svejk

svejk

Lives in United States United States
Works as a none
Joined on Aug 11, 2009
About me:

I finally know what I am going to be when I grow up - old!

Comments

Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4
On Article:7189216280 (1 comment in total)

I would like to think that I am the kind of person who can come out with an amusing snarky comment about anything but I am totally stumped here. I mean, all she had to do was say that sniffing XXX oil will increase the resolution of your photos and there would have been a huge rush to try it. Of course there would also be a comment flame war with half of posters saying that YYY oil was much better and that only total fools who were so lame as to use ZZZ brand of camera would sniff XXX.

Posted on Nov 12, 2011 at 18:31 UTC as 1st comment
On First Impressions: Using the Nikon V1 article (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

AnselWannaBe: Disappointed with Nikon as I have been a faithful for 40 years and am still seeking a small, fast P&S. Alas, it looks like the new iPhone 4S, while not really a camera but a phone with a camera, is looking better than this camera. OK, Nikon users, what is your favorite "take anywhere" camera from any brand that can capture the moment fast... with thumb controls?

I was in the same boat as AnselWannaBe. Get a Canon S90/95/100 like I did. Put tape over Canon label. Take nice pics. Sigh.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2011 at 17:16 UTC
On It's all about the details article (53 comments in total)

1) Rather than listening to a bunch of rather meaningless gripes about the author's affiliations how about people share their experiences with these and other software packages? Holllingworth has shown the way with a very informative post.
2) People might also consider the Digital Outback Photoshop Filters available from outbackphoto.com. They are less expensive than other products. I have not used them but would love to hear from folks that have. I have no connection whatsoever with Outback Photo, other than recommending their site.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2011 at 16:46 UTC as 21st comment

Not at all what I was taught in Art College and am still learning to practice decades later. We were told to use a frame but only for a short period as a beginning to learn to visualize the print before you look through the camera. Learning to visualize a print from viewing a scene opens up your imagination to what can be done if you were to move, say, over there, and a little closer and drop down to get the viewfinder to accord with your imagination. The ideal state was that after seeing your shot and moving to the spot to get it, the image you imagined would be in the finder.
Your feet are your primary composition tool, but they must be directed by your imagination rather than trusting to luck. The shots above also show that using a frame tends to make you ignore vertical format. I would have used it for all of the ones shown.
A frame can be a temporary way of learning to see what a scene offers so that your feet and finder can achieve it. At least, that is what works for me.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2011 at 17:35 UTC as 18th comment
Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4