John M Roberts

Lives in United States Portland, OR, United States
Works as a Professional Photographer
Has a website at www.jrobertsimages.com
Joined on Dec 21, 2007

Comments

Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On photo Holy Island in the Post-Processing Salvation - # 2 challenge (10 comments in total)

Nice to see and the explanation. I was curious to see what your histogram showed and at what in camera jpg setting was used which would influence that histogram.

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2016 at 05:59 UTC as 7th comment | 2 replies

Can anyone tell me what type of transmitter and soft umbrella that was. I curious if it is radio and provides all the speed light functions.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2016 at 20:06 UTC as 91st comment | 3 replies
On article A conversation with portrait photographer Brian Smith (12 comments in total)

I enjoyed the interview. I'd like to see more. It's nice to get a perspective from obviously successful photographers. Didn't put me to sleep. Drew me to research more of his work which was the best part.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2016 at 19:34 UTC as 15th comment
On article Nikon D750 Review (1986 comments in total)

You can go to the Nikon site and get full specs.
For flash composition which I assume will work with manual as it does with my D700 and D800E
-3 to +1 EV in increments of 1/3, 1/2 or 1 EV

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 04:01 UTC as 72nd comment
On article Retro through-and-through: Fujifilm X-Pro2 Review (2469 comments in total)
In reply to:

LakeSuperior1: Can't wait to get my hands on this camera. Happy X-Pro 1 user and the upgrades on this new camera are everything I was hoping for. For those who complain about Fuji's video ability, keep in mind Fuji has never really been shy about their cameras being geared towards stills. Same can be said for those who want a tilting screen. They have cameras that have a tilting screen. But this isn't the intended market of this camera. In fact, most of the complaints I have read about this camera all seem to come from people who this camera clearly isn't intended for. Unlike Canon & Nikon, Fuji is willing to make cameras for certain types of shooters instead of trying to make every camera fit for everyone (that never works). Refreshing if you ask me.

I see your point. I never had an articulated screen all my years but wish I had. I found nothing rewarding having to lay on the ground for viewpoint. I don't see why this camera's market needed to have this exclusion. In fact I don't see why most don't have it unless it creates some durability issues. Now video seems much less of a necessity. I want high quality with my stills and if video were more important then I'd shop with that in mind.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 01:11 UTC
On article Fujifilm announces development of EF-X500 flash (85 comments in total)
In reply to:

Yohan Pamudji: Wireless communication type: Optical pulse communication (in multiple flash-unit photography operation)

Shame--would have been pretty much perfect if this were radio instead of optical.

That was exactly the first thing I was looking for but pretty much knew it wouldn't be the case. Weather sealed made me smile.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2016 at 21:16 UTC
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (748 comments in total)
In reply to:

Everythingis1: Sounds like he blows a lot of money on bad gear, and wants there to be a perfect camera (for him) in each sensor size. If camera companies tried to do and offer everything he wanted they would pretty much all of them but Canon would be out of business within 3 years.

I don't think he realizes that it would raise the cost of cameras to the point where hardly anyone could buy them; not to mention how would they sell new models when MP counts are already higher than 99% of photographers need?

The article reads the exact same as the majority of posts here complaining about their cameras. All camera manufacturers have to do is be slightly better than their competition. not perfect. Based on the gear he has used, it sounds like he has had an active role in supporting the industry's lack of innovation.

I thought that the advantage of less moving parts would allow for these cameras to be more affordable even when including the beneficial functions of DSLR's.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2015 at 04:37 UTC
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (748 comments in total)
In reply to:

57even: It is not perhaps surprising that mirrorless does not replace DSLR...yet.

To gain market share, mirrorless majored on the big flaw of DSLRs - size and weight. A lot of the compromises more or less derive from that. Less room for buttons, less room for large batteries, and less reserve power for really fast processors.

So, they appeal to people who want the same IQ in a smaller size, but can live without the continuous shooting, all-day battery performance, such as photojournalists, travel and street photographers. Sony's venture into FF has also offered solutions for landscape and studio photographers.

But the bulk of the pro market is involved with events, sport or advertising, and these issues are a big deal, as well as lens range, flash etc. But breaking into this market would require breaking the dominance of Nikon and Canon, which is a whole different challenge.

We are in a state of transition, waiting to see what the big two may do. Who will blink first?

Then I'm completely delusional and must be hallucinating when I compare my D800e with 24~70 with my Fuji X-E1 with it's 18~55. Yes, this not apples to apples as far as f stop yet Nikon has not offered an f 4 equivalent of high quality for me to consider your comment as reasonable. Sure if I were to compare my Canon SL 1 it might be getting closer. I find full frame DSLR's to be very heavy and bulky. When I got into full frame digital I was very surprised that it's system was even bulkier and heavier then my Mamiya M7II medium format system. Sony's full frame body is significantly smaller and I would still consider it an advantage even with it's lenses compared to DSLR's equivalent. Though I have not moved yet to mirrorless in FF and considering what I now own I still prefer actually shooting with my DSLR's for their spontaneity and ease which forgives their bulk and weight in many instances.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2015 at 04:32 UTC

Great shot. I am compelled to suggest cropping off about 1/4 of the right side The harsh light and tall building are distracting. Enough sunset light will be prominent in the frame leading to an even more impressive shot.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2015 at 19:33 UTC as 77th comment
On photo ET passport photo in the Alien challenge (6 comments in total)

I had to click on your win. I did google and found a nice tutorial for PS
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-effects/flip-mirror/

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2015 at 17:46 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On photo Cold - Refrigerated Transport in the Cold challenge (18 comments in total)

Again, very nice shot cjf2. Had I voted that would have been my favorite with few others coming close. You get around.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2015 at 23:07 UTC as 1st comment
On photo City's Winter Quilt 001 in the Telephoto Landscape challenge (3 comments in total)

I loved your shot cjf2 as much as your other. Completely different feel. I gave it a 5. Thank you and rainrunner for the kind words.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 08:16 UTC as 1st comment

The D800e fell behind the D800 in sharpness. How can that be?

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2014 at 18:51 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On article Fujifilm announces weather-resistant XF 50-140mm F2.8 (226 comments in total)
In reply to:

Harry S: There seems to be an automatic assumption that everyone buys into mirrorless because it's smaller, therefore lenses like this are pointless.

I would guess many of these people have not stopped to think there may be a whole host of other reasons why somebody owns a mirrorless camera, of which size may just be a small part of. Even taking size into account, you can still have a very compact system when required (i.e. X-E2/35mm 1.4), but that doesn't discount bigger lenses like this, particuarly as there are a lot of pros using Fuji X gear now, particuarly for weddings.

Even with this lens in their bag, an X-T1, this, and a bunch of the X primes is still going to be significantly lighter and smaller than a DSLR setup.

I personally shoot with a Sony a7, size isn't on my radar at all, in fact I bolt a big LA-EA4 adaptor on it and use a Sigma 35 1.4 and Zeiss 135 1.8.

Quite a narrow statement regarding FF. Why would FF be any less necessary now and why are they still being manufactured and sold? Other than the advantage of size of my mirror less system nothing has yet to come close to the spontaneity and ease of use as my FF DSLR's.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 04:48 UTC
On article Nikon announces AF-S Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G ED (67 comments in total)

This is a welcome and long desired announcement. I can lighten my load some (14~24) and not have to consider those massive and expensive filter systems. This and the D750 seems like a smart move on Nikon's part.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2014 at 04:28 UTC as 26th comment
In reply to:

Jack Simpson: Cracking shot, Barney :) I never realised you were a concert photog :o

I imagine you obtained a signed release in order to get rich off of that or was it just sold for editorial use only? Great shot. What was the situation?

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2014 at 18:51 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Rather than these monsters, where is the collapsible medium format cameras of before, like the Fujis or Plaubels? Can you imagine a medium format camera smaller than a pro DSLR?

I still have my Horseman 69 ER which is solid, folds up nicely and has small lenses. If only a sensor back of equal size to benefit the lens's image circle could be affordably made I'd be thrilled. For now it's still film for that one thus not used do to the pleasure of shooting D800E.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2014 at 18:50 UTC
In reply to:

John M Roberts: There will be many non professional shooters that will feel, “what the heck, I might make some money if I just invest in the join up fee. I’m not getting anything right now anyway.”

30% of a sale does not justify what work I put forth into creating my library of images. I put out all the expenses, time and effort to gather images with the speculation that the effort will pay off. The agency takes none of that gamble. Their gamble begins after selection. How cushy they can also charge for a contract. They are feeding off of the large arena of photographers that are not gambling their livelihood on photography.

It seems this trend of devaluing what the image creator receives for their work will be difficult to reverse mainly due to supply and demand yet I would encourage photographers not to settle for such a percentage.

I know all about the efforts of the agency. I first joined in the late 80's. They did all the categorizing, marketing, publishing thousands of hard copy inventory books to mail out to potential clients, billing, and got me connected with buyers I’d never would have done on my own. The cut was 60/40, in favor of the photographer, then shifted to 50/50%. It was a fair arrangement.

It is supply and demand that allows this current percentage to occur not the efforts the agency puts forth compared to the serious photographer. Websites are much easier and cheaper to maintain than hard copy, not to mention organizing and filing. With your expressed thoughts, all the agencies years ago should have received 70% for their efforts and the photographers were ripping them off. I'd guess that if you had been a professional photographer experienced with this type of business relationship you might have a different perspective on the equity of percentages.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2014 at 15:41 UTC

There will be many non professional shooters that will feel, “what the heck, I might make some money if I just invest in the join up fee. I’m not getting anything right now anyway.”

30% of a sale does not justify what work I put forth into creating my library of images. I put out all the expenses, time and effort to gather images with the speculation that the effort will pay off. The agency takes none of that gamble. Their gamble begins after selection. How cushy they can also charge for a contract. They are feeding off of the large arena of photographers that are not gambling their livelihood on photography.

It seems this trend of devaluing what the image creator receives for their work will be difficult to reverse mainly due to supply and demand yet I would encourage photographers not to settle for such a percentage.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2014 at 17:46 UTC as 35th comment | 4 replies
On photo Split Rock Moonrise in the Light house challenge (9 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ross Murphy: is this a composite image ? long exposure and the moon is not blown out is why I ask

Looks like the moon could be filtered by the haze. It wouldn't need to be blown out considering the rest of the environmental light.

Link | Posted on Apr 9, 2013 at 00:03 UTC
Total: 36, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »