kociasek

Lives in Poland Wroclaw, Poland
Works as a translator
Joined on Dec 6, 2005

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

Thanks, dpreview, from another Prince fan! I only wish you identified the image that impressed Prince so much during the first meeting with the photographer.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2016 at 08:02 UTC as 34th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

kociasek: I'm quite disappointed you didn't ask Mr Lubezki about the "physical presence" of lenses in The Revenant. In this film there are scenes where the lenses show VERY visible flares and ghosting, they are splattered with mud and blood, fogged over with breath vapour etc. Did he think the film would be more immersive this way? To me, and some other viewers I talked to, the effect was the opposite, it reminded us that we were just in a cinema. Also, Mr Lubezki himself says he avoided analogue grain to make the film less romantic, more "real". Doesn't seem consistent with those lens tricks.

@ Rishi Sanyal
"how are you not going to get natural flares and veiling"
You can edit them out in post-processing. After all, they inserted CGI bears, buffaloes and wolves, so they certainly had the right gear and the expertise to be able to do that. BTW, I really enjoyed the camera movements, the wide angles and the natural light. It's just those in-your-face lens artifacts... even my non-photographic wife commented on this during the movie.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 21:27 UTC
In reply to:

kociasek: I'm quite disappointed you didn't ask Mr Lubezki about the "physical presence" of lenses in The Revenant. In this film there are scenes where the lenses show VERY visible flares and ghosting, they are splattered with mud and blood, fogged over with breath vapour etc. Did he think the film would be more immersive this way? To me, and some other viewers I talked to, the effect was the opposite, it reminded us that we were just in a cinema. Also, Mr Lubezki himself says he avoided analogue grain to make the film less romantic, more "real". Doesn't seem consistent with those lens tricks.

@ Timur Born
A very interesting analysis of the cinematography in the film, thanks.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 09:09 UTC
In reply to:

kociasek: I'm quite disappointed you didn't ask Mr Lubezki about the "physical presence" of lenses in The Revenant. In this film there are scenes where the lenses show VERY visible flares and ghosting, they are splattered with mud and blood, fogged over with breath vapour etc. Did he think the film would be more immersive this way? To me, and some other viewers I talked to, the effect was the opposite, it reminded us that we were just in a cinema. Also, Mr Lubezki himself says he avoided analogue grain to make the film less romantic, more "real". Doesn't seem consistent with those lens tricks.

@ Dale Baskin
Yeah, I know the scene from Children of Men and I find it impressive, too. However, the "visibility" of lens there makes more sense because it looks as if the events are shot by a war reporter. In "The Revenant", which takes place in 1820s, such association doesn't work.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2016 at 08:57 UTC

I'm quite disappointed you didn't ask Mr Lubezki about the "physical presence" of lenses in The Revenant. In this film there are scenes where the lenses show VERY visible flares and ghosting, they are splattered with mud and blood, fogged over with breath vapour etc. Did he think the film would be more immersive this way? To me, and some other viewers I talked to, the effect was the opposite, it reminded us that we were just in a cinema. Also, Mr Lubezki himself says he avoided analogue grain to make the film less romantic, more "real". Doesn't seem consistent with those lens tricks.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2016 at 23:44 UTC as 22nd comment | 10 replies
On article Good genes: Samsung NX500 review posted (516 comments in total)
In reply to:

kociasek: Question to DPReview (Barney Britton?) or any owner of NX500 - can you please confirm that video clips from NX500 cannot be imported into Lightroom CC? I bought the camera recently and was very disappointed to notice this limitation. The conversion tool provided by Samsung didn't help to resolve this. I tried a number of third party conversion programs before I found one that works, but it costs 40 bucks :-(
BTW, I have no problem with opening those videos directly in my Windows 10.

@ Dale Baskin
FYI, even the full version of Wondershare Video Converter is hopeless - yes, it converts H.265 to H.264 but in the process changes the resolution to 1920x1080. Those low-res files get recognized by Lightroom CC, but who cares.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 17:15 UTC
On article Good genes: Samsung NX500 review posted (516 comments in total)
In reply to:

HowaboutRAW: In cons:

Please fix the H.265 play back error.

No the format won't play with WinMedia Player on a Win 7 machine, nor will QuickTime play that format on a Mac.

However plenty of other AV programs play it on a Mac and PCs running Win 7.

Win10 will play it with Windows Media Player.

No, Ubuntu 15.04 not so much.

@ VisualFX
TmpGENC can't even load H.265 videos on Windows 10 (the operating system itself has no problems with them).

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 16:17 UTC
On article Good genes: Samsung NX500 review posted (516 comments in total)
In reply to:

kociasek: Question to DPReview (Barney Britton?) or any owner of NX500 - can you please confirm that video clips from NX500 cannot be imported into Lightroom CC? I bought the camera recently and was very disappointed to notice this limitation. The conversion tool provided by Samsung didn't help to resolve this. I tried a number of third party conversion programs before I found one that works, but it costs 40 bucks :-(
BTW, I have no problem with opening those videos directly in my Windows 10.

@ VisualFX
I import vidoes into Lightroom mostly to catalog and watch them. If you know an alternative free or inexpensive DAM program for videos, I'm all ears, but Adobe Premiere doesn't fit the bill.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 16:07 UTC
On article Good genes: Samsung NX500 review posted (516 comments in total)
In reply to:

kociasek: Question to DPReview (Barney Britton?) or any owner of NX500 - can you please confirm that video clips from NX500 cannot be imported into Lightroom CC? I bought the camera recently and was very disappointed to notice this limitation. The conversion tool provided by Samsung didn't help to resolve this. I tried a number of third party conversion programs before I found one that works, but it costs 40 bucks :-(
BTW, I have no problem with opening those videos directly in my Windows 10.

@ Dale Baskin
Thanks for testing video compatibility with Lightroom. I installed Wondershare Video Converter Free but it can't handle H.265 codec on Windows 10, only audio gets previewed and converted. Am I right in guessing that you tried it on a Mac computer?

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2015 at 15:49 UTC
On article Good genes: Samsung NX500 review posted (516 comments in total)

Question to DPReview (Barney Britton?) or any owner of NX500 - can you please confirm that video clips from NX500 cannot be imported into Lightroom CC? I bought the camera recently and was very disappointed to notice this limitation. The conversion tool provided by Samsung didn't help to resolve this. I tried a number of third party conversion programs before I found one that works, but it costs 40 bucks :-(
BTW, I have no problem with opening those videos directly in my Windows 10.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2015 at 22:08 UTC as 55th comment | 7 replies
On photo Nazca Booby Portrait in the Birds, Birds, Birds! challenge (14 comments in total)

LOL!

Link | Posted on May 30, 2015 at 21:12 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

kociasek: "all the advantages of a traditional cable release"
No, not at all. When I use cable release I don't need to stand right behind the camera. For example, I can shoot fireworks lying on the grass, watching the show, lazily pressing the button of the cable release connected to my tripod-mounted camera.
Also, using such feature I'd be afraid of moving behind the camera in case the camera interprets it as a shutter signal.
Also, with cable release I can take a photo at exactly the right moment. With hand waving you don't get such split-second accuracy.

"Riiight. Because the roll of film has only 36 frames, and it would such a waste... Oh wait."
Sometimes you don't get a second chance, e.g. when you use bulb mode your exposure may end prematurely, you may waste a 30-minute exposure...

Link | Posted on Apr 27, 2015 at 17:43 UTC

"all the advantages of a traditional cable release"
No, not at all. When I use cable release I don't need to stand right behind the camera. For example, I can shoot fireworks lying on the grass, watching the show, lazily pressing the button of the cable release connected to my tripod-mounted camera.
Also, using such feature I'd be afraid of moving behind the camera in case the camera interprets it as a shutter signal.
Also, with cable release I can take a photo at exactly the right moment. With hand waving you don't get such split-second accuracy.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2015 at 11:18 UTC as 67th comment | 4 replies
On article More things we found cut in half (CP+ 2015 edition) (136 comments in total)

OK, so they will cut in half. But will they blend?

Link | Posted on Feb 17, 2015 at 21:09 UTC as 6th comment
On article Adobe details OS support for next version of Lightroom (229 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peiasdf: About time 10 years after 64-bit replaced 32-bit on most PC. I also wonder if this is related to most smartphone running on 64-bit SoC now so Adobe can consolidate coding to 64-bit only.

Now if only the next Civilization game is 64-bit and supports multi-core.

Ten years, really? Can you prove it? I doubt it. I still use 32-bit Windows, and at least four of my friends do the same.

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2015 at 00:26 UTC
On article Quick Look: The art of the unforeground (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

kociasek: Excellent images and an interesting tip. Using foreground as negative space seems challenging, I must give it a try :)

Come to think of it, I'd crop the second image a bit from the top. But the "unforeground" works well.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2015 at 15:14 UTC
On article Quick Look: The art of the unforeground (85 comments in total)

Excellent images and an interesting tip. Using foreground as negative space seems challenging, I must give it a try :)

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2015 at 14:54 UTC as 41st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

deep7: It's actually quite nice to see this "record" temporarily being held by one of the world's great landscape photographers and for such a fine image. He isn't just a very good photographer but is very fussy about print quality and talented at marketing (obviously!!).

Recently, this record was held by one of the blandest photographers I've ever "seen", a photoshopped image of a river bank. That was much harder to comprehend.

I should note that an internet reproduction will only ever give us a general idea of what the image looks like in the flesh. I'll bet this one is a stunner. It's a bit like seeing a real Constable painting, compared to one on a place mat or biscuit tin. No comparison at all!

@b craw That was an excellent reply. Let me just add that deep7 most likely has NOT seen "Rhein II", only some weak representations of it, i.e. small digital images online rather than the huge print (210x380cm framed). I haven't seen it either, so I will not comment on how good or bad it is. But I find Gursky's work intriguing, especially after watching some documentaries about the guy on YouTube.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 20:51 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2163 comments in total)
In reply to:

kociasek: The caption under the photograph of the four lenses seems to be wrong. It says:
"These four lenses are all 85mm equivalent F1.2s. However, this does not mean they're all 85mm F1.2 equivalent."
Unless I'm mistaken, "equivalent" should be dropped from the first sentence.

Richard, thanks for your reply, my mistake. I overlooked the fact that the actual focal lengths are different. A hyphen would help: "85mm-equivalent F1.2s."

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2014 at 18:45 UTC
On article What is equivalence and why should I care? (2163 comments in total)

The caption under the photograph of the four lenses seems to be wrong. It says:
"These four lenses are all 85mm equivalent F1.2s. However, this does not mean they're all 85mm F1.2 equivalent."
Unless I'm mistaken, "equivalent" should be dropped from the first sentence.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2014 at 16:25 UTC as 152nd comment | 22 replies
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »