Jeff Peterman

Jeff Peterman

Lives in United States USA, MD, United States
Joined on Jul 4, 2002

Comments

Total: 58, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

photoramone: Do you suppose that it's LEGAL, or Friendly, even?? I once took a picture of four ladies in a shopping mall, all were dressed in middle-eastern garb (Burkas) and you could see nothing more than their EYES. I was incredulous that they were very angry that I had taken this picture of them, out in public... My response to their complaint was, I'm very sorry, I won't do it again... But later, it occured to me that , How could they Prove, in a court of law, that it was the four of THEM??? BUT, I believe that, with-out getting their PERMISSION, I shouldn't have "done that Drive-bye" thing.. I'm just sayin!!!

A shopping mall is not a public place - it has owners who can set rules about photography. Many malls have signs saying "photography not permitted without prior approval."

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2013 at 22:57 UTC

The should have chose a less hazy day. OK, not so easy in London, but they do happen.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 22, 2013 at 18:38 UTC as 23rd comment
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: I hope the new monitors have the 16:10 aspect ratio of their existing 24" photo monitor and not the more common 16:9 aspect ratio. The squarer format is much better for photo work.

If the monitor is big enough, then vertical resolution can compensate for the 16:9 aspect ratio.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2013 at 21:20 UTC

I hope the new monitors have the 16:10 aspect ratio of their existing 24" photo monitor and not the more common 16:9 aspect ratio. The squarer format is much better for photo work.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2013 at 20:33 UTC as 40th comment | 8 replies

PerL,

But the issues is how much did using Kodachrome 64 impact the final result compared to if the same photographer had used a modern high-end digital under the same conditions for the same shot. Are they any better because they were taken with Kodachrome 64 than they would have been taken with digital? If the answer is "no" because of the "noise" (grain) and lack of contrast/saturation control, the this is just an exercise in nostalgia.
You appear to be implying that these shots ARE technically better. If so, in what way?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2013 at 22:28 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies

Amazing how our expectations have changed. To me, these are grainy and over saturated compared to modern digital images!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 10, 2013 at 22:07 UTC as 22nd comment | 5 replies
On Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM preview article (152 comments in total)

When paired with a 10-22 on a crop body, it could make a good, two-lens, combination. If the macro works well, that would be a definite advantage to this combination over the 10-22 and the 17-55. (A little more lens swapping at the wide end, but longer reach and no need to carry another lens for macro.)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2012 at 15:23 UTC as 46th comment | 2 replies
On Accessory Review: Manfrotto Solo VI DSLR Holster Bag article (96 comments in total)

OK, I'm confused. At the start of the review, it says that the bag can take a 5D with 100-400mm lens attached, but it was tested with the MUCH shorter/smaller 24-105mm lens. That, and the apparent outer dimensions of the bag make me seriously question whether it could take a 100-400mm bag.

A review should at least verify the manufacturer's claims, and in that case I think it would have failed.

In any case, I personally don't like holster-style bags - their slimmer fit makes then much less functional than regular bags only a little wider, and the latter allow room for a small flash, a small second lens, or other items. My personal favorite for that is the Tamrac Velocity 7 sling bag - which is pretty small, yet can hold a 7D, 10-22 lens, 17-55 f2.8 lens, and a 55-255 lens - with pockets for spare battery, memory cards, and other small items.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 30, 2012 at 14:56 UTC as 13th comment
On Review: Nokia 808 PureView article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

audijam: i think samsung will follow.....

It all depends on how much is protected by patents that Nokia owns. I think Samsung may be cautious after their problems with Apple.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2012 at 15:56 UTC
On Review: Nokia 808 PureView article (354 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dougbm_2: All Sony needs to do is put phone capability into the RX100 and voila a truly knockout Camera phone (rather than this Phone camera). God knows why Nokia spent so long developing this only to hamper it with an outdated operating system.

"God knows why Nokia spent so long developing this only to hamper it with an outdated operating system."
You've answered your own question. They started developing this a long time ago, when Symbian was their only option. If all the software/firmware was written to use Symbian, switching to another operating system won't be quick and simple - in fact, they might have started the switch months ago, but decided to release this phone because it worked and demonstrates the technology well.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2012 at 13:53 UTC

Fascinating article. I think that in every case, the photographers acted reasonably. In most cases where they didn't intervene, trying to do so probably would have ended up with failure and their own serious injury - and no photograph. Instead, there photograph could tell the story and help others in the future.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 31, 2012 at 14:00 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

Ceesprof: Again this brings up the question about the truth in photographic imaging. Maybe we better believe artists with their sketchbooks than a photographer. Merely the existence of this software makes the truth in photography questionable.

What "truth in photographic imaging?" People have been editing photos since the beginning, way before digital came along. And with this App, would it be "true" if you had someone install a rope off-camera to keep people out of the view when you took the shot? After all, this is something that wouldn't exist in reality because of the busy street, but was created by the photographer and his/her assistant.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2012 at 15:12 UTC
On Camera ZOOM FX article (22 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: I have a Samsung Galaxy SII Skyrocket that has decent camera, but a poor camera App. This one looked interesting until I read "lack off a touch-focus option or indeed any exposure and focus-lock features" as these are precisely the features I need that are not offered in the stock App. (The stock App does have exposure compensation but not exposure lock.)

Hmm, based on some other comments here I looked more closely and found the settings I want in the stock App. So, I'm happy!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 7, 2012 at 03:35 UTC
On Camera ZOOM FX article (22 comments in total)

I have a Samsung Galaxy SII Skyrocket that has decent camera, but a poor camera App. This one looked interesting until I read "lack off a touch-focus option or indeed any exposure and focus-lock features" as these are precisely the features I need that are not offered in the stock App. (The stock App does have exposure compensation but not exposure lock.)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 7, 2012 at 03:31 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On Just Posted: Lytro Light Field Camera review and video article (309 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: It is certainly a cool idea. BUT, I think the hurdles involved in producing something that can produce images of high quality/decent resolution are huge. Maybe we'll see something more than a toy in about 5 years. (Anyone remember all the hype about Foveon sensors that still haven't reached their "potential" after ten years.)

I'm not saying that the Foveon technology doesn't work, just that it has limitations that keep it out of the main stream. I can see the Lytro unit becoming another niche device - assuming they can bump up the resolution.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2012 at 15:51 UTC
On Just Posted: Lytro Light Field Camera review and video article (309 comments in total)

It is certainly a cool idea. BUT, I think the hurdles involved in producing something that can produce images of high quality/decent resolution are huge. Maybe we'll see something more than a toy in about 5 years. (Anyone remember all the hype about Foveon sensors that still haven't reached their "potential" after ten years.)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2012 at 22:55 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Anyone know of anything similar for Android? So far, I'm not impressed with any of the camera Apps I've tried on my Galaxy SII.

"We’re working on Android" made your affiliation pretty clear to me!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 29, 2012 at 21:22 UTC
In reply to:

Jeff Peterman: Anyone know of anything similar for Android? So far, I'm not impressed with any of the camera Apps I've tried on my Galaxy SII.

I've seen a few Android Apps that have a disclaimer saying things like "if supported by the hardware." I suppose this is especially problematic with things like focusing and exposure that may be controlled at the firmware level and not accessible to an App.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 29, 2012 at 19:37 UTC

Anyone know of anything similar for Android? So far, I'm not impressed with any of the camera Apps I've tried on my Galaxy SII.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 29, 2012 at 17:56 UTC as 28th comment | 5 replies
On First impressions shooting with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 article (269 comments in total)

Seeing the photo above, it does look remarkably like my OM-2S with a Winder 2 attached. But I never looked like that model when I held it. Which is probably a good thing.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 23, 2012 at 20:38 UTC as 24th comment
Total: 58, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »