Matthew Miller

Matthew Miller

Lives in United States Boston, United States
Works as a Systems Architect
Has a website at http://mattdm.org/
Joined on Aug 25, 2006
About me:

1996-1999: Casio QV10A
1999-2004: Nikon Coolpix 950
2004-2007: Olympus C-5060
2006-2006: Fujifilm F20
2007- : Fujifilm F31fd
2007-2007: Pentax K100D (mostly with DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited)
2007-2009: Pentax K10D (mostly with DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited)
2009-2012: Pentax K-7 (still mostly with DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited)
2009-2011: Fujifilm F200EXR
2012- : Pentax K-5ii (+ 15mm, 40mm, 70mm Limiteds)
Now you know. :)

Comments

Total: 87, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Breaking the Rules article (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

Graystar: The rules are never broken. Whenever you think the rules are being broken, what it really means is that a rule is being applied that you're not aware of.

Divide that first image into 8 rows and 8 columns. Go 5 across and 5 down. You'll end up at the box where all the action is...the teeth into the arm. 8/5 = 1.6 It's a perfect Golden Mean placement.

The rule of thirds is actually a simplified version of Golden Mean placement.

"Centered on the fifth column" is not the normal expression of the golden ratio.This is exactly an example of the magical thinking to which I am referring. You have a preconceived idea that you _really want_ to fit, and don't mind bending it until it does. And then it's trotted out as proof.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2012 at 20:15 UTC
On Thomas Park still life 14 sushi - with grid showing 8/5 location photo in Graystar's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

There's a lot of "biting of the arm" on various intersections. What exactly is especially "poignant" about that particular tooth?

Or are you making a new rule which says that the box between the 5/8th mark and the center line is special?

This is really magical thinking. If you have a rule in mind and go looking for it, you can find places where it will apply everywhere, finding justifications for where it doesn't quite fit, and simply discarding cases where your theory doesn't line up. Here, you've chosen to fit it to for the placement of items in the scene in the border and aren't trying to fit it into proportions of features of the image itself as is more traditional in golden-ratio-ism. You can claim that this is a "rule", but you're on really weak ground both historically and in modern studies of aesthetics.

Note also that since you've drawn your lines at 0.625 instead of 0.618, you're a little off from the magical number — not that it makes any real difference!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2012 at 20:13 UTC as 2nd comment
On Breaking the Rules article (142 comments in total)
In reply to:

Graystar: The rules are never broken. Whenever you think the rules are being broken, what it really means is that a rule is being applied that you're not aware of.

Divide that first image into 8 rows and 8 columns. Go 5 across and 5 down. You'll end up at the box where all the action is...the teeth into the arm. 8/5 = 1.6 It's a perfect Golden Mean placement.

The rule of thirds is actually a simplified version of Golden Mean placement.

This is magical thinking. You're taking a pre-conceived rule, making a somewhat arbitrary application of it, and then declaring that the result fits. But what's really so special about the left-top part of her fourth tooth from the left? The composition just has asymmetric balance— a fundamental rule which makes perfect sense — and the coincidence of alignment with some specific fraction is simply that: coincidence.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2012 at 03:47 UTC
On Just Posted: Pentax K-30 full review article (272 comments in total)

I wonder if it might make sense to have completely separate silver/gold awards for video and for still photography? They're really very different use cases, and I know there's a trend towards converged devices, but it's a shame that a camera which really focuses on being a great camera gets dinged in the awards because it's not a camcorder.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2012 at 04:46 UTC as 49th comment | 5 replies
On Hands-on with Nikon V2 article (453 comments in total)
In reply to:

Matthew Miller: Can the built-in flash trigger Nikon's wireless CLS flashes?

Well, that's good for _me_, because I'm far less tempted by the system.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2012 at 16:53 UTC
On Hands-on with Nikon V2 article (453 comments in total)

Can the built-in flash trigger Nikon's wireless CLS flashes?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 27, 2012 at 19:26 UTC as 51st comment | 3 replies
On 11 Cool Photography-Related Kickstarter Projects article (48 comments in total)

I have no real use for the Astro, but the design is so clever and appealing that I kind of want to get one anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2012 at 13:23 UTC as 11th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

gl2k: Great idea because storage is soooo expensive. LOL
2 TB about €100

Robust, business-class storage costs something like 10¢/month per gigabyte. For real. That €100 stand-alone drive is just one part in a big system.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2012 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

DougRight: Ashamedly, jpg and a fairly predictable camera almost gets me all I need. Lossy RAW pegs exactly what I want - white balance control a chance at recovery all at a minimal cost beyond jpg storage. Bravo!

No need for shame. If it works for you, you're winning.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2012 at 20:05 UTC
In reply to:

MrTaikitso: Short term, Connected Cameras. (To differentiate from the non connected.) Long term, Cameras. Why? as per my blog post here...

https://visionaforethought.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/is-the-old-way-really-better/

...like the other items I list in that post, the 'connected' camera is how cameras should always have been. In a year or so, we'll wonder how on Earth we managed prior. Consider the now:

1. Grab camera.

2. Take photo(s).

3. Locate connecting cable. "Oh bummer, I left it in the cafe/car/train/office."

4. Cable acquired, connect to camera.

5. Pull laptop or iPad from bag, or head to location where there is a USB port equipped connected device such as computer or iPad+connection kit.

6. Transfer images from camera to host device.

7. Share/upload to content distribution medium of choice.

With a connected camera:

1. Take photo(s).

2. Connect camera to 3/4G phone WiFi hotspot signal or other WiFi signal.

3. Upload photos to content distribution medium of choice.

Simples!

I think you're right, but your second list is about two steps too long — #2 and #3 can just happen.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2012 at 00:04 UTC

Basically: it's the tech for the gargoyles in Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash (published 20 years ago).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2012 at 15:33 UTC as 39th comment
On Photokina 2012: Interview - John Carlson of Pentax article (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

xmeda: He is worse than politicians.. hundred sentences told, but nothing said.

So, the important thing to realize is that Pentax USA really doesn't do anything but distribution and marketing in this country. They obviously have slightly more connection with Pentax Japan than the average consumer does, but apparently not by much. Whatever customer service people there are in the US often just plain don't have information that Pentax Japan has declined to share with them. I'm not sure why they like to foster an illusion that it's otherwise — it really just makes them look as you say.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2012 at 20:07 UTC
In reply to:

Gazeomon: On paper this looks like just the camera I hoped Nikon would come up with to replace The D300/s with. If I find usable lenses in the Pentax range for my style of shooting (and 3rd party lenses) I might be tempted to switch systems. Nikon has become a very uncertain prospect for DX shooters these days.

What's your style of shooting? If it's nice prime lenses, Pentax has you covered. :) See: http://photo.stackexchange.com/a/13594/1943

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2012 at 01:38 UTC
On Compositional Rules article (120 comments in total)
In reply to:

graphikal: The illustration of negative space is not a compelling one. Nor is the model and horse picture a good example of use of the rule of thirds, a rule that tends to turn out boring photos anyway when slavishly applied by newbies.

"This food is terrible and the portions are too small?"

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2012 at 20:14 UTC
In reply to:

Camediadude: I will celebrate the failure of any company that concocts a fraudulent backstory like 'hipstamatic' shamelessly did.
http://lifeinlofi.com/2010/12/23/news-wausau-city-pages-uncovers-the-real-hipstamatic-backstory/
http://www.mariepeters.com/?p=168

Oh come on. That was clearly on the same level as Blair Witch Project claiming to be a true story. Of course it's not true. "Exposing" that is missing the point.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 20, 2012 at 16:53 UTC
In reply to:

thubleau7: never heard of them, maybe that is why they are going broke ?

looks like a toy made in China comes in a Christmas stocking five bucks.

It's an iPhone app, and the cheap toy Holga/Diana aesthetic is intentional (and part of its success).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2012 at 15:46 UTC
In reply to:

ammca66564: Occurs to me that a product like Hipstamatic probably gets a surge of revenue. And everyone who wants one gets one pretty quickly, your revenue goes straight into the tank.

Absolutely. Their model of selling add-on packs as new "lenses" and "film" is genius, but even that can only go for so long.

It seems like the logical thing to do would be to break down and write an Android version.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2012 at 01:37 UTC
In reply to:

jsis: I laughed when they said "none of those projects will be impacted or cut... we're excited to continue working on projects we're passionate about and love". Of course they're going to say that, otherwise they would not attract investors. Instagram is next.

You didn't hear? Instagram already won the buyout lottery.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 18, 2012 at 01:35 UTC
On Review: Nokia 808 PureView article (354 comments in total)

Unless I'm misunderstanding something you're saying — and I might be — I think you misunderstand the relationship between zooming and cropping as they affect depth of field. Assuming you print at the same size, and assuming you have enough resolution to actually resolve a distinction between blur and sharpness, Nokia's optical zoom should actually provide just as much blur effect as a real greater focal length.

See http://photo.stackexchange.com/a/10121/1943 for more on this (or http://photo.stackexchange.com/a/9626/1943 for a more math-heavy explanation).

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2012 at 00:36 UTC as 128th comment
In reply to:

waxwaine: If I remember the idea of m43 was "Go compact", and this is not a very good example. No point on this compared to any APS-C camera.

T3: I agree that all current sensors are amazing, but I don't think that really changes the equation. Full frame has almost 4× the light-gathering surface area, and nothing short of magic is going to change that advantage. It's perfectly reasonably to argue that it doesn't matter so much, but it's not reasonable to argue that reality goes away. I stand by the assertion that f/3.6 is a better "equivalence" in terms of actual results.

Direct link | Posted on May 26, 2012 at 15:18 UTC
Total: 87, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »