can zoom to 100% and actually see it at 100%. My battery lasts a lot longer in preview mode than generating each image from raw on demand.



You can set the quality. I have it on 8, which gives previews of 2-4MB roughly.

It wont show the processed RAW file until it's been created - you're still getting the jpg preview which obviously looks different because your raw adjustments haven't been made.

 

[koffiejunkie]

It wont show the processed RAW file until it's been created - you're still getting the jpg preview which obviously looks different because your raw adjustments haven't been made.

I think you're missing the core of my complaint. It used to generate the full size preview *on import* - not only once you make a change. These days, when I import, the activity window still shows "Generating preview" briefly, but it doesn't actually do it. I guess the fact that it's brief (often to quick to see) means it's probably failing for some reason.

This has been the case since 3.3, or at least, that's when I first noticed it.

 

[bwana]

I think you're missing the core of my complaint. It used to generate the full size preview *on import* - not only once you make a change. These days, when I import, the activity window still shows "Generating preview" briefly, but it doesn't actually do it. I guess the fact that it's brief (often to quick to see) means it's probably failing for some reason.

This has been the case since 3.3, or at least, that's when I first noticed it.

Open aperture preferences, go to the imports tab, then go to post import processing and select Standard Previews.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Open aperture preferences, go to the imports tab, then go to post import processing and select Standard Previews.

Aah right. Thanks. I guess that's why Aperture 3.3 is meant to be so much better at previewing while import.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Directly after import, yes. But a month later, you shouldn't ever see the embedded preview. The Aperture-generated preview at full size and high quality isn't much different from what you see rendered on the screen rendered from the CR2 file directly. The only difference really is the jpeg compression quality loss, and that's irrelevant for flipping through to delete the bad ones and check focus. Full size means I can zoom to 100% and actually see it at 100%. My battery lasts a lot longer in preview mode than generating each image from raw on demand.



You can set the quality. I have it on 8, which gives previews of 2-4MB roughly.

I'm going to disagree with you. I love geekie, which uses the embedded jpeg. I get a view of the image in which I can decide on composition and sharpness within .1 of a second and then dump the pic if it's looks crap.