PIX 2015
FocusPuller

FocusPuller

Lives in United States Los Angeles, CA, United States
Works as a Assistant cameraman
Joined on Sep 29, 2006

Comments

Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12
On Nikon releases ViewNX-i image browsing software article (103 comments in total)

Haven't installed yet, but it appears from comments that the best that can be said is that it is "blazing fast", which is good because it also seems like one would want to get to another app really quickly to do any real work. Sounds like another step backward for Nikon software, which I was very happy with until Nikon started "improving" things. Oh well.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2015 at 14:37 UTC as 10th comment

Not so sure about the drone application. At $40k with lens and at least 6 lbs this isnt going on the toys everyone is obsessed with. Big-budget films, maybe, but that would be a very small market.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:56 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

MayaTlab0: Thanks for talking a bit about Arri. I think this is a brand many camera manufacturers should give a long, careful look at. Arri was late to the digital party and yet right now in many areas they are considered the reference. It isn't because of the Alexa and Co specification sheet, which has nothing particularly extraordinary, but simply because of a better overall design that actually cares about users and helping them achieve their artistic intentions.

"...noone owns a camera but rents it."

Not completely true in the digital age. ARRI film cameras were always available for sale.When Panavision was a major player in film cameras, one could only rent them. Now, with ARRI and RED the predominant camera players, more filmmakers and DP's can and do own their cameras.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:45 UTC
On Apple reveals Photos beta for developers post (125 comments in total)

Aperture users should look into Capture One Pro 8. Very good and very Mac-friendly. I think Apple made a BIG mistake abandoning Aperture users and steering them to LR. Very fishy.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2015 at 15:58 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies

WOW.

Amazing. This is actually pretty much worthless. Artifacts all over the place. Guess they were using The Surface to render?

Thanks, Microsoft. Another winner.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 12, 2014 at 18:51 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

InTheMist: Downgrading my account.

Adobe, you suck for forcing this subscription mess on users.

So hateful, Henry, like so many internet commenters you debase honest discussions about ANYTHING. You think you're clever? Grow up.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 15:56 UTC
In reply to:

Gavin Abegglen: Really a $1000 , for a toy for under $200 you could get something that can do the same and even better . For a $1000 you could something , like a DJI Phantom or Wakera QX 350 PRO, which did even more including flight time .

have to agree with :By RichRMA (2 hours ago)
Annoying, Apple-like, 20-something hipsterism.

Hilarious, snark-like, 40-something superior-ism

Direct link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 14:25 UTC

Because what the world needs is YouTube videos of cats, babies, and people falling down in 4K? Thanks, Sony.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 22, 2014 at 17:31 UTC as 9th comment | 3 replies
On Make your own Google Street View virtual tours post (8 comments in total)

The GOOGLE march to world domination continues apace. Resistance is futile.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2013 at 16:23 UTC as 1st comment
On Studio comparison widget article (13 comments in total)

Of what use is comparing a Sony with a Zeiss lens to a Nikon with a Nikkor lens? Is that a test of lenses or cameras, or what?

Also, what are we looking at in RAW mode? Isn 't it another jpg? Is the same raw processor used in all cases?

Seems like all one can do is compare "this" lens with "this" camera to "that" lens with "that" camera.

What am I missing here?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 24, 2013 at 18:38 UTC as 2nd comment

Useless pretty much on a smartphone. Navigation in Safari dodgy. So far, no good.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2013 at 01:30 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

IcyVeins: Why are cine lenses measured in T stops and regular lenses in f stops?

To which I would add depth of field is still a function of the F/stop, and would be somewhat less than the T/stop.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2012 at 20:46 UTC
Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12