![]() Which means the app developer has to be super clear about what the requirements are from the start. Look, I get that this is a specialized app and I understand the complexity and nuance related to app permissions. Which, how was I to know that? The UI seemed to indicate that I couldn't proceed until all the boxes were checked. What product owner made this decision? IMO it's completely out of touch and user hostile.Įdit: turns out the hard constraint was access to the photo library. Having location access a hard requirement for a photo app is just ridiculous. Now I re-download Halide (the version I paid for a year or two ago) to see what this new version is all about and I'm presented with a bewildering splash screen, prompting me to subscribe (for what now?) and I do everything I can to not subscribe, and then I'm taken to the permissions screen, and it's asking for camera permissions (totally reasonable), photo library access (ok, but let's hold on for a sec), and location access (no thank you), and I can't get anywhere in the app that I paid for, without granting all three permissions. I paid for and tried the initial version (Mark I?) a year or two ago, and, aside from a few manual settings and RAW capture it didn't do a whole lot beyond what the stock photo app did, and Halide's UI was a bit worse to boot. I was never a fan of the first version of this app, despite being a mobile app developer and a photography nerd. If the devs are still listening I'd gladly pay (again) just to have the MkI app back, if money is what they want. ![]() UI fit and finish has also degraded significantly from my subjective POV and the large potential scope of future feature updates make me pessimistically assume that the app will continue to fail to be particularly well tested. I get that they think their new Auto mode is better, but in general this was a bug-infested and unwelcome surprise update for my usage of the app (getting maximum quality raw images out of my phone mounted to a small tripod.) None of this would be an issue if I had any way of opting out of this generous "upgrade" I couldn't refuse. Manually adjusting exposure length also sometimes leads to it getting "stuck" on long values like 1/2 or 1/1 far longer than Mk I ever did. "Full manual control" is somewhat crippled in Mk II (it switches back to Auto every time I switch back cameras) as well as removing the ability to pin ISO down when making use of tap autoexposure (there is no option but to have both exposure length and ISO adjusted now). We're aiming to be the absolute best tool to do that one thing. While we think the first party camera is great, it's also tasked with doing many, many things, from videos to panoramas. It's harder to quantify the value of design. That said, writing this out are just the checkboxes on a spreadsheet of features. With MKII, we're now investing in education to help beginning photographers become better. Manual focus, Control over ISO vs duration, Manual white balance, Explicit control over which lens is being used (the first party camera switches without telling you), tell what parts are clipping or hitting your noise floor (histogram, waveform, and zebras), focus loupe and focus peaking that tell you exactly what is in focus (rather than tapping and hoping for the best) a reviewer lets you view the component images that make up the image asset in your library (e.g. Here are some things off the top of my head that you don't get with the first party camera, excluding RAW: So if you're using a third party app (that knows what they're doing) then at worst you get the same results as the first party camera. Since we're in the middle of a launch, I don't have time to dig super detailed into that article you posted, but from a quick skim it doesn't appear to be particularly well-researched.Īll the goodness of the first party camera's deep fusion, etc, is exposed to third-party developers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |