Marc Opolo: I’m sorry to see Yahoo decided to do this. They plan to make money from my efforts without compensation. I had all my photos on a CC license. So I changed it to CC-NC, which is very simple: just point at You in the menu, select the Organize Page; drag all photos to the work space; click the Permissions item on the menu and select Change License. Done. As an amateur I find it a big honor that people want to use my work. Over the years people just simply and politely asked me if they could use or print my photos. Sure! That’s how 1 ended up in a book, 1 in an travel catalog and 1 has been downloaded for print by 6 people. Everybody still can use my work. If they ask! And not by changing the rules.
Why did you upload with an open CC license if you didn't want your photos used commercially? Makes no sense.
Rooru S: For E-mount users, I would suggest buying either A-mount version or whatver SLR version you want (EF, F, etc).
Why? Because of two things. First, The E-mount version is simply the SLR lens with a extending barrel to make up for the difference in register distance from flange to sensor on SLR lenses, you don't benefit of any size savings. And second, if you buy the SLR version and you use APS-C cameras, you can use Speed boosters, but you cannot do that with the E-mount version.
I'm quite sure the same applies for Micro 4/3 users.
samyang lenses are fully manual, so they have aperture rings.
Robert Soderlund: In the last balloon picture, doesn't it take few milliseconds for the sound to reach the flash at a meter or two? How did it fire in time?
I wouldn't know how quickly a balloon explodes, I've never done this, in the pic it's shreds have already contracted so my uneducated guess would be that if sound takes 1/340 to reach the trigger and flash takes 1ms from that to fire, then 1/340+1ms is how long it took for the balloon to reach that state ;)
well it says in the description that flash was triggered by sound and it's duration was 50 microseconds, isn't that 1/20000 s. What is there to speculate? Shrug.
Pat Cullinan Jr: What camera should I buy if I am to view images on a 72-in 4K flat panel, whilst enjoying enough surplus pixels to do some reasonable zooming? My burning desire is to reproduce the experience of a slide show (Kodachrome 64, Nikon F, FTn, F3, N2000, Nikkor lenses, Leica IIIg, Summitar 1.5, Leitz and Zeiss projectors).
I just can't have any more 13x19-in prints in my life.
4K is 8.3 megapixels, so in that regard basically any new camera has that and more.
dad_of_four: Haters gonna hate...I cannot tell whether it is Irony or Hypocrisy that a bunch of hobbyist photographers are idly sitting around saying how awful & decadent this thing is. Meanwhile we all possess camera gear that would feed a third-world family for multiple years. Most of us have cars that exceed the lifetime income of said families. As you read this reply, you are creating an even bigger carbon footprint for yourself.
Recycling is conducted very poorly in your area if you need to specifically drive somewhere to drop off your drink cans. Bringing up aluminium is a really poor example for you here, it's one of the materials that are very energy-economic and actually profitable to recycle.
Rawmeister: OMG. There really are too many mental defectives in the world.So, so Sad.
Please, why don't all you "more money than brains" types stay away from the photography world.
I'm rooting for a massive worldwide ebola pandemic as a much needed attitude adjuster.
hahaha =D Holy assumption... ('88' is a number connected by some people to nazism)
Randello wrote: > Apart from the fact that this is a great shot it breaches the rules! - "â€¢No Composites/ Don't cut out the background" Again the host fails to DQ a winning shot. Why bother entering a challenge if the rules are not enforced!>
Has the background been "cut out"? I don't know how this was made but it seems likely that the subject was placed on a white surface, and when brightly lit - this is pretty much what you get.