sh10453

sh10453

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Electrical & Computer Engineer
Joined on May 2, 2010
About me:

Been shooting since the days of Adam and Eve!

Comments

Total: 144, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jim Salvas: Well, I licensed some my photos through Getty on Flickr and that was a worse deal. They sell an image for $800, and I get just $160.

So that is 20%, and they keep 80%.
Even slavery would have been a better deal, I think!!!
Where do I apply for "Slave Photographer Wanted"?

Last spring, it took me 3 trips to a nature area, that is 60 miles away (360 miles total), and, of course, 3 full days (over a period of one week), to produce one single image that I was satisfied with as publication quality!

Do they think we aim at our backyards, from the comfort of our home, and shoot through the kitchen window to make the images we submit?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 15:48 UTC
In reply to:

Steve Bingham: What an insult! Another penny stock socking it to the photographer - with free advertising from dpreview! No thanks. In fact, this does not speak well for dpreview. 30%? My gallery gives me 50% on my prints and I get 100% when I market my images. Preparing and uploading images takes time! And they want me to first kick in $250? This really is a sucker deal.

I think you may have misunderstood the $250 (minimum) license fee issue.
My understanding is that there is no fee to pay as a photographer.
It's a fee paid by buyers of images.

If I'm wrong, I hope someone would correct me on this.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 15:33 UTC
On AP cuts ties with Pulitzer-winning photographer article (166 comments in total)

He would have been safe if he had sent both images, the original and the altered, and let the agency decide which one to publish.

News organizations, especially in the USA (TV networks, especially), are extremely biased, controlled by wealthy individuals or groups of them.
They twist and publish what is sensational, and what is in line with the political views of the owners of such networks. They heavily influence simple minds.

Their lack of ethics is one of the main reasons I don't watch our network news. I simply have no faith in their reporting or ethics.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 18:04 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply

Many of the images can't be described by words. Of course there is always room for "critique"; a professional critique, that is, for those who learned it in college.

Incredible captures of the harmony between the children and the animals, staged or not, regardless of post-processing, which, in some cases, may not have been suitable to everyone's taste. But it is her art, and her taste.
If you don't like her art, remember that not everyone likes YOURS either!

For me, many of these images really explain the meaning of "A picture is worth a thousand words"!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 26, 2014 at 16:24 UTC as 213th comment | 2 replies
On Reminder: Vote now for your product of 2013 article (64 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ralf B: The many times this poll gets re-used redefines "rumination".

Sorry Barney, I have to agree to Ralf, aside from the fact we are asked to compare apples with oranges.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 18, 2014 at 17:52 UTC
In reply to:

Paul the Sunman: I really don't see how or why anyone can compare such different categories. "Best" by which criteria?

Part 2
So this vote must be taken with a large cube (not just a grain) of salt.

I am not doubting that all these products are wonderful products, but the vote is simply not a valid one, in my humble opinion.

I don't own any of them, and I have no intention of giving up on, or switching what I have. So I can't vote on any.

Maybe, just maybe, if all the products were from the same category (all DSLR's, for example), then the vote might be more meaningful. But for now, it doesn't help me that the EM-1 has more votes than the Sigma lens!

Thank you, and thanks to DPR, keep up the good work, but hire a new statistician :) or stick to technical reviews!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2014 at 22:19 UTC
In reply to:

Paul the Sunman: I really don't see how or why anyone can compare such different categories. "Best" by which criteria?

Part 1
Jyrki,
Unfortunately, my own criteria, as I learned it (learnt?, if you are British) throughout school and engineering college, does not allow me to compare apples and oranges.
How can I compare a Pentax DSLR to a Sigma lens, then vote for the better product!! That's beyond me.

If you do some simple statistics on the votes, you will find the voting has been very much like the screwed-up USA's presidential (and other elected officials) vote. Almost always along the party lines.

I have done my own, first finding the ratios of the owners and comparing them to votes results, then some more, ..., and finally by summing up all Owners, Wants, and Hads.
Amazingly, the votes are very much along the "party" lines!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2014 at 22:18 UTC
In reply to:

Paul the Sunman: I really don't see how or why anyone can compare such different categories. "Best" by which criteria?

Paul,
It's by the criteria of comparing apples and oranges!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 14, 2014 at 21:53 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: I don't believe that the idea behind this lens is taking pictures with it.

Rather, it's an item for collectors; those who will hold onto it, in its brand new condition, for 20, 30, 40, or more years, then it goes to the big and famous auction house, where someone incredibly wealthy (from the 1% who get away with ...?) will bid on it by phone.
It probably will fetch 100 times its current price (by then)!
Who knows! These people are paying a $150 million for a painting (while millions are dying of hunger of course)!

I'm now curious!
How did you know "many of which deliver worse iq than this lens"?
I thought they said the production will be in May of next year, or did I miss something?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2013 at 03:27 UTC
On DSC_0405 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Allison looks awesome!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2013 at 16:39 UTC as 1st comment
On Want to remember something? Don't take a photo article (183 comments in total)

I didn't know a psychologist can be called a "scientist"!!!

I always learned that science deals with theory and facts; facts that are usually indisputable.
Not sure how much in psychology you could label as indisputable facts, if any.

For someone to take a few students on a field trip, then publish her findings to the world as "science" is perplexing, and amusing to me. That goes a long way to tell me about how psychology professors do their research!

I think she herself needs to see a psychologist, but a good one, if there are any!

Keep on shooting, guys and girls. Twenty years down the road, when you look at your pictures, you'll have a vivid memory of every one of them.

Just my humble opinion, and my 2-cents. You are of course entitled to your own opinion.
For me, this study (if you can call it a study) is ridiculous, and is dismissed.

Alison looks good in the picture :) ... if I recall her name correctly (again, dealing with memory)! :)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2013 at 14:17 UTC as 39th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

sh10453: I don't believe that the idea behind this lens is taking pictures with it.

Rather, it's an item for collectors; those who will hold onto it, in its brand new condition, for 20, 30, 40, or more years, then it goes to the big and famous auction house, where someone incredibly wealthy (from the 1% who get away with ...?) will bid on it by phone.
It probably will fetch 100 times its current price (by then)!
Who knows! These people are paying a $150 million for a painting (while millions are dying of hunger of course)!

Actually I am not a racist, and I have quite a number of Russian friends here.
Also, my sister-in-law is Russian.
My first serious camera was Russian, a 35mm Kiev 4, well ..., not exactly Russian, but Soviet era.

All I meant was that photographers who intend to actually use the lens (like those who make their living as photographers) would rather pay their $600 for a "tried and tested" Canon or Nikon lens that is designed to work with their cameras, with all of nowadays built-in automation.

Buyers of this lens will most likely be collectors or people with some extra cash who will buy it for the fun of it.

So the comment was not meant to be offensive to Russians at all.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2013 at 02:52 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: I don't believe that the idea behind this lens is taking pictures with it.

Rather, it's an item for collectors; those who will hold onto it, in its brand new condition, for 20, 30, 40, or more years, then it goes to the big and famous auction house, where someone incredibly wealthy (from the 1% who get away with ...?) will bid on it by phone.
It probably will fetch 100 times its current price (by then)!
Who knows! These people are paying a $150 million for a painting (while millions are dying of hunger of course)!

I don't think it will be mass produced. They are taking orders now for a May 2014 production. That says something about the amount being ordered.
Besides, how many REAL photographers are willing to pay $600 for an 85mm Russian lens?

We'll wait and see if it will be offered on eBay as a used item in a couple of years from now :)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2013 at 17:36 UTC

I don't believe that the idea behind this lens is taking pictures with it.

Rather, it's an item for collectors; those who will hold onto it, in its brand new condition, for 20, 30, 40, or more years, then it goes to the big and famous auction house, where someone incredibly wealthy (from the 1% who get away with ...?) will bid on it by phone.
It probably will fetch 100 times its current price (by then)!
Who knows! These people are paying a $150 million for a painting (while millions are dying of hunger of course)!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2013 at 17:27 UTC as 43rd comment | 11 replies
On DPReview Gear of the Year: Canon Rebel SL1 / EOS 100D article (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: Hey Shawn ... Was nice to see you and the team during the live event ...

Question for you?
What is the difference between the CMOS and the Hybrid CMOS technology?

Thanks.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Shawn.
Yes my question was meant "as applied to cameras", not from a pure physics point of view.
That part (physics) I do understand, where the Hybrid CMOS is CMOS-SET (Single Electron Transistor), and we are not going there, of course!

Interesting observation of the Panasonic system. I do notice the fast autofocus on my Panasonic, but I have not thought or noticed that it is faster than my Canon 5D, for example.
Of course I am not talking about a scientific experiment that can measure micro and nano seconds. Just my normal use observation.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2013 at 02:08 UTC
On DPReview Gear of the Year: Canon Rebel SL1 / EOS 100D article (272 comments in total)

Hey Shawn ... Was nice to see you and the team during the live event ...

Question for you?
What is the difference between the CMOS and the Hybrid CMOS technology?

Thanks.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2013 at 00:13 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
On DPReview Gear of the Year: Canon Rebel SL1 / EOS 100D article (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

cam2013: Canon is making people fool for using same sensor year after year after year and then gives name from t2i to future t36i.the only change is name and the only unchanged part is sesnor.same is true for power shot s95 to powershot s120.no change in sensor.nice way to fool people by selling same crap over and over with high price.

OK, we got the idea.
Which one do you work for? Nikon, Sony, Pentax, or Olympus?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 13, 2013 at 00:10 UTC
On Jumping Spider on Fall Foliage in the My best picture this week challenge (21 comments in total)

Ruth, I trust your word, but a spider is a spider for me :)

Congrat's Mick!
Who said you need an SLR to make a great photo!!!
I have the FZ200 (aside from my Canon full frame SLR), and I really like the camera.
Good job.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 03:54 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On TIME's top photos of the year article (149 comments in total)

Their title of "top 10 pictures of 2013" is flawed to begin with, IMHO.
What would make some sense is to have some categories, and then select the top 10 of each category.

I looked at a few, and it was hard to continue.
One thing I can't really understand is how #7 (swimmer) made it to the top 10.
A 10 years old child could have snapped that shot with a point-n-shoot camera.

Sometimes I wonder if the selection panel (or some members) know a particular photographer (friend, relative, etc.), and squeeze one of his/her picture in the so-called top 10.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 03:45 UTC as 52nd comment | 1 reply

A camera with 2013 components, and an 1836 performance. That's what the model name seems to mean to me!
3.8 sec startup time? Is it a diesel engine? 0.5 sec shutter lag? 10 bit ADC? 1 frame/sec? .... These are specs listed by Adorama.
What a shame!

Is it lack of engineering capability or a budget squeezed by clueless bean counters?
Do these people actually have a REAL marketing department that knows what is happening in the camera world?

There "WAS" a lot of potential for this camera if they put some teeth in it, and if they didn't design it as a copy of one of the most recognizable cameras of its class on the market.
Let an intern student do the styling for crying out loud!

Again, what a shame! A penny-wise, and a dollar-fool.

Now with such specs, why would Nikon bother to sue them? They should have left them sell it (if they could) and enjoy the jokes about it!

OK, I feel better now. I'd feel even better if fellow photographers blast that marketing department even more! :)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 02:47 UTC as 3rd comment
Total: 144, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »