 |
digitall
Lives in
Perth, Western Australia, Australia
Joined on
Oct 24, 2003
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
RobG67: What saddens me the most is the way that so many British posters are using that execrable Americanism 'store', when the word they really want is 'shop'. Shops are were goods are bought, stores are were goods are kept ie 'stored'.
I agree to some extent but 'store' is widely used for large establisments in the UK. BHS: British Home Stores, Co-operative stores etc. Shop tends to be used for smaller businesses. We see the word 'retailer' used too, e.g., Britain's high street retail giant...
However, I too like to see the simplest and most appropriate expression used where possible. In this case I see little 'execrable' about the use of 'store'. I think that is a bit of a slur against Americans.
Excellent new features which maintain this as one of the best sites on the internet. Your innovation and hard work is highly appreciated!
digitall: What has technology, ubiquity and speed got to do with 'art'?
Art does change but change is a quantity, not quality. I do not know how you can hold that 'Art is all opinion' and that 'opinion's form'...
Opinion is a facet of language, spoken and written. Art, within the realms of painting, photography etc., is to do with expression and is about expression of emotion. Great art is an emotional experience and the technological aspect is a realtively trivial part of artistic achievement. However, I find your assertions interesting if unconvincing.
digitall: What has technology, ubiquity and speed got to do with 'art'?
Mine is a rhetorical question, but thank you for your considered reply. My point is that art is nothing to do with quantity, speed of transmission, etc. Art has been available to those with an artistic temperament for millennia.
What has technology, ubiquity and speed got to do with 'art'?
Have you any idea how bad this patch tool example is? You've ended up with two identical rippled areas in the water where the tripod legs were eliminated. What is needed here is a more 'content aware' photographer/editor!
ozgoldman: I'd like to see Nikon try that in Australia, as they would be fined zillions of $$$$. Restrictive trade practices are illegal here, and so they should be.
You are surely joking! Customers in Australia are at the mercy of all the big duopolies and monopolies, importers etc. We pay full 'recommended retail price' and are offered the most paltry discounts imaginable. No competition at all and we pay dearly for everything. Nikon black list 'grey' imports, won't even repair such cameras even if you pay. Try and get anything done about that.
Same with power tools. A compound mitre saw which retails for about $1,100 dollars here goes for about $400-500 in the USA.
dopravopat: I think that HDR is being overused and when applied, it is overcooked.
The sample posted in this article is a clear example when HDR was most likely not neccessary at all. I would not mind if there were strong shadows or white clouds or snow, ot the sun in the sky. I seriously doubt that the dynamic range of the scene was greater than 8 EV, a value that a properly exposed RAW can capture with all details. Also I do not like the colors, both greens and blues/cyans, they are "radioactive". The image should have been processed in LAB mode with a stronger global contrast on the lightness channel (local contrast is fine - details are clear). And overall with less saturation and especially the green channel should be a bit darker. That is my opinion, your taste may be different (or your monitor). Even when I am doing HDRs, I try to keep them as natural as possible. It is very simple to get an surrealistic, painterly look. But it is much harder to get a well balanced image with natural look.
I agree, it is a particularly poor example.
A truly stupid book with a review of equal quality. What is the point of this?
Your choice of subjects is excellent. So many interesting characters and a marvellous record of London life.
A useful tip, many thanks!
An excellent feature which I welcome and hope to use. The dpreview team must be congratulated for the innovation (without gimmickry) displayed in this website. No one should have cause for complaint when the feature is voluntary, useful and free, and without loss of copyright to the author. Well done!
patcam7122: dpreview, I'm interested as how you see this new firmware as an "improvement". What little detail there was originally has been smeared over with excessive noise reduction. I find it hard to believe Panasonic would feel viewing these photos would be an inducement to potential customers to buy this camera.
You've probably made the mistake I made at first. New firmware images are in the right hand column.