orpheo

orpheo

Lives in Switzerland Switzerland
Works as a IT-Support
Has a website at www.pixelregen.ch
Joined on Jun 12, 2005

Comments

Total: 30, showing: 21 – 30
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

JayFromSA: The problem Adobe has is that if CS3 was the latest version, it would still be the gold standard. CS5 is way better than CS3 and more than enough for a long time to come IMHO. You can do your basic RAW conversion in any software program you wish, save it as a tiff and still pull it into ACR to benefit from all the tools inside it. Or you could convert a copy of your RAW file to DNG and then pull it (as a RAW file) into ACR. Point is, you actually don't need another ACR upgrade to recognize your new camera's RAW format.

Hey Adobe, we won't need CS6 or perhaps even 7 for a while still. Especially not inside an iCloud or any other iBig Boss or iEye-In-The-Sky type of system. Sorry. Forget it. Not now, not ever. Especially not for the amount of money you charge!

With Bridge, LR3 and Photoshop CS5 I have a quite seamless workflow, that also saves time, when handling lots of pictures. For that (along with the quality of the software) I was willing to pay a substantial amount of money. But i'm not willing to do that (even in "only" upgrade-prices) every 2 years or so and for that kind of money, I would expect a longer "servicespan" in updates for new cameras RAW format.
But my nice little workflow will probably be obsolete until the Canon 5D MkIII comes out, which might be my next camera. By then I will probably be tired of the that upgrade-circus (incl. the whole bearing of Adobe) and start looking for workarounds like you sugest...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2012 at 01:06 UTC
In reply to:

iGirl: I have CS5 - and can't see where I will need an upgrade from CS5 any time soon. It should last at least 5+ years, maybe even more. Maybe by then a real competitor will arise.

Also if Adobe has plans on starting up their "subscription" scheme to steal from users on a running fee basis per month (like a utility bill) - once the usefulness of my PAID copy of CS5 runs out - I will forever delete and block all things Adobe, and never look back.

For those who are not aware - They are currently trying to scam users with this never ending billing scheme on the new web design product called "Muse".

Yes, Photoshop CS5 would last me 5+ years as well. But Adobe has also developed the bad habbit of stopping updates for RAW-files of new cameras soon after the release of their newest CS-version. I can see it coming: updates to CS5 will already have been stopped until Canon 5D mk III or Nikon D800 come out. The idea, that my next camera would still be supported, was one of my main reasons to upgrade to CS5...

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2012 at 00:34 UTC
On Introduction to Documentary-style People Photography article (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gioradan: Many thanks for your positive comments.
I do not carry a model release form with me.
One of the obvious reasons is that I do not want people to know that they have been photographed. One other aspect is that most people I photograph do not read or write english and that will make the model release legally worthless.
The two key issues for publishing this type of images are in the titling and use of the image.
You can use images like this for news type publishing in digital, printed and broadcasted media. But anything promoting a commercial entity under ( say) the dart throwing monk is a no go zone. When it comes to titles, make sure that the title does not pass judgement that you cannot backup. Something like “The boatman preferred being photographed with brand X...” can put you in the deep end of a law suit, and will be a sure way to be dumped by that brand from any future engagements.
I hope it helps
Giora

Which leads to your question. It is not an "official delict", so the persons in the pictures have to acclaim their rights or nothing at all will happen.

This is where my ethical question comes in. The people in your pictures will probably never realise that a picture of them was published somewhere. And possibly someone earned money and/or fame with it. Does that make it okay, to do it abroad, when at home it would be forbidden?

National Geographic Magazin and similar publications are available here too. In the context of a doc you could say there is a public interest to be informed about the people in other places, what they look like, what they wear etc.
But I'm not sure what would happen, if one of the portraied persons would want their picture removed.

Hope this helps to clarify. I expected the laws in the US to be at least as strict but maybe not in New Zealand(?)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2011 at 13:42 UTC
On Introduction to Documentary-style People Photography article (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gioradan: Many thanks for your positive comments.
I do not carry a model release form with me.
One of the obvious reasons is that I do not want people to know that they have been photographed. One other aspect is that most people I photograph do not read or write english and that will make the model release legally worthless.
The two key issues for publishing this type of images are in the titling and use of the image.
You can use images like this for news type publishing in digital, printed and broadcasted media. But anything promoting a commercial entity under ( say) the dart throwing monk is a no go zone. When it comes to titles, make sure that the title does not pass judgement that you cannot backup. Something like “The boatman preferred being photographed with brand X...” can put you in the deep end of a law suit, and will be a sure way to be dumped by that brand from any future engagements.
I hope it helps
Giora

I thought, this might be misleading, but my post was too long already ;)
Of course there are public events, where the main subject is the people participating. Like the public halloween-party-example in another comment, riots, city-marathon and so on. There the public interest to be informed is weighed higher than the personal rights of the participants, as long as you're not misrepresenting them (so that is actually an exception for journalsm.).
There will often be recognizable "innocent bystanders" on this sort of picture, or it is of interest to document, that there are visitors and that they are exited etc. But this doesn't give you the right to publish for example a series of visitors portraits, where the event itself is not even visible anymore.
Obviously there are a lot of grey zones, where no swiss court has ever defined the exact borders. As far as I know, there is no distinction between professional photographers, doing their work and amateurs.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2011 at 13:11 UTC
On Introduction to Documentary-style People Photography article (66 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gioradan: Many thanks for your positive comments.
I do not carry a model release form with me.
One of the obvious reasons is that I do not want people to know that they have been photographed. One other aspect is that most people I photograph do not read or write english and that will make the model release legally worthless.
The two key issues for publishing this type of images are in the titling and use of the image.
You can use images like this for news type publishing in digital, printed and broadcasted media. But anything promoting a commercial entity under ( say) the dart throwing monk is a no go zone. When it comes to titles, make sure that the title does not pass judgement that you cannot backup. Something like “The boatman preferred being photographed with brand X...” can put you in the deep end of a law suit, and will be a sure way to be dumped by that brand from any future engagements.
I hope it helps
Giora

I'm a little surprised that the laws in the US should be less strict than here in Switzerland...
If I interpreted everything right, in Switzerland there is no general exception for journalistic or artistic use, it still depends on what the picture is about. If the person is the main subject of the picture, as in the posted examples, it would be a no-go to publish them anywhere (no, not even in your online-gallery or a forum) without their consent. The only exception is to "people of common interest" (celebrities). And in the documentary of a PUBLIC event you only get away with "recognizable" persons, if they are not the main subject.

Sad enough for the genre of street photography, I think. But beeing it like it is, ignoring this while visiting other countries where "people don't read or write english" smells just a little like exploitation. Is it ok, just because the particular country might not have the same protection of personal rights yet? Hm...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2011 at 05:17 UTC
On DSC_0023-copy in the Candid or smi-candid (female forms) challenge (9 comments in total)

Same here. I got confused between my understanding of the challenge and many (nice) pictures that are more portrait-like. So I did not vote at all in this challenge.
Additionally to what you say about voters, I wonder why hosts don't disqualify more often. Even if it is a very good or apealing picture (like the winner here).

Direct link | Posted on Sep 28, 2010 at 13:22 UTC as 4th comment
On IMG_7944 in the Paparazzi Wannabee (Full Colour Only + No minors/ animals) challenge (3 comments in total)

Ooops. Your right. Sorry!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2010 at 23:33 UTC as 1st comment

Hi Ken,

Please don't be offended. It is really a nice picture and obviously not only I thought that. But I'm still trying to grasp how challenges work here, rules, voting and all.

Greetings
orpheo

Direct link | Posted on Sep 20, 2010 at 23:20 UTC as 1st comment

I like the picture, but it is posed. There is no paparazzo IN the picture.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2010 at 11:17 UTC as 3rd comment
On IMG_7944 in the Paparazzi Wannabee (Full Colour Only + No minors/ animals) challenge (3 comments in total)

...said: no mirrors.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2010 at 11:13 UTC as 3rd comment
Total: 30, showing: 21 – 30
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »