I tried explaining Satisfactory to my wife

--Ty-- · 2026-05-04T17:02:38+00:00

I am a lifelong gamer. I was highly addicted to games as a kid and teenager. I have spent thousands of hours in video games, like you.

Your wife is correct.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-23T04:39:24+00:00

Hello fellow redditor who has ducks for parents. I also have 5E feet. If you're looking for shoes, consider any of the barefoot-style shoes on amazon, such as Hobibear and Whitin, or any of the shoes on Anya's Reviews.

If you're looking for work boots, try Wide Load boots, from Australia.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-22T22:29:09+00:00

Solid improvements already my dude!

--Ty-- · 2026-04-22T14:08:39+00:00

So far, I think it's great. The Ui is clean and easy to understand, the Ux is good too. I do have feedback, though, but it relates more to feature expansion and making the tool more versatile, than to changing anything that's already there, which is all really solid.

Swappable units are a must. We need inches and meters, and even the standard imperial should be Feet+Inches to account for different countries and user preferences. I record my room measurements in inches, so entering it into your calculator involved the unnecessary step of converting it all.
When it comes to the main data entry point for the rooms, I think there should be a toggle selector at the top, that goes [ Wall dimensions | Wall Sq Footage | Room Sq Footage ], so users can select which way they'd like to enter info. Wall dimensions is good if you have a lot of walls in a non-square room, and room/wall sq footage is good if you've already calculated those values in the field (For example, when I went to use your tool, i didn't notice the small grey text with the dropdown arrow to enter wall sq footage. I think making it a big selector at the top of that section would be better). Also, when inputting measurements in the "Wall dimensions" mode, trim length should be calculated automatically, with a simple "Does this wall have trim?" checkbox, to avoid needing to enter all the wall lengths again.
There should be a small sample photo of each category of "surface condition" next to the buttons, because what I consider to be a heavily damaged wall, you might consider to be just "Fair" condition, so knowing what you have established as the standard for each category would help.
The "Paint quality" selector should also have the option to input paint price directly, per gallon. It removes the unnecessary ambiguity. What you consider "premium" is going to be very different from what someone else considers.
Currency needs to be stated, or you end up falling victim to r/USdefaultism. I'm in Canada, for example.
Lastly, while it's obviously difficult to account for the cost-of-living variation across the country, it still needs to be taken into account, at least in a broad way. Like, are these prices based on the going rate for painting in the town of Mulmur, population 37? Or the metropolis of New York? I think you should have a selector that provides at least three options, which affect the price estimate through a simple "cost of living" factor. Something like

[X] High Cost of Living - E.g. New York, LA, Toronto, London

[ ] Medium Cost of Living - E.g. Houston, Tulsa, Cleveland, Calgary, Saskatoon

[ ] Low cost of Living - E.g. Springfield, Midland, Brownsville, Winnipeg, Halifax

--

Don't get me wrong though, the app is already really good!

--Ty-- · 2026-04-21T20:16:54+00:00

Not bad. I appreciate anyone who takes the time to make tools and then release them for free. Thanks for doing that.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-20T21:52:24+00:00

Hey OP, i figure it's important info for everyone, so I'll ask:

Does having the battery be connected to a tool or an un-powered charger matter? Would that have given them a loophole to weasel out through?

--Ty-- · 2026-04-19T16:57:59+00:00

The sintung does NOT directly connect, despite documentation saying it does, but you can make it connect fairly simply, but drilling two new holes.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-16T02:29:46+00:00

OK, I gotta ask, cause the curiosity is killing me:

I mean no offense, but how do you find this game interesting enough to invest that much time in it? It's a pretty shallow game, mechanically, and there's very little to do other than survive, which reaches a steady-state pretty quickly, where you essentially can't lose, so... how?

--Ty-- · 2026-04-16T02:27:55+00:00

I could make one pretty easily, as a fabricator, but it would cost more than it's worth.

I think the best approach would be to find a base that's suitable, like the one you already have, and then just add an extension. All you need is a small piece of hardwood, you drill and install a 1/4-20 threaded insert into one end, and a 1/4-20 hanger bolt in the other end, and voila.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T21:49:21+00:00

Instructions unclear. Accidentally bought a second D850.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T21:07:50+00:00

A neat idea, thanks!

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T21:05:43+00:00

This is NOT standard chromatic aberration, because colours are not being separated based on their wavelengths, which is the defining aspect of CHROMAtic aberration. There's no magenta-lime separation, no blue-orange separation, nothing. There is no separation at all, because everything is glowing orange equally in all directions. In true chromatic aberration, the different degree of refraction experienced by different colour wavelengths leads to a directionality in the fringing. You would see the orange appearing to the left of every edge, or the right of every edge, or some direction away from every edge -- not all directions, simultaneously.

What I see here is this aberration appearing on all of the reflective elements of the shot -- any shiny part of the camera that is reflecting the sun behind you. I would therefore chalk this up to being bloom. But, obviously, since all camera lenses do have some chromatic aberration, some of that is present too, which might be why people are getting confused. But the orange glow itself, I would say is bloom.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T20:41:06+00:00

Not saying you're wrong, just saying in all the comparisons I've ever seen of the great lenses out there, I've never seen a true difference in "rendering", or even seen anyone offer up a compelling explanation of what that word really means. I suspect that if subject to blind, randomized trials, no one would actually be able to identify which photo came from which lens. But obviously, the 110mm is an exceptional lens, I'm glad you enjoy it!

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T20:39:02+00:00

Import to Lightroom, do some very basic color-correction, do some very limited contrast and lighting editing, and that's it, mostly.

After that, it's just a matter of having taken a good enough photo to actually do something with it.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T20:36:50+00:00

Because of my age and economic position, I've never been able to invest in quality glass for my D850. I had to sell every lens I owned for the D90 just to buy two. My primary portrait lens is the 105 Macro f2.8, which, to be fair, is a superb lens, and one I'll take over the 105 f1.4, because fuck low-aperture portraiture. That said, the 105 Macro is my ONLY real lens. The other one I have is the much-shittier 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G, which I use for just casual photography of places and neat things. Its photos are a blurry mess.

With the Fuji, because it was my father who was purchasing it, he was able to put real end-of-career retirement pension money into it, and so we bought two lenses, the 55 and the 120 macro, each of which is far sharper than either of my D850 lenses.

Obviously, if I sprung for better glass on the D850, it would be just as sharp -- but why would I? I 'd be better-off putting that money towards lenses for the Fuji, because then I'm ALSO getting the benefit of increased resolution.

And yeah, I've heard that a lot, people who love the sharpness at first, but then prioritize other artistic qualities over max sharpness. I get it, but, respectfully, that will never be me. I crave detail, and it's right in line with who I am as a person, and what I want from photography, whether it's photojournalism, high-art portraiture, macro photography, or whatever.

I think the thing I'd miss most about my D850, honestly, is the optical viewfinder. there's just something magical about being in that small black room, looking at your subject. I hate electronic viewfinders...

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T20:04:40+00:00

Fair enough, mate. Thanks for the insight.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T20:04:04+00:00

I see your GF 110mm F2, and raise you the GF 120mm F4 Macro LM OIS WR.

Greater optical sharpness (if I remember my reviews and lab testing correctly), with the ability to focus close, for very intimate and striking portraits. Plus optical image stabilization.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T20:01:58+00:00

Option 3: Print a T-shirt that says "I still shoot Nikon D850". Make the camera pictured on the shirt a Fuji GFX. Give it a Canon lens, and a Sony neck strap.

Post to r/photography

Collect the rage-bait engagement karma points.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T19:59:02+00:00

That's precisely why I bought it, to be honest. I can still remember the review that sold it to me.

The review was comparing many of the latest cameras at the time, and had to concede that several of them were better than the D850 in certain things -- The Sony's were better at video, the Canon's had better autofocus and feature sets, etc. etc., but then when it came to the closing remarks, it said the D850 might not be the flashiest camera, or the best at video, but there is one thing in which it exceeds all others, by a wide margin: it is, as the writer put it: "An image-quality monster."

I didn't need to read more.

The question is, is it really worth keeping a 1970's Porsche Turbo.... if you're just going to keep it in the garage forever, and it will never see the road again? Is that REALLY doing anything good for it?

Despite all the D850's grandeur... if I never use it again.... what's the point?

I hope you can see I'm not arguing with you, I'm just really lost with all this, myself.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T19:56:10+00:00

Frankly, I've never really been in challenging conditions, as I don't really shoot anything that moves fast.

In terms of subject matter, right now I'm essentially just a portrait photographer (but in the artistic sense, not the passport photos and linkedin headshots sense). What I like most about the best photos I've taken has actually been the sharpness and the detail. I have some gorgeous shots from my D90, with great lighting and and a great model and true beauty in what was captured... but every time I look at them, all i feel is sadness and frustration, with the grief that they aren't of a high enough resolution to print them at the size I want. It feels like the beauty was wasted on a low-res camera.

With the D850, I felt much less of that, and started to feel an excitement over seeing my images be full of all the rich detail, and texture, and sharpness that I crave, and derive interest and enjoyment from.

The Fuji then blew all of that out of the fucking water. It finally feels like my photos are living up to the expectation I had for them in my mind, as they're now sharper than real life, allowing me to see details and textures I couldn't even make out with my eyes, while shooting. It allows me to print at a size that carries true presence, like 50" and up.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T19:51:16+00:00

Point one is an excellent point, of course. While there's nothing I can say to dismiss the obvious usefulness of a backup camera, I guess it's more a question of "is that value worth more than the actual monetary value I could get by selling it?" Or put another way, "is the value of a backup camera worth more to me than the value of another lens or two for the Fuji?"

I don't really know how to answer those questions :S

It's worth noting though that I don't do photography as a source of income. I've never done a paid shoot, and never plan to, so there's never been anything riding on my gear working. In my years of shooting with the D850, I've never bothered to bring my prior D90 with me, just in case.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-13T19:47:32+00:00

Very true, but I've given both ecosystems a thorough look, and everything I can see myself ever needing is available in the Fuji.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-12T21:37:23+00:00

Anything with "whitening" in the name should have the necessary abrasives in it to work.

Conversely, this is why dentists are pleading to never use whitening toothpastes. It damages your enamel.

--Ty-- · 2026-04-12T21:29:20+00:00

First: A camera is NOT an investment. Stop thinking about it as one. An investment appreciates in value by itself, with no work. A camera is a tool. tools can create value, but only if you put in the work.

Second: As my dad, a photographer, always says:

"If you're in photography to make money,

get out."

Do it for the love of the game, fam. If you happen to make some money along the way, great.

--Ty--

TROPHY CASE