Steps onto soapbox
It is frustrating to me when I cannot hunt down detailed profile pictures of specific yoyos. Shout out to YYE for having detailed pictures of all of their yoyos!
Steps off of soapbox
11 Likes
I agree. I only wish YYE wouldn’t over-light them, that’s all. They are frequently lit so overly brightly that the colors aren’t representative of the real thing in normal lighting conditions. Now, if the web images were HDRs, I could probably adjust them properly myself, but alas they aren’t.
5 Likes
Well I still wish that release dates, and specific materials were included in the specs, even if it was just going forward, but would be great for all. There is always http://yoyo.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page I guess, although it often just has “aluminum”.
Sorry, if I’m off topic.
8 Likes
hear hear!! I third this movement!
I would love to have the specific alloys of materials in the specs section.
3 Likes
Every so often I daydream of making a real standalone yoyohistory site. Sort of combining the wiki and the old yoyomuseum. I dislike that the yoyowiki is stuck on wikia and I would love it if we has a central place for historical photos and specs of yoyos.
6 Likes
Ehhh, it has a pretty good selection of plastic yoyos as well. I like the Museum of yoyo history (http://www.yoyomuseum.com/museum_view.php?action=view&subaction=yoyos) for older stuff. The YYE store site has a decent selection of current items as well as stuff no longer available. The Yoyo Nation store had an excellent collection. Too bad it went down.
3 Likes
I try to keep the colors as accurate as possible. Any specific yo-yo that the color looks too far off?
That sounds like a lot of extra unnecessary work. With the amount of pictures we continuously have to take/update it’s not really worth it.
Noted! I can definitely add material easily, but not sure if release date would make sense. We don’t always get yo-yos when they first release. So a YoYoExpert Release Date might not be 100% accurate. Maybe a broader just release month or year would work.
7 Likes
Release date and material type will be included in all future releases. Past ones too if I have some extra time. 
@Myk_Myk
9 Likes
You put that soap box back where you found it young man… 
2 Likes
Both the green and orange Mowl M+s are not nearly as bright and vivid in real life as in the photos. They are much, much darker and less saturated in ordinary lighting environments. I suspect the pink & blue Surveillance is similarly too bright and vivid.
The red & blue YYR Anomaly is a little brighter and more saturated in the photos than to my naked eye, but not nearly as much as the Mowls.
1 Like
Yeah those are a little off now that I look at them again. Something to watch a little closer in the future, thanks!
2 Likes
I don’t think it’s extra work, you just save the images with HDR info in them, and if the browser can render the extra depth, it will. Doesn’t break anything as far as I know? I’d need to research it, I thought this “just worked” but maybe I’m mistaken… wouldn’t be the first time!
EDIT: I researched this and the browser standards just aren’t there to do HDR at all at the present time… so this can be ignored 
1 Like
Unless we’re thinking of two different things (could be, i’m not really a pro at this stuff!), it’s more than just saving as HDR. I would have to take bracketed images of every shot, so thats like 3x or 5x as many pictures which then have to be merged and edited. Not going to be worth the time for basic product photos.
2 Likes
The EH specs are looking just beautiful! Even though I wasn’t the one to suggest the idea, thanks @YoYoExpertGarrett!
3 Likes
Hmm, no, modern cameras tend to capture HDR color range when you take the shot. So it’d be the same picture. It doesn’t really matter as there is currently zero web browser support, plus you would need a HDR display (if reading on a computer / laptop / tablet) or a very modern smartphone that has a HDR display, to even be able to see the wider color range.
I’d just want the HDR to be downloadable so I can adjust the exposure in post, for my own collection album.
From my experience, the difference between an HDR (bracketed and merged) shot and a regular one, in a studio lighting setting, is minimal. (I’ve experimented with this)
HDR is best used in situations where you have both high and low contrast, where you could end up with portions of your photo either white washed or with black blobs - the dynamic ranging remedies this by taking photos at the different exposure levels so they can be merged, covering a wider range.
If you have a really well lit studio shot, you don’t have that range of contrast you need to cover with HDR. So even if you did do HDR, the results won’t look much different than a regular shot.
Tl;dr - I agree, the extra work to do HDR wouldn’t be worth the time
1 Like
Different meaning of HDR. What we mean in this case is 10 bits of red, green, and blue.
HDR jumps from the HDTV standard of 8 bits of data per color being transmitted. In practical terms, that’s 8 for red, 8 for blue, and 8 for green, or the shorthand phrase “24-bit color.” At this level, individual color data comes in a value of 0-255; multiply that out by three colors for a total range of about 16.78 million colors.
For decades, screen makers have felt like that was a large enough range, but higher resolutions and less CRT-related blurring have made the biggest drawback of limited color depth quite evident: banding. Look at the image above. You’ve probably seen stretches of a single color on a screen just like this in a movie or TV show, where the screen isn’t receiving enough granular color data to fade a color naturally. 10-bit color gets us to a total color range of 1.07 billion colors (1024 per individual primary color).
Instead of 24-bit color (8x8x8) it is 30-bit (10x10x10). Does not sound like a big difference, except remember this is a binary number — each additional bit doubles the size of the color space.