jkoch2

jkoch2

Joined on Jun 6, 2006

Comments

Total: 554, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

abi170845: And how would I go about having that place to myself as long as I want to get the shot? Only pros are allowed? Give me the place to my self for 5 days and nights, don't bother me and I'll get the shots. But?

Shouldn't the tribes claim a share of Mr. Lik's fortune? Or has he donated it to an Aboriginal foundation?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 15:52 UTC

Anonymous Ladies and Gents: Today our celebrated auction house has three masterworks on the block. The celebrated artist recently sold works for $10 million, which breaks a record set only days ago. The market is hot! Buy soon or be sorry.

The first two works are of a cat sleeping. Opening minimum bid: $100,000, which is only 1% of the proven potential value. A bargain! So phone your anonymous island connections to get the encrypted transfer orders ready.

The opening minimum bid for the third offering is $500k, since it is bound to be a winner. Subject and title: "Man Laughing."

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 15:49 UTC as 97th comment

I buy your photo for $4 million. Then you buy mine for $5 million. Then we swap our photos with "private investor" for $12 million, also on credit, to exhibit the photos in a gallery. Meanwhile, on the side, handsome properties exchange hands for lowball prices, and assessments get reduced. The IOUs cancel out. Net cash exchanged? Very little. Then auction day comes, and bidders get excited about the excellent investment returns and bid eight figure sums. Oh, and will the seller accept a small security deposit, with the balance covered (on paper) by title to a sand dune and (why need the IRS know?) an indemnity secured by an Curaçao fund with an account in Vaduz.

Real money eventually comes into the equation, but the smart money does not get stuck in the art itself. The photo may end up hanging in a museum, for all to see for free or a small fee, but the precedent does boost opportunities for royalties and sales.

Not a market for ordinary folks.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 22:09 UTC as 155th comment | 2 replies

To pretend not to be lured to aerial photography or video is no more credible than to claim not to wish to fly.

People don't get the things to spy on neighbors. They would be very unsuitable for that: too noisy, too difficult to navigate, and so on. As a public hazard or nuissance, they are unlikely to cause a fraction as much trouble as fireworks, dog bites, sports injuries, ladders, motorcycles, skateboards, or even bicycles. Ordinances already restrict any wreckless use or traffic hazard posed by almost any device.

A smart investor in such devices will probably take the trouble to get certification as an instructure, then make money marketing the goods and instructing realtors and other businesses.

The biggest "con" against drones is the risk that the $$$ investment plummet into the water, hang in the trees, or crash or lose power over some inaccessible ravine or enclosure. This will deter most from buying one, and also deter those that do from doing risky or stupid things.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 15:44 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

Paul Kersey Photography: can't wait for the warm weather so I can harass people with this. Seriously though, regulating usage of these devices is a must, or need I start shooting them outa the sky?

Careful, Cane, why trust your brother Abel (Priaptor) to be your keeper? He is jealous and vows violence against those he envies.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 15:24 UTC
On Behind the Shot: Dali's Dream article (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

fmian: I don't think I've ever seen a trapezoidal doorway in real life...

All doors appear trapezoidal, unless viewed from two specific symmetric points. Any door I build will be trapezoidal, and only appear rectangular from two skewed points. The door will have to be sanded or else stick.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 14:54 UTC
On Behind the Shot: Dali's Dream article (103 comments in total)

Airfare is about $1,850 from my location to Windhoek, Namibia, by way of JHN. Friends might expect me to return with tales and photos of the Kalahari, or maybe a saga of noble tribesmen, thirsty elephants and hand-fights with baboons. Shots of a derelict building, on the other hand, might make them suspicious. Couldn't you have shot that at the old XYZ plant or ghost house down the road? Or, better yet, the abandoned asylum? One plausible defense: no, I could not, since observers would report a suspect of arson, vandalism, trespass, or perhaps copper scavenging.

In defense of the talented Mr. Marom, his objectives can't be commercial. Were that the case, he might prosper authoring coffee table books with DeMille-esque scenes of his own legendary neighborhood.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 14:48 UTC as 8th comment

"Try not to have the overhead of owning stuff." Very good advice! Trouble is getting someone to lend you the camera bodies, lenses, lights, audio gear, and drones to learn enough to bluff the client. But a demo portfoliio based entirely on phone camera video, carefully taken and edited, might be the best and fairest measure of what the person really knows or can do.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 2, 2014 at 20:15 UTC as 3rd comment
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (370 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scales USA: I enjoyed seeing the video, I lived in Western Washington and got to see salmon running out my front window as a kid.

I also managed to do a lot of fishing in the ocean and around Puget sound over the years.

Its been a struggle to keep salmon runs going, they are just a tiny shadow of what they used to be.

Getting those shots in the heavily shaded areas along the creek is difficult.

Salmon running out the window? Was the door locked?

Maybe you knew Richard Brautigan. Angered a neighbor when he asked if her house was a trout stream. He could see fish swimming up the front stairs.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 19:34 UTC
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (370 comments in total)
In reply to:

nicolaiecostel: I see nothing pro about shooting some dying fish in the morning sun.

More to the point:

- what is the viewfinder lag like in low light. As far as I could see, you shot as the light kept getting better. Will I get motion sickness in real low light ?

- how is the AF in low light, in both single shot accuracy and tracking. You took some demo shots in bright light.

- what is the noise in low light ? You shot as the sun was getting high in the sky, so that's no real indicator for noise as far as I am concerned.

- what is the battery life ? Is the pro going to have to change batteries every 300 shots or it will last for thousands, like the professional cameras ?

- can we really talk about a pro contender when the camera doesn't even has a multi selector for the focus points, and you have to click the screen to change focus points quickly ?

Are you suggesting that solely because it has 15 FPS, 28 megapixels and two 2.8 weatherproofed zooms, it should be a tool for professionals ?

The off-point barb deserves an impaling.

True, tough to challenge Romanians on matters of low light photography. The land spawns so many nocturnal pros, going back to Vlad Tepes. O Korean challengers, be wary of the wrath of the House of Drăculești. But don't fear too much. They fear the light, have a hard time reading spec sheets or manuals, and don't visit stores.

The NX1 can be supplemented by a grip, which is the only way the other large cameras can shoot thousands of shot, either, without battery changes. There is a YT video that illustrates use of the multiple focus point tools.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 17:13 UTC
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (370 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vignes: only 144 comments and it's day 2. when the A7II was posted, the count was in hundreds and it hit 1000 mark within day2. This is the problem with Samsung brand, maybe they need to change their camera name to something else. Similar to Toyota with Lexus name. At the end of the day, it's all marketing and how you portray yourself in a particular market space.

The GH4 body has been cut to match the NX1. Some people recognize the imprint Samsung may attain. A D7100 owner may not chuck lenses to by an NX1, but not upgrade the body either. Anyone not compromised by lens investments, or interest in 4k, will look at the NX1 seriously.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 16:50 UTC
On Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1 article (370 comments in total)

Nice camera. Some wince at the $1,100 price of the f/2.0-2.8 50mm stabilized lens needed to do it justice. Woud the $600+ 18-200 Movie Pro be an adequate all-in-one poor man's alternative? Too bad no IBIS.

A great new paradigm for comparing high-iso low light: dead fish. Which camera furnishes the most natural macabre look? Do the AF face mode or eye detection work post-mortem? Well, perhaps that is no less unreal that judging images of bottles, manequins, toy figures, photos, or playing cards.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 28, 2014 at 16:42 UTC as 56th comment
In reply to:

UnitedNations: I was going to buy the A7s next weekend for strictly night street photography.
After seeing this news, I ask:
What is the point of getting the A7s now if the low light shooting ability in the A7II is improved 4.5 stops due to the IBIS?
I am a little confused about Sony's marketing intentions. What camera shoudl I buy?
Can someone more knowledgeable than me please explain? thanks...

Sony will let people savor the dark, while it lasts, before announcing the A7sII. 4k likely to remain in the shadow, though.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 18:04 UTC

Did Metz leave behind any gear to liquidate at discounted prices? Or did all the inventory, last night, go in a flash?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 17:53 UTC as 26th comment
In reply to:

UnitedNations: I was going to buy the A7s next weekend for strictly night street photography.
After seeing this news, I ask:
What is the point of getting the A7s now if the low light shooting ability in the A7II is improved 4.5 stops due to the IBIS?
I am a little confused about Sony's marketing intentions. What camera shoudl I buy?
Can someone more knowledgeable than me please explain? thanks...

A7sII with 4k video? Hmmm. But maybe too much sensor heat.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 17:49 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (840 comments in total)
In reply to:

PILUIS: ¿Es que no se ha probado el estabilizador en 4k?
Pues falla algunas veces y se muestra inestable tanto en estabilización vertical como horizontal. Luego después de un rato se queda normal y estabiliza bien.
Esto debe ser un problema de recorte del sensor. Y de interferencia de los ejes de estabilización.
Estamos esperando un nuevo FIRMWARE de Panasonic que corrija este pequeño defecto. Con lo bien que va la cámara..... y esto empaña a las tomas con zoom y con i-zoom tanto en tomas en HD como en 4K.
Es un defecto que no puede advertir Panasonic en el manual y así se lava
las manos de hacerle trabajar a los ingenieros que han diseñado el estabilizador.
Cuando queráis os pongo videos con este defecto que me ha costado cambiar ya 2 veces la cámara y nada sigue haciéndolo.
De todas maneras es mi cámara favorita y aconsejo a todos/as su compra.

Mejor colocar los enlaces en otro hilo, acompañados por una traducción. Indique, por lo tanto, las calibraciones precisas de las tomas.

El estabilizador de cinco ejes solo funciona en video de 1080p, no de 4k. Esto se declaró desde un principio. Lo mismo occure con el LX100, salvo que se nota menos, pues tiene menos zoom. Dudo que ningún estabilizador sea "suficiente" con 4k, sobre todo si se trata de zoom largo, peor aun en casos de recorte extra para extender la vista hasta Marte.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 17, 2014 at 15:33 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (840 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neodp: So it's a like Stop less in background blur isolation than a kit lens on a crop DSLR. Including worse Bokeh quality. Not with light; but in terms of DOF eqiv, and it's huge. That's not good. Not at the price.

They should NOT have listened to novices as to lusting for ZOOM X-FACTOR and just made a better camera. They should have capped the focal at 100mm (eqiv angle) and went the other way! Heck, they should have done 27-100mm on MFT. Made that a f/2.8 CONSTANT lens (built-in, so very IQ optimized optimized) and then you'd have something. Think about it. There's your do all camera. Mid small size, affordable price. Leica F2.8 27-100mm HELLO! They could even sell "X-FACTOR" extenders to the silly crowd.

But they wouldn't make that.

Birds? Why not just cats? Limit photos to cats and 50mm is the most zoom you ever need. Right? Listen to meow, not tweet.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 17, 2014 at 15:18 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (840 comments in total)
In reply to:

EduPortas: Hey DPR, I think you missed Sony's recent RX10 firmware update. It includes 120fps and a new XAVC-S codec recording option. Any chance you can update this comparison with those new features?

If Sony cuts the RX10 price, that would be actionable news. An RX10ii (or RX12?) with 4k would also be actionable. 60p 4k, even if limited to short clips, would be a knockout. Firmware with 4k, even if feasible, seems unlikely.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 17, 2014 at 15:09 UTC
On Video: Capturing nature with the Canon EOS 7D Mark II article (200 comments in total)

Entertaining and enlightening.

Is there a rating site for game farms and safari packages? That might help people assure people better wild animal shots than the choice of camera. The only wolves or cougars I've ever seen are only out of the corner of my eye, at dusk, and in flight into the brush. Sharp-eared bears that don't flee before I see them are probably not ones I'd want to face anyway. No kidding: wildlife encounters that facilitate photography are either by chance or require extensive patience and preparation, neither of which monetize easily. Pros who must deliver money-shots with tight turnarounds need see-'em tricks besides a camera. An early GH4 promo featured Crococun zoo reptiles. Odds are I'll never see a wild chimp in native habitat, or be in danger if I did, so maybe the zoo or chimphaven are the answer. Canon does sponsor the PBS Nature series, though, so maybe varmints will pose more willingly for that brand.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 18:54 UTC as 43rd comment
On Price released for Brikk's 24k gold Nikon Df article (389 comments in total)

Hasselblad's comeuppance. Its next Lunar edition should have a capsule of real moon dust embedded atop the viewfinder.

The effective price might be only 60% of the list price, if tax authorities in some places permit deduction of camera cost as a business expense, which might not apply to jewelry. Or, if the state accountants report the charge as related to "national defense," auditors will look the other way or assume that the high costs reflects some mysterious power.

Does it come with a gold-plated SDHC card? Could be a deal-breaker.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 31, 2014 at 16:24 UTC as 74th comment | 1 reply
Total: 554, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »