The Statbot - Latest Comments in Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Virus Protection — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:37:30 -0000

Quite interesting to note that Adobe is the most dominating processing software. No other graphical software is listed. Adobe photoshop is quite expensive. There is an open source GIMP but there was hardly any trace of use in the report presented.

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Djarum Black — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:37:08 -0000

So most (72%) of his photos are shot using his Canon 5D, 17% using his (probably) older 10D and 10% are missing the EXIF Data Flickr uses to tell you which camera the photo was shot with. The missing Exif can be either due to some stupid tool that mangles them, screenshots, or just Flickr acting up (happened more than once)

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Stylish Templates — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 09:09:33 -0000

Really interesting to see all the numbers behind the pictures. I do have a question though, how do you gather your data, what tools do you use? I have no idea how your magic is done, very interesting stuff, keep it up!

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Make clothes online — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 05:57:59 -0000

As for the “Other Cameras”, 67 were taken with a FinePix F601, 27 with a FinePixA303 (both Fuji cameras) and one with a Rebel XTi. Nikon has so far been absent here – however, there are two
photos from Nikon Cameras in his Flickr Feed!

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

I can’t see the future of Thailand. I do not know where the land of smile has gone. I do not when every fighting will stop. I do not know how the broken society will be melted into one society again. What I really know is that I am no longer want to live here at this time. Probably, it is time to leave.

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Sebastian — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:07:32 -0000

Hi,
Very nice stats!
Last year i wrote a small Ruby script that creates this kind of stats "Graphs" from your photographic library..

http://sebastian.yepes.in/b...

Regards,

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Arul — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:49:51 -0000

wow! photographer..... A very good graphical notation for easy understanding....

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Yuvi Panda — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:59:32 -0000

Charts are made in Excel 2007 gsmaverick :)

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Yuvi Panda — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:52:24 -0000

Same here Shey. My S3, while better than most compact P&Ss, just absolutely *needs* flash when the light goes even a bit down. Flash, if not used properly, does make images look crappy :(

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Shey — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:16:57 -0000

Yuvi, you do it like no other -- awesome!

On a related note -- I hate flash -- there are certain situations where it's useful, and other situations where my crappy S80 can't handle the lighting so I have to use it. But I try my best not to as it can really mess with the image you're trying to capture.

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Colby Olson — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:18:36 -0000

Great post, yet again. Really interesting to see all the numbers behind the pictures. I do have a question though, how do you gather your data, what tools do you use? I have no idea how your magic is done, very interesting stuff, keep it up!

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Gavin Schulz — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:35:52 -0000

Pretty cool stats. Just wondering what program do you use to make your charts?

Re: Statbot comes back from the Dead – Thomas Hawk’s Camera usage stats

Phil Glockner — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:20:28 -0000

I think the most interesting take-away here is the almost absolutely lack of flash. Will EXIF tell you if a flash on a hot shoe or remote was used? Because, part of almost every traditional fashion or portrait photographer's kit is some sort of indirect flash, to 'fill in' the picture.

Traditionally, it was considered pretty edgy to choose to work without a flash of any sort, even just for fill. However, with digital cameras becoming more sensitive and being able to output to RAW to make what used to be an in-camera tweak, perhaps a flash is no longer necessary.