Search results

Nope, not being obtuse, and I don't need to imagine any such scenario because it happens all the time in my daily/weekly life - at work and at play. And that's been the case for the last twenty years. Would a free app be of help? Well, yeah, of course. But guess what: we've had that kind of...

Don't worry - AI will be along any day now to sort out this kind of thing and we'll never have registry conflicts again. 🤓

Yeah ... except that's not what I said. Read it again: Maybe it is because we live in different worlds that I'm not amazed by a piece of technology doing ... well, nothing special. It's not fixing a problem and it's not doing anything new. In my world, it's perfectly normal for people from...

And yet, as Mara points out, "AI" is incredibly bad at giving us solutions to real problems - the kind caused by irrational humans doing stuff that wasn't built into the taught responses. If it draws a picture of a pitbull in a suit, chances are it's plagiarising an image from an 1840s Punch...

Let's see the video, featuring a real blind person in a real store ....

So there you are: between the innate limitations of the software and the terms-and-conditions imposed by the cultural norms of some random developers, it's restricted to recycling banal information and displaying phoney emotions. Hardly groundbreaking stuff.

Don't we already have enough of people pulling out their phone to "capture the moment" and missing out entirely on the "moment" happening right in front of them because they're focused on a screen instead? And then millions of petabytes of crappy videos posted online not actually showing the...

Meh ... :hmm: For me, it's "routine" because there's nothing new about it, nothing special - we (humans) have been doing that for centuries. But we've also being doing it in a way that adds value to the interaction, not simply regurgitating stock phrases. But again, these are all marketing...

But it is just "routine". It's the same pre-packaged samples they keep throwing at us, completely devoid of any real-world context. While there may be some humans who talk like that in real life, to me it sounds 100% computer generated - nothing more than the audio version of the utterly useless...

Ya shudda shot with sodium vapour light! 🤓 Old tech that I learnt about only a couple of weeks ago:

Neither! Ireland. Our ancient writers (and more modern ones) were particularly adept at writing vicious satire about the English colonisers that was only really understood by the native Irish. It was a point of pride to be able to write something in English making fun of the English and have...

Having grown up in a country with a strong tradition of satirical writing - often quite vicious, and wielded as a weapon of subversion - I have much appreciation for a good satirical plot. However, as a writing style it needs to be very carefully crafted, and the object of the satirical...

Hi Lily! :hi: I have a (not terribly) spooky chateau at my disposal, if you're interested - see -> here <- for a thread on the subject.

Looking good. I'm inclined to agree with Nate about the order of presentation - first and foremost, people will be coming to you for their photos, not the studio. On that point, though, in the "studio experience" tab you have a mix of hard-core technical info and softer abstract concepts that...

Round table looking for discussions; also available in square, picnic, excel ... :D This is, for now, an informal networking suggestion. If it attracts positive attention, I'll make it into a more concrete proposal. As some of you know, I have a management role in a music and dance...

Don't you just love a good spectrum? :cool: I'm at the @sfoster end. Watched a first one all the way through and thought it was quite clever; managed about three quarters of a second and thought: "okay, so it's the same voice, same stuff re-packaged, so-so-samey and then drifted off into...

I made my first animations with a pencil and the pages of my school dictionary! Good times. Who needs tablets or AI ... :hi:

As you know, the golden rule for portrait shots has always been "focus on the eyes" ; but that really should be a more lenient "make sure the eyes are in focus" because it'd be a really weird head that needed any of the space behind the eyes to be in focus, but chins, lips and noses are almost...

Okay, that gives you about 8.5cm/3 inches to play with, front to back. Just about enough for most faces, but close to the limit if you have a model with a prominent nose and you focus on the eyes. Might be teaching you to suck eggs, but remember that dof is spread equally in front of and behind...

Definitely less "scientifically accurate", more "photogenic", than before though! :yes: For completeness, I'd be interested in knowing also what focal length lens you're using, and at what distance you have the camera set up.