munro harrap

munro harrap

Lives in France France
Works as a none
Has a website at none
Joined on Dec 27, 2007
About me:

irrelevant

Comments

Total: 530, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sony SLT-A77 II Review preview (487 comments in total)

Seems OK to me in those shots that are not grossly underexposed- of which there are many. It compares very well with my D7100 results and has the advantage of that faster zoom, and in the basketball shots where the colour is iffy moaners can just adjust to suit anyway- and all cameras do this.

I might go back to using a Lunasix with a cone on to avoid underexposure too. Let's hope that to level the playing field somewhat, that DPr. does so too!!

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2015 at 14:23 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

My standards are irrelevant. I question the standard of work winning competitions like World Press Photo and World Photography Awards because THEY claim they are selecting the best photographs made in the world in the past year in their field. IMHO they simply do not make the grade relative to other work that is better. Its got nothing whatever to do with me, and this is why people like N disgust me. N uses every opportunity to sneer and be sarcastic, and not just to me,(read N and other's posts!) and then every other mindless little cyber-bully piles on regardless thereby revealing their true nature.Tripods, indeed.
Either you make sure you are in the right place at the right time or you miss it! like everybody does, me too.

It is the World Photography Awards 2015 we are discussing, not me, and not John Moore. Stick to the subject everybody. I got jumped on as I said I could, and you could do as well on an average day,so you should all be pleased, not upset. Read MY posts S.V.P

Direct link | Posted on May 3, 2015 at 00:08 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

No, to somebody my age you ARE rude. Read a few of your posts.
(sigh) is what? It is condescension.
"Besides, which part of Joseph Goebbels staring at the Jewish photographer did you miss"
That does not make any sense in any context
Go on, read your BS, read every nasty spiteful clever little reply to me. Read it over and over again, because everybody on Planet Earth can do the same. I suggest therefore you realize that I am NOT your audience. Millions may stand behind you but that is no excuse for you, any more than it was for Hitler!!

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 11:57 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Additionally standards have risen again and again and colour now rightly dominates visual media-photography especially.

Colour has additional demands, but it has become VERY difficult for me to admire and appreciate some of the best monochrome photographs, even though I have taken a good number of them, because had I had the money at the time, or the clients to pay the film, I would have shot everything in colour.

Unfortunately many of my contemporaries and the generation before DID shoot everything in colour, but then showed and sold the work as monochrome pictures, which is not only dishonest, but daft.

They would however claim they "saw" in monochrome (obviously untrue, but I know what they mean!)

There is even today a market for these obsolete retro images, and that is why I am not uploading samples to show you!

When you do Somerset House do a Desert Islands Pics! You can choose 8 photographs only to look at always. Get the picture now?

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 11:45 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Photography historically is a world away from NOW. But standards were set generations ago, by a few people, and every once in a while some newbie comes along and raises the bar, visually. Now, IMHO, anyone winning a major competition must be of such a standard, because otherwise you and I can rightly point to photographs of identical subject matter taken years before that are better.

Eisenstadt was a very good photographer. Several of his pics became well-known, but there is a world of difference between well-known and/or famous, and GOOD.

Today many competitions are won by work that is not GOOD.

Go to any gallery: the number of GOOD pictures is tiny. THere are thousands of artists and photographers completely forgotten now, who in their day became wealthy and well-known. But we scarcely give them a thought because of the mediocrity of their output.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 11:37 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

The photo in My Gallery was posted to help people learn about detail loss in 5D files. It is not a photo as such.
I do not answer impertinent questions. The French have a phrase for people like you. They say that "elle est toujours en train de chercher la petite bete".

At this, you really take the biscuit. You are controlling, rude, and you seek even know to control how people answer you and the content of their answers, but I will, nevertheless try to help you.

Direct link | Posted on May 1, 2015 at 11:28 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

It's an OK pic, but knowing the photographer was Jewish adds nothing to it at all. Knowing it is Goebbels, and knowing who Goebbels was (a master manipulator using words as you attempt to do- hence your choice, ) adds nothing at all, because the problem is that its just an average snap, of no special interest or merit.

If you do not know these things the picture has no interest, it is just a picture of a man among hundreds of millions of pictures of men.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 23:06 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

However whichever it is is irrelevant to the debate, completely irrelevant. Further I have made no claims of any expertize. However, there are standards. These standards exist, they are out there for you and I and all others to match and surpass which we are all of us capable of doing.

Without words. Cameras dont use words.If you want to use words, put the camera away and write.

I admit SOME words have helped me. Chief of which was the quote from Francis Bacon Bourke-White stuck on her darkroom door:

"The contemplation of things as they are without substitution or imposture without error or confusion is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention. (Francis Bacon).

Until you realize that in its profoundest sense you cannot get very far in visual media

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 22:51 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Googled Goebbels images, there's loads. Hundreds, so which one?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Unable to comment as image unknown to me.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 22:40 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Never seen it

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Still WRONG (to quote you!) Change the caption- what happens? With the appropriate caption we could have you voting for Goebbels or buying his chocolate, and you can try the same experiment with your other examples. This is what limits them: their weakness, requiring completion to work at all, allows any caption writer to manipulate the viewer's consciousness, and often in utterly out of context ways, as in advertizing.

If, as I, you have had the experience of newspapers mauling work you have made to angle it their way, you will know how important it is to supply precise, tightly composed photographs that nobody can caption, or crop, to mean something else!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 21:50 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

If a picture needs a caption it has failed. If it needs a title it has failed. Sure there are kids at school and "conceptual" guys playing games with titles they then illustrate etcetera, but this is not photography. It makes use of it as a means to an end, but the end is not the image, so photography it ain't.

And ANYONE with a decent camera on programme could take all these secondrate, poorly seen and worse composed shots in a day. You teach, try! You may find I am correct and as I did years ago, discover your students worthy of Magnum on Day 1 , in some cases.
All anyone needs is a subject they really care about and a camera. Love conquers incompetence in most cases.

No hyperbole intended felt or stated.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 20:59 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Instead of making silly remarks, try drawing what you would have got had you been where I would have been, and yes, I would have been there, its obvious, and yes, I would have run , if not already there.
Your job is to reduce into an intelligible 2D rectangle, the essence of what matters in any scene, and a part of that is a learning process in which you are continually repositioning yourself into what will be the next best shot's viewpoint, and you do this until you can do it in your sleep as it has become an integral part of who you are.

Looking at what others have achieved and understanding why their pics work where yours dont is an excellent way of accelerating the process. Making stupid remarks is not. Spock out!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Take the first as example. Remove the caption," Sister's grief".

Now what is there. It looks as though the woman on the ground wants a lift on the stretcher, dreadful.

The photographer is in the wrong place. He needs to be between the stretchers going past and the wall on the right, and kneeling. pointing the lens across the passing stretcher and catching its contents clearly full on with the woman on the ground looking at its contents in the same way from the other side, in such a way that her anguish is what gets to you.

The guy who took it is unemployable at any reasonable standard.
You have a situation in which it is a given that you must improve on Eugene Smith at Minimata, or Jones-Griffiths in Vietnam.
He hasn't and needs to wake up to what a great tradition he and other mediocrities like him are betraying, along with their subject matter. Null points

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

munro harrap: I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

I meant what I said. Anyone with a reasonable machine and the commitment to the subject could do as well.
The Ebola shots especially show a lack of commitment and humanity.
and are occasionally ambiguous. None should need captions to clue you in. Several fail without the captions as it is not clear what is going on. That is not good photography if it needs words to clarify or explain.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 30, 2015 at 15:37 UTC

I am not impressed by the standard of photography I see here at all. On an average day, an average photographer can make this many photographs of this standard, so no prizes from me unfortunately

Direct link | Posted on Apr 29, 2015 at 17:02 UTC as 11th comment | 35 replies
On Samsung NX1 Review preview (1199 comments in total)

Neither Nikon nor Canon can match the two fast zoom lenses-not even close. The Canon 17-55 f2.8 is an old plastic thing, not very sharp, not weather-proof and certainly nowhere near a 24mm lens angle of view (has to be 15mm on smaller Canon sensor)

Nikon are a disgrace as they can field only two lenses, a good, but very slow 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 VR, and an old heavy extremely expensive 17-55mm f2.8 that is still nowhere near the 24mm angle of view (its 25.5mm), and which is unsharp if you credit DXO (used by Dpreview for tests) with any honesty at all.

So, as it is a better zoom the Samsung 16-50mm already puts Samsung ahead

I have a D7100, nice camera, but no useable fast sharp standard zoom available so it stays in its box!!

As Sony too has good fast standard zoom it is obvious that back in the day when they had no competition Canon and Nikon DELIBERATELY did this to force you to go full-frame.

And this Samsung has good 4K. Enuf said, it outclasses the rest. All obsolete now!

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 12:14 UTC as 25th comment | 1 reply
On Video: Capturing nature with the Canon EOS 7D Mark II article (199 comments in total)

Excellent video, thankyou.This and the Tamron I just watched are better then most TV and extremely helpful.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2015 at 19:58 UTC as 11th comment
On Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Lab Test Review preview (80 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: There should come a point at which there is no vignetting. A lens designed to cover the sensor properly would have no vignetting even wide open. As they charge now so much money, perhaps we could get them to design for full-frame. I do not care if it is bigger and heavier, but I do care if it always vignettes. DX review shows it still vignettes a third of a stop at f11. I have zooms that are better than this.

If you use primes quality is now the sole criterion> I want primes that ALWAYS cover the sensor> I want zooms that do as well- remember the 70-200f2.8G VRI?

Vignetting is caused deliberately to keep the lenses small. If they were physically bigger they would vignette less, as anyone who has used Hasselblad lenses on 35mm knows.

What bothers me is lack of choice. I do not mind a bit of vignetting I can get rid of by stopping down, but many modern, very expensive lenses (check out the Leitz 35mm f1.4) , zooms especially vignette two stops in the corners, and zooms do at 100, 200, 400mm which is really poor goingwhen you have to use them wide open to stop motion.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 15, 2015 at 19:43 UTC
Total: 530, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »