The point is there are a lot of naysayers that the iPad can't do the job and can't do creative things. So pointing out that the job would have got done without the iPad is not relevant.Okay great, but it's not like these scenes would't have been possible if we didn't have the iPad... This just seems like a long ad for the film and the iPad.
They don't deserve your money.Eh. I was only planning on renting it anyway.![]()
Netflix?
I was thinking more like "downloading" it, but that behavior is not condoned on this site for sure.Netflix?
I know I've said this before, but a professional cinema camera has a sensor the size of an iPod shuffle. The sensor in an iPad camera is smaller than the 'play' icon on the play button of an iPod shuffle.
An iDevice will never be a professional photography tool.
I reckon the FX guy just used the iPad to shut his girlfriend up, anything could have done this including a load of taps and domestic light switches. As everyone knows, Apple stuff is so locked in and they get a 30% cut. iPads are toys, no self respecting pro would use an iPad even if it could do the job.
The people making the custom app should be the ones getting the credit, not the device, which could be anything, it just happened to be an iPad.
Be that as it may, the image quality of photographs are still more dependent upon the size of the sensor. For this reason, iDevices will NEVER compete with professional cameras unless they start using gigantic sensors. No amount of tricks will change that. The quality of portable device cameras is significantly increasing, but the sensor size and their inability to draw in more light will continue to be the major gap separating them from professional grade cameras. Most people are pretty happy with the quality of current phone cameras, but they won't be holding a significant place among photography studios/businesses anytime soon. There's only so much that can be done with tiny sensors.I remember when people said that professional photographers would never use digital, because you can tell the difference. And then filmmakers said they would never use digital. I remember when people thought that you'd never watch movies streamed over the internet, because you'd never get a good enough quality.
It's called innovation, and it happens fairly regularly.
The point is there are a lot of naysayers that the iPad can't do the job and can't do creative things. So pointing out that the job would have got done without the iPad is not relevant.
Be that as it may, the image quality of photographs are still more dependent upon the size of the sensor. For this reason, iDevices will NEVER compete with professional cameras unless they start using gigantic sensors. No amount of tricks will change that. The quality of portable device cameras is significantly increasing, but the sensor size and their inability to draw in more light will continue to be the major gap separating them from professional grade cameras. Most people are pretty happy with the quality of current phone cameras, but they won't be holding a significant place among photography studios/businesses anytime soon. There's only so much that can be done with tiny sensors.
If it could do the job, why on earth wouldn't as pro use it? Ego?
The iPad was used as a PLC device. Whop-pa-de-do
What's the point of this comment other than to annoy? Regardless of your beliefs, this comment is entirely unnecessary.
I was thinking more like "downloading" it, but that behavior is not condoned on this site for sure.
I'm not religious and never stated I was, but I AM an advocate of not bashing the beliefs of others as long as their beliefs are not putting other people in harm's way.So you are religious but steal? His does that work
I also find that preposterous. His loss.I actually know a religious tech guy that won't buy apple now because Tim cook is openly gay. What a douche.
Be that as it may, all it does is incite arguments. Considering the lack of effort in that post, it was clearly meant to troll... which is against the forum rules anyway. I get what you're saying, but the subject matter is a little more sensitive to people than a comic book... and even though some people take comic books quite seriously... it is a different matter entirely. I just don't see the point in empty arguments that are only started to provoke frustration. I prefer intelligent conversation, which is what we're doing here. You're actually expressing thoughts in a calm and collected manner without the sole intention of pissing others off.Regarding religious text as a work of fiction is not so uncommon. We do it all the time with other religions. Think, for example, of Marvel turning the Germanic gods into comic book super heroes, or the old adventure movies plundering Greek and Roman mythology for entertainment purposes.
It probably wouldn't be considered offensive to tell, e.g., a Hindu that one is a Christian (which implies disagreement with many Hindu beliefs and myths), so why should it be offensive to tell a Christian that one does not believe the Bible to be the Word of God but rather something conceived and written by man? It's not a personal attack, it's not even an attack on Christianity, it's just the exact same way everyone treats all religious texts and ideas outside of their particular belief's canon.
Still, I do think the makers of "Noah" made it for the US market, which would mean they were eyeing for a primarily Christian audience. So they probably didn't take as many liberties as Stan Lee did with The Mighty Thor, and will most likely do their best to convince everyone that the whole thing is in line with the Bible.
I also find that preposterous. His loss.
And many I'm sure that aren't "openly" gay.Same. Does he not realize probably very tech company has a gay person employed?
I'm not religious and never stated I was, but I AM an advocate of not bashing the beliefs of others as long as their beliefs are not putting other people in harm's way.
There are plenty of people doing good things in the name of religion. There will always be bad things and bad people. That's human nature. I don't group people together, regardless of their beliefs.Fair enough. I'm the opposite. I genuinely think there is something wrong with someone who 'believes' without question and it's reprehensible that there are churches that teach children complete lies about evolution. It's breeding idiots.
As for harms way..,Well that's the point isn't it EVERY single religion
Is responsible for millions of death and a great number of wars.
At a glance, I thought I read that Noah filmmakers use an iPad to create a huge lightning and rain effect in the film. In which case, WOW that's impressive!
Then I read more, and well ..
It's the control system software, or app. Basically digital knobs and switches. I'm sorry but something like this can also be custom-made for Windows XP on a Pentium II laptop. Click this, click that. It's even can be more accurate and faster with keyboard, trackpad and hard-wired system. So I failed to see why it's such a big deal?
Be that as it may, the image quality of photographs are still more dependent upon the size of the sensor. For this reason, iDevices will NEVER compete with professional cameras unless they start using gigantic sensors. No amount of tricks will change that. The quality of portable device cameras is significantly increasing, but the sensor size and their inability to draw in more light will continue to be the major gap separating them from professional grade cameras. Most people are pretty happy with the quality of current phone cameras, but they won't be holding a significant place among photography studios/businesses anytime soon. There's only so much that can be done with tiny sensors.