Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20
On article High-speed macro photographer shares his setup (96 comments in total)

Graystar: "Safety First"...Ha! That's a good one! ;)

The humor in what?? What does your comment have to do with the water drop that looks like a condom (hence, "safety first")?

You're thinking voltage and flash circuits...we're thinking something different.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2012 at 03:04 UTC
On article High-speed macro photographer shares his setup (96 comments in total)

Graystar: "Safety First"...Ha! That's a good one! ;)

"Mixing high voltage electronic devices and water is fun, lol.

Flashes use the same sort of circuitry as defibulators."

Ummm....right.

You don't get out much...do you...

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2012 at 18:31 UTC
On article High-speed macro photographer shares his setup (96 comments in total)

"Safety First"...Ha! That's a good one! ;)

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2012 at 19:39 UTC as 37th comment | 5 replies

This is why you should always set a custom white balance.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2012 at 22:54 UTC as 40th comment
On GalleryItem:2310876 (2 comments in total)

Some people really like the idea of "breaking the rules" or even ignoring rules because it means that they don't have to learn anything. It's just like those people who like electronic viewfinders because they have exposure simulation, and they no longer need to learn about exposure (yeah right.)

If you want to know why the placement works and why it's important then take a class and learn something.

Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 01:32 UTC as 1st comment
On article Breaking the Rules (142 comments in total)

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.

"We just also understand that there’s nothing magic about your illuminated square."

If that's what you think then you understand nothing.

"Put another way, do you really imagine this photo wouldn’t have won the awards it won if the composition had been half an inch to the right?"

That's very possible, as it changes the image. The impact of the content is still there, but the additional impact of good composition would be gone, which might be enough to tip the scale toward some other compelling photo. Remember, the reason I'm pointing it out in the first place is because the photographer said that there were no discernable compositional rules, which is clearly incorrect. The face is centered on the 5th column, the arm also runs along and crosses the 5th row and the intersection is at a Golden Mean intersection...so there is a strong, discernable compositional element to the photograph. Maybe you should try cropping it differently to see if it has the same impact.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2012 at 13:45 UTC
On article Breaking the Rules (142 comments in total)

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.

Since Matthew Miller and others seem unable to operate Photoshop properly, I've done it for you. Here's an edit showing the grid and 8/5 location. See it here...
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1994984005/photos/2310876/thomas-park-still-life-14-sushi-with-grid-showing-8-5-location

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2012 at 05:01 UTC
On article Breaking the Rules (142 comments in total)

Jo_To: interesting, helpful, good examples, and well written, thanks for that.
(to the 8/5 discussers, your 8/8 grid isn't squared (because the picture isn't squared either) so it may miss the 1.6 rule)

Regards & nice weekend

Doesn't matter. It's 5 of 8 parts of the width across, and 5 of 8 parts of the height down...exactly. The frame isn't square, so why should the divisions be?

Let's recognize the rules used, but let's not add rules that don't exist.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2012 at 08:05 UTC
On article Breaking the Rules (142 comments in total)

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.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2012 at 04:56 UTC as 71st comment | 7 replies
On article A Serious Rangefinder Compact Camera (137 comments in total)

Looks like a camera for old people who are unable to push a button and spin a dial at the same time.

Pass.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2012 at 02:21 UTC as 11th comment

Other forum software has eliminated the "thumbs down" rating and simply have a "Like" because people would abuse the thumbs down.

Link | Posted on Sep 28, 2012 at 01:22 UTC as 286th comment | 2 replies
On article iPhone 5 vs. iPhone 4S: Image comparison (94 comments in total)

They both look like crap. I don't understand...why even bother with these?? No lens reviews but you're comparing lousy camera phones. Just doesn't make sense.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2012 at 18:09 UTC as 20th comment | 3 replies

mpgxsvcd: I sure wish the spec below was emphasized more than the number of pixels, the focal length range, or the max extended ISO value.

I had to search on the Canon website to find out what focal ratio these cameras have. Now I see why they are hiding that information.

f/3.4 (W) - f/5.8 (T)

f/3.5 (W) - f/5.9 (T)

I found the same information by just looking at the images above.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2012 at 17:04 UTC
On article Roger Cicala investigates Canon's AF marketing claims (89 comments in total)

"As an aside, I am particularly skilled in finding them because usually if you touch them with your fingers the lens won’t focus anymore and the unit has to be replaced."

I LMAO on that one!

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2012 at 01:19 UTC as 42nd comment
On article Just Posted: Nikon D3200 in-depth Review (358 comments in total)

Fire the programmers!

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2012 at 23:23 UTC as 101st comment

He's a professional being paid to take promotional shots that are supposed to promote and appeal to the target audience. It was unprofessional to be unprepared, and unprofessional to take shots that didn't guarantee mass appeal. Business is business...he can artsy on his own time.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2012 at 00:56 UTC as 176th comment | 3 replies

Graystar: So DPReview is outsourcing reviews of compacts and cameras like the Pentax K-01 (outlier mirrorless, for lack of a better term) to concentrate on DSLRs, CSCs, and...cell phones??

"with the exception of the last 3 words, you're spot on."

Immediately before the words "Nokia Press Release:" there is a sentence that reads...

"We've had a brief chance to use the large-sensor smartphone and will be posting a report in the coming weeks, once we have a chance to shoot a samples gallery."

What does that mean?

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2012 at 01:57 UTC

Graystar: So DPReview is outsourcing reviews of compacts and cameras like the Pentax K-01 (outlier mirrorless, for lack of a better term) to concentrate on DSLRs, CSCs, and...cell phones??

What does THAT mean? So you're NOT going to post "a report in the coming weeks, once we have a chance to shoot a samples gallery"?

What a nonsensical comment.

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2012 at 01:02 UTC

So DPReview is outsourcing reviews of compacts and cameras like the Pentax K-01 (outlier mirrorless, for lack of a better term) to concentrate on DSLRs, CSCs, and...cell phones??

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2012 at 00:23 UTC as 94th comment | 7 replies

Big lenses on little bodies...I think the CSC concept whizzed right over Schneider's collective head.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2012 at 18:57 UTC as 70th comment | 6 replies
 Total: 69, showing: 1 – 20