larrytusaz

larrytusaz

Lives in United States Tucson, AZ, United States
Works as a Database Design
Joined on Aug 20, 2005
About me:

Equipment:
Nikon D40 (6-2007), D200 (3-2009)
Nikon 18-55mm DX AF-S
Nikon 70-210 f/4-5.6 AF non D
Soligor pre-AI 135mm f/2.8 (11-2007)
52mm & 62mm Circular Polarizers (2004 & 2005)
72mm Polarizer (5-2008)
ML-L3 remote (11-2007)
WT(re)B: D40x

Comments

Total: 380, showing: 241 – 260
« First‹ Previous1112131415Next ›Last »
On Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? article (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dan Wagner: I'm a practitioner of real photography. At least that's what I call it. I eschew gimmicks, fancy lighting, Kubota, Fong, and of course Instagramization. I shoot with film and process it myself. I want to be more involved. I want craft. Otherwise where's the heart? As an analogy, cooking with a microwave is one way to prepare a meal, but it's not as satisfying for the cook or the eater as traditional methods. The sense of self-accomplishment is vastly weaker. When it comes to photography or cooking, I put my photos where my mouth is. My work is at danwagnerphotography.com and it's real. This IS photography.

See, I agree with Dan Wagner completely. To add my bits, when jdrx2012 asked about "laying judgment on them," gee whiz, what good is anything in life without SOME sense of standards? I mean, if I took a photo of a box of cow manure and called that art, are you "laying judgment" on me to suggest that such a photo maybe isn't one particularly of any artistic merit?

I get that art typically isn't as linear as 2+5=7 (although sometimes I wish it were in some ways) that art is open to a lot of interpretation & so forth--after all, Dan Wagner stated he didn't care for Ansel Adams' work, while of course he's very famous & highly regarded for his landscapes. I love John Mellencamp's work & he is in the Hall of Fame after all, but others don't like him--no problem.

Even so--come on, since when did it become the idea that we are not allowed to judge ANYTHING at ALL? No thanks to that notion.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 16:51 UTC
On Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? article (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

jwil6902: 35mm killed 120. Digital killed 35. Mobile will kill the P&S/basic DSLR. Get used to it, it's called progress and we are powerless against it's relentless march into the future.

If mobile phone photography is progress, especially vs a DSLR, then I'm Mickey Mouse.

See, the problem here is, people in art sometimes don't understand the need for standards & respect of boundaries. They matter you know--if not in art, then in many other things. To wit: your mis-usage of "it's." That mis-uage is a common one, but it's still wrong. (By contrast, the way I used it's there was correct.) You can argue all day long that you don't think the standard is right, but the standard remains. "The dogged wagged it's tail"--WRONG. "The dog wagged its tail"--CORRECT. That is FACT, it's not up for what you THINK, it is FACT.

I say this because, well, I think sometimes many of you take the "it's open to interpretation" thing too far. I mean, why don't I just take a photo of some cow manure with a empty bottle of beer laying around it, throw it way out of focus, and call that "art?" Gee freaking whiz.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 16:44 UTC
On Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? article (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: Thank you Kate Bevan. Are you available? (Ha ha.)

I would go further & say "iPhone Photography" etc is most definitely debasing photography. I'm sorry, but if you have access to a Nikon D5100 or D3s etc, what in the WORLD are you doing practicing "photography" with a stinking camera phone? You expect me to take you seriously as a photographer when you're lazy enough to use a camera phone rather than a REAL camera? At least use something like a m4/3rds, something like an Olympus E-PM1 is VERY small but absolutely embarrasses any camera phone photo, & it's hardly the most up-to-date model (like a Sony NEX-C3 etc--imagine what THEY will do).

If you're just taking "fun snaps" of everyday goofy stuff without the pressure to get something "artistic" (heck we all do that), sure, by all means. But using a camera phone ON PURPOSE as a "photography" tool? Puh-leaze. If I were a chef, I sure as heck wouldn't claim Chef-Boy-Ardee was "real food." It's mediocrity in a can.

Obviously owning fancy cookware doesn't MAKE you a chef, but I would imagine someone who IS a real chef or aspires to be realizes that plopping a can of Chef-Boyardee in a pot or shoving Stouffer's lasagna in the microwave is NOT what a chef would aspire to. The same people who don't respect SOME sort of boundaries in this realm are the same nut+jobs who would probably argue that 2 goats living together on a farm is a legally-binding marriage.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 15:11 UTC
On Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? article (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

Maurizio Mancioli: If photography is viewed as art, the way you "get there" doesn't matter. It is the power of the work itself that will. Its capacity of "taking you places", of instigating you.
With the growing amount of available tools (Photoshop, Instagram), so grew possible "shortcuts" to reach interesting results is there. But in the wrong hands, all these possibilities will only be a tiring excess of effects.

The thing is, though, to me, once you reach a certain level of ability, why would you dumb it down by going the iPhone Photography route? That's just silly. Good grief, at least get a micro 4/3rds if size & portability is an issue. I don't see chefs using a microwave for heating up Chef-Boy-Ardee & claiming that as "real food." If that is "snobbery" as other people have said, so be it--maybe some snobbery is GOOD.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 14:46 UTC
On Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? article (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

rkny: I think Instagram is doing the exact opposite of debasing photography. I think it's championing it. It's widening the appeal of photography and getting people who otherwise may have never discovered photography to think about it as an expressive medium, and to get satisfying results without $5000 worth of equipment and hours spent in a darkroom or fiddling in Photoshop.

Instagram is also getting people to take pictures more creatively, For any given photo, there is often one Instagram filter that suits it best. Which filter looks best is a critical visual decision that the average person has never been faced with, and when they choose the right filter, they get satisfying results. This is because they're unconsciously mimicking the look of photos they've seen before. It's like casually humming along to a tune and discovering you can actually sing pretty well. Instagram can be rewarding, and that reward can fuel the pursuit of better photographic technique. Win win.

Instagram "champions" photography about as much as Chef-Boy-Ardee champions fine cuisine cooking.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 14:24 UTC
On Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? article (291 comments in total)
In reply to:

magnaman61: I know dozens of professional photographers using Instagram almost daily to post images on social media sites. What does that say?

It says they're lazy & I wouldn't hire them to photography my daughter's wedding based solely on the principal of it.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 14:22 UTC
On Is Instagram 'debasing photography'? article (291 comments in total)

Thank you Kate Bevan. Are you available? (Ha ha.)

I would go further & say "iPhone Photography" etc is most definitely debasing photography. I'm sorry, but if you have access to a Nikon D5100 or D3s etc, what in the WORLD are you doing practicing "photography" with a stinking camera phone? You expect me to take you seriously as a photographer when you're lazy enough to use a camera phone rather than a REAL camera? At least use something like a m4/3rds, something like an Olympus E-PM1 is VERY small but absolutely embarrasses any camera phone photo, & it's hardly the most up-to-date model (like a Sony NEX-C3 etc--imagine what THEY will do).

If you're just taking "fun snaps" of everyday goofy stuff without the pressure to get something "artistic" (heck we all do that), sure, by all means. But using a camera phone ON PURPOSE as a "photography" tool? Puh-leaze. If I were a chef, I sure as heck wouldn't claim Chef-Boy-Ardee was "real food." It's mediocrity in a can.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 14:09 UTC as 67th comment | 2 replies
On Scientists demonstrate 'paint-on' batteries article (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sean Nelson: I'm quite opposed to anything that would limit the life of the products I buy, and this is why I never buy equipment without user-replaceable batteries.

IMHO, the biggest battery advance doesn't require any breakthrough at all - just get all the electronics manufacturers to agree on a few standard form factors for Li-Ion batteries so I don't have to buy new batteries and chargers for every last freaking thing I own. Being able to share batteries would go a long, long way toward reducing battery purchases and the attendant disposal issues down the line.

But of course it would rob the manufacturers of one of their most lucrative sources of income, so I don't suppose I'll live to see it...

(Sean Nelson) Here here. When I argued against the move to SD cards years ago (noting that certain cameras were the same size even after going from CF to SD), while others thought it was a good idea based on the usage of SD cards by many devices, my reply was "well why isn't there the same push for a more universal sort of battery & charger? There are WAY more types of those than memory cards & you can't buy replacement batteries in the store as easily as you can memory cards."

Heck, I've noticed that in the realm of phones with respect to battery charging & connectivity, the micro-USB form factor is becoming universal. Even cheap Tracphone flip-phones use it. It's great. My SanDisk Sansa Clip uses a standard 5-pin USB mini for charging & file uploading (yes I know it also has a sealed-up battery, shoot me, ha ha). The more universal such things can be, the better.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 1, 2012 at 01:59 UTC
On Scientists demonstrate 'paint-on' batteries article (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sonnik: Bottom line: If it falls short in performance AND causes us to throw away the product after the battery stops holding a chatge anymore, then it's a dud of an idea!

Exactly. Longer battery life definitely is a good thing & while I realize I'm not an electrical engineer, I fail to see how they come up with the notion that you MUST have an integrated design to have good battery life. From what I'm seeing the various camera batteries are lasting longer than ever even with larger displays & other demands being placed on them.

Look at how long the EN-EL15 on the D7000 lasts vs the similar-sized EN-EL3e on the D90. The EN-EL14 with my D5100 lasts longer than the EN-EL9 did on my D5000 yet is a bit smaller--and removeable. I'm sorry but I'm calling bull on the "you MUST have an integrated battery for decent life & size" notion.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2012 at 15:16 UTC
On Scientists demonstrate 'paint-on' batteries article (108 comments in total)

I'm sorry I don't buy it. You will *never* convince me that you MUST have non-replaceable batteries for a product to have decent battery life & structural integrity. Can you imagine cars being done this way?

It is unethical business-wise to design products to where customers can't replace the battery themselves. I agree with the one person, this is just blatant "sheep" following of everything Apple does only because they're Apple. God I'm so sick of it. What next, are we all going to start wearing turtleneck sweaters too?

If you the manufacturer can't figure out how to give your product structural integrity with replaceable batteries--tough. Figure it out.

In fact the US should do like I'm told Europe does, if I'm correct by law they REQUIRE user-replaceable batteries. It should be that way here too.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2012 at 12:58 UTC as 49th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

larrytusaz: Okay, not to grumble too much, but can someone PLEASE tell me what is wrong with "minors' being visible in the picture? Please don't propagate the silly myth that taking photos of kids at the park equals being a pervert.

(ConanFuji) Well when you put it that way, I can understand it. Most definitely. What you are describing is what you could call the "Full House Syndrome" (as in the TV show from the 80s-90s). My own wife just went through a phase of wanting to watch Full House DVDs every night for HOURS upon returning home from work, and it drove me crazy--anything a kid did was AUTOMATICALLY superior & of a higher priority than the adults' lives. Oh my goodness, I could hardly stand it.

If THAT is what you are trying to prevent, I couldn't agree with you more, and my apologies for not getting it the 1st time.

What I was talking about is the common scenario you see nowadays whereby if you are a male in the park with a camera snapping photos, people think you're a pervert. (Have they never heard of Henri Cartier-Bresson?) In one case (tinyurl.com/65qguv) a father was called that even when he was photographing his OWN kids. But that's another topic for another day.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2012 at 18:02 UTC

Okay, not to grumble too much, but can someone PLEASE tell me what is wrong with "minors' being visible in the picture? Please don't propagate the silly myth that taking photos of kids at the park equals being a pervert.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2012 at 18:30 UTC as 3rd comment | 3 replies

So much for how locking out 3rd party batteries from their cameras prevents overheating/explosions and the like.

To wit: when oh when are the 3rd party manufacturers going to successfully clone the EN-EL15? It's been almost 2 years.

LRH
Motorola Triumph

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2012 at 01:05 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

Jogger: but, does it do 1080p?

HA HA HA HA, thank you so VERY much for that. So, to the videographers who want to corrupt our stills-only cameras with your video concerns, I give you the Archie Bunker raspberry.

If I could afford it, I'd buy it just based on that principle alone, to "vote with my dollars" how much I so approve of this.

(But I've got to admit, it's a whole different league of camera, but I've got to admit, the Nikon D5100 I own, it is giving me KILLER photographs. As long as you can ignore that red-dot movie button, easy to do if you don't use live-view--and I usually don't--it continues to amaze me how great it does, especially at high ISOs.)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2012 at 15:33 UTC
In reply to:

PaulSnowcat: An now we'll have a new class of "professional" photographers.

- Hi, who are you?
- I am a photographer!
-What kind of photographer?
-A professional! I am using losless pics from my Iphone!

Ugh :/

Total agreement. Enough of these "it doesn't matter what your tool is." Maybe I should take my kitchen butter knives & call them my "tools" & call myself a home improvement professional. C'mon now--even if "artistic" photos have been taken with a phone, if you're even half-serious about photography, why would you dumb yourself down using an inferior tool like that?

Smartphone photos are fine for FUN, heck, I've used mine for times when I was trying to match up a hardware supply store part for an appliance I needed help with, I took a picture of the relevant area of my appliance so the store clerk could look at it & say "oh yes, you need so & so for that"--for such things--sure.

But for REAL photos of QUALITY, only a REAL camera will do. Heck you can pick up an Olympus E-PL1 kit for barely $200 anymore, it's not even the latest-greatest technology by any means, yet even it will still easily smoke camera phone photos to bits.

And it's small enough to have with you too, by the way.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 22, 2012 at 13:32 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: I don't question why Canon is doing 4K video -- all video is headed there.

I'm less clear on why DPReview is giving so much coverage to Canon video when it has a long tradition of barely mentioning video from other companies. Could it be because Canon isn't doing much with stills that's interesting...?

If I'm overposting, forgive me. To me, I think painting vs photography is a good analogy. I don't doubt there is much overlap there, yet at the same I have heard of & even met persons who are into painting who are not into photography one bit. If you go back in time enough, it was once the case photographs didn't exist at all, paintings were IT. Can you imagine how puzzled artists of the day were once photography came to be, & especially when the Kodak Brownie made everyone a "photographer?"

Yet, painting survived, and what's more, people who don't disparage photography but just aren't interested in it because painting is what they do, we're totally okay with that. There are sites you can go to that deal with painting ONLY. No one is calling those sites or their fans "luddites." They like what they like, no disrespect to anyone else's interests. It's GOOD that you can be into painting & have no interest in photography & not be called a "luddite."

The same thing should apply here.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

ProfHankD: I don't question why Canon is doing 4K video -- all video is headed there.

I'm less clear on why DPReview is giving so much coverage to Canon video when it has a long tradition of barely mentioning video from other companies. Could it be because Canon isn't doing much with stills that's interesting...?

I REALLY don't want to make anyone in authority mad, but I totally share the concerns of those who are scratching their head at all the video stories appearing on here lately. Even respected Nikon expert Thom Hogan has expressed concerns at photography progress being snowed under by an avalanche of video interest. The same applies with this site covering video every 2.5 nanoseconds.

It is one thing to acknowledge that SLRs can record video, it's another for every other story here to be video-video-video. I mean every-time I turn around, there is yet another video story. It's almost as if this has turned into a site mostly about video, with a little photography sprinkled here & there for old time's sake, but otherwise--this is a site fully dedicated to almost NOTHING but videography now.

After all of these years, it's really disappointing to see this. Photography is still very relevant. There are plenty of people here who are interested in STILLS even if they ARE okay with SLR video.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 19:03 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I would like it if the red-dot movie button could be re-mapped. I don't use movie-mode on SLRs & it would be handy to be able to remap it to ISO or white balance etc, just as you can with the Fn button.

I'm not going on a "SLRs shouldn't have movie modes" rant, it's been almost 4 years & whether I like it or not it's here, and I realize the target market absolutely wants it. Still, the Fn button can be re-mapped, on a model like this that has so few "hot buttons" it would be nice if the red-dot could be as well. (Obviously it would be mapped to movie-mode out-of-box by default.) Other "semi-serious" models like the Olympus E-PL1 I also own allow for this, as do the newer versions of m4/3rds.

And yes--why not Wi-Fi built-in? (One person said "different standards in different countries"--but then how did Samsung figure it out?) Why not have the Wi-Fi unit, or another one like it, that works with not-so-ancient models like the D5100 and D7000 etc?

Anyone around here have a can of Raid? There's a certain yucky cockroach scurrying about that needs to be sprayed.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 22:07 UTC
On Blackmagic Designs announces Blackmagic Cinema Camera article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

larrytusaz: A number of observations:

(1) If I read the specifications correctly, this camera, which looks more like a stills camera than a video, nonetheless is video-only. I have no problem with that. Trouble is, good luck finding a stills-only d-SLR. That seems like a double standard to me.

(2) That aside, even if photography & video are "converging" (and I sure hope they aren't, and if they are, I will practically make it my very mission in life to make it not be so if I at all can), what is with dpreview's fixation on video gear of all a sudden? A little here & there is okay, but my goodness--it's like I woke up & Chick-Fil-A suddenly not only sold hamburgers, but forgot about chicken completely.

(3) Lastly--why a sealed-up battery? Something in me worried sooner or later cameras would jump on the "don't let users replace their own batteries" bandwagon. Why are all the electronics manufacturers so insistent on doing this?

I can argue what's in my heart all I care to. Further, one does not need to PROVE video is not photography--actual life experiences you've had, including mingling with others, are all I need to substantiate it. Others, maybe not, but me--I feel it in my heart that the 2 should not "cross-contaminate" each other, & that's it. Someone can argue all day, even with facts backing them up, to PROVE that, technically & even practically speaking, they're the same. My mind is made up, & that's it.

I have no problem with the existence of this product, although the non-replaceable battery design is stupid. I don't even object to dpreview making occasional mention of such products every now & then, even if I don't like so much "cross contamination." I just, like others who have posted here, don't care for their preoccupation with video lately. They seem to be going beyond just acknowledging it or touching on it here & there, and just all-out cramming it down our throats.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 17:52 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I would like it if the red-dot movie button could be re-mapped. I don't use movie-mode on SLRs & it would be handy to be able to remap it to ISO or white balance etc, just as you can with the Fn button.

I'm not going on a "SLRs shouldn't have movie modes" rant, it's been almost 4 years & whether I like it or not it's here, and I realize the target market absolutely wants it. Still, the Fn button can be re-mapped, on a model like this that has so few "hot buttons" it would be nice if the red-dot could be as well. (Obviously it would be mapped to movie-mode out-of-box by default.) Other "semi-serious" models like the Olympus E-PL1 I also own allow for this, as do the newer versions of m4/3rds.

And yes--why not Wi-Fi built-in? (One person said "different standards in different countries"--but then how did Samsung figure it out?) Why not have the Wi-Fi unit, or another one like it, that works with not-so-ancient models like the D5100 and D7000 etc?

(john--) I understand what you're getting at. I would say, though, the same thing would happen in many other situations, and with MUCH worse consequences. What if they put it in M (manual) mode by accident, very easy to do with the mode dial right therel. The custom functions of the re-map nature tend to be hidden by default as "advanced" & thus wouldn't likely be goofed up by accident.

(Christian) No, I have NOT changed my mind nor "proven you right." I'm merely trying to be civil. While I don't care for photo-video convergence, especially on DSLRs, I can TOLERATE it if it can be made to stay out of my way on the tools I use. The suggestion I made would do just that, & at very minimal expense--AND the video crowd would not have anything taken from them at all. Sounds to me like I'm trying to be reasonable. Given that models like the Olympus m4/3rds let you do that, and the Nikon D800-D4 etc as well as I understand it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2012 at 17:40 UTC
Total: 380, showing: 241 – 260
« First‹ Previous1112131415Next ›Last »