Ignat Solovey

Ignat Solovey

Lives in Russian Federation Moscow, Russian Federation
Works as a photojournalist
Has a website at http://www.dyor.ru
Joined on Jul 24, 2004

Comments

Total: 119, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On BPG image format aims to replace JPEGs article (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eric Glam: I support BPG. Let's go for it!!!

We need a way out of the 8bit world, and if this takes off, I'm all for it.
We had JPEG-XR by Microsoft, JPEG2000, and we have WEBP by Google. All of which didn't get wide-spread acceptance. I hope this one will, as long as it's truly royalty-free. The decoding speed is crucial to its success, but the author didn't quite talk about it.

Before going out of 8-bit in RGB, you have to do something with CMYK. Sure enough, print medium which allows broader color representation, does exist, like 12-ink inkjet printers, Durst machines and thermal sublimation printers. But they are not intended for large-volume printing, like magazines, newspapers or books, which, of course, did suffer in numbers after the advent of mobile devices, but not everywhere (exceptions are China, Brazil and India, and this is almost half of world's population). Moreover, the better mobile displays are, the better image quality is required, despite the perception of what “good photograph” is didn't change much for the last 50 years... yet. So, smaller size images are good, especially when things like wireless broadband are next to unknown, but you can't just dump JPEG, as well as any other well-established file format.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2014 at 12:37 UTC
In reply to:

zsedcft: Camranger is a waste of money. If you have a nikon a canon you can just pick up the plink wr-3040 for $30 on amazon, flash the modded version of open wrt, download DSLR dashboard, and you get most of the functionality for 1/10th of the price.

I like the idea of this products, but the difficulties that trigger trap have been having with their "Ada" sensors makes me think that this is going to be very difficult to achieve by a 1-man-in-his-shed kind of operation. I also have more confidence in the build quality and support from trigger trap. I hope he does pull it off though, more competition is always a good thing. I'll see how my set of Ada sensors work when they finally arrive!

And how do you propose to connect sensors to MR-3040? It's just router. Nice, cheap, useful, with custom firmware... but it's no trigger controller.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 10, 2014 at 08:17 UTC
On Sony Alpha 7 II real-world sample gallery posted article (231 comments in total)
In reply to:

aris14: Το DPR guys...
Pls make this simple test.
Take the 5-5 top cams of a certain category.
Choose 5 or 6 nice spots.
Have a tripod.
Shoot the same spot with one cam after another.
Post the results w/o writing which cam's pic is each pic on the list.
Let us enjoy.
Thx in advance

That's what pixel peeping is called among some Slavic-speaking people: "photo-onanism". Well, it's nothing wrong with pulling your rod or caressing your slit for some endorphin and dopamine, regardless if you're 14, 34 or 64, but what you offer is:
1) very impractical way to conduct conditional comparative camera test;
2) does not improve photography in general;
3) does not make anyone better photographer;
4) does not help consumer to choose the brand to give money to.

Oh, I see the point, and mighty devious your scheme is: while all pixel-peepers around will jack off their fingers, tongues and other organs, and flood forums with useless exabytes of their yekzperht aahpin'yonz oh which part of test table shot with which camera and lens, we photographers may have a chance to enjoy photography.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2014 at 13:58 UTC
On Canon introduces new $78K 50-1000mm cine lens article (174 comments in total)
In reply to:

dark goob: I applaud DPreview for not mentioning "equivalence" in this article, and for not calling Super35 a "crop sensor".

I'm glad we've finally evolved beyond calling things "full-frame" vs. "crop". Clearly, when Canon's most advanced optics by far are made full-frame relative to Super35 (24.9x14mm), which is much smaller even than an 16:9 APS film frame, we are finally in the future where 135-format's long dominance over the cultural milieu has ended.

Maybe now DPreview would be open to switching to using Range Factor terminology. This lens is a 2.01:1–41.08:1 Range Factor. The ratio is D:W, where D=distance-to-subject, and W=width-across-frame. I.e. a 1-foot ruler will occupy the entire width of the frame left-to-right from 41.08 feet away at 1000mm. With the extender it increases to a max of 59.76:1.

"Compare" this to a Canon SX60HS which has a Range Factor of 0.62:1–39.55:1 on its 1/2.3"-format (6.2x4.6mm) sensor, which is a 27% crop of Super35.

This is cine lens, right? Cine lenses (and that's one of the reasons they cost like humble rural property, or two, or three, each) usually show nothing of what bothers forum inhabitants: coma, fringing, distortion, etc. Any of them, from UWA to supertele. Guess why? Because the spectator must NOT see anything changing but the field of view. The only feasible way to produce the lens of such quality is make its circle of coverage much wider than declared format. For instance, Kern-Paillard 75/2, originally for 16mm, Bolex and C-mount, covers Super35 and APS-C like native... from photographer's point of view.

The same quality is shared by TS (PC) lenses: while having the flange distance of their 35mm system, they easily cover 6x6 frame, and that's why they allow tilt and shift.

So I guess this engineering marvel, while not impressing photographers with aperture range, may show great results as a Double35 stills lens. You just wait for someone to put it on EOS-1Dc and share the pictures.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2014 at 17:47 UTC
In reply to:

ToolMan78: The first image is pretty damn good considering it's in the category for 11-14 year olds. But the rest......?

@shutterbud
That's why I never mentioned anything of that ilk (or should I say ILC? ;)) in this thread. Fuji mirrorless are a piece if work all right as well, from my point of EOS-1 guy, but at least the model mentioned has rather clear dials to set aperture and exposure... As for other settings, HCB would be quite fine with automatic and RAW. Anyway, most modern cameras allow work in conditions far beyond the limits of 20th century classic approach.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 13, 2014 at 17:24 UTC
In reply to:

Tommot1965: the snake images is pretty awesome ..such a shallow DOF and the eyes have it..

@chris_j_l
Sorry, professional deformation of personality ;)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2014 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

Tommot1965: the snake images is pretty awesome ..such a shallow DOF and the eyes have it..

@chris_j_l
what's so special in a kid holding just 2 kilos of camera? It's only heavy until you get used to it. And the IS matters, I think, despite the fast shutter speed. People just got used to featherweight everything, and EOS-1 with 100/2.8L IS is not the heaviest setup to hold... properly balanced, I'd say.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2014 at 09:22 UTC
In reply to:

Rocky Mtn Old Boy: Not quite sure how the third image qualifies as "Wildlife"...

"He inserted a colourless piece of quartz (a red-tint plate) into the optical path, which shifted the waves to transform shades of grey into blues and purples."

Interesting, I'll grant you - but no more so than the works from any abstract artist. I work in mining and we have boxes of fossils (ferns, leaves, etc) that I suppose I could throw a filter or two on to 'colorize' them. At least those fossils were once 'alive'. Sort of really really old wildlife. ;-)

@Rocky Mtn Old Boy
You know, abstract artists usually have very solid background in academic painting... at least those who started this branch of art. There is a difference between «The Black Square» by Malewicz (where there is not a single drop of a black paint) and the black square random bloke would paint on canvas with oil. Here is the same: personal background matters.

This is a brilliant piece of science art, whatever impression it leaves. If the judge board decided it should have a place in this contest and in this category, so be it. It's aesthetically pleasing as it is, and has solid explanation which adds value. This would be a gem in any scientific photography contest, I guess.
And about your mining waste... well, I'd give something to get a grip on that fossils of yours, and leave the rest to me. I do not possess the knowledge in geology to add explanation this solid, but I have some friends who can help me with that. What's nothing to you may spark the light for others.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2014 at 07:51 UTC
In reply to:

ToolMan78: The first image is pretty damn good considering it's in the category for 11-14 year olds. But the rest......?

Depends. That's about the level of perception. There is a double-layered joke among us news shooters: “Got Magnum album as a gift. Looked into own trash bin, didn't see much difference”. The second one, black and white, is quite impressive, it's atmospheric.
Photomicrography... I have some in store myself (and I think it's time to ask some of my boffin mates for nice samples, and Zeiss rep to allow me some time in microscopy showroom), I can say this piece is excellent. As for the bats image... well, too many distracting details which look not that good on a small size, this picture is good big though.

The key thing here is that pictures 2 to 4 all have quite a stories behind them. The story behind the image is not less (if not more) important than the image itself. Especially in the era when inexpensive equipment alone allows you to achieve great technical results with an effort incomparable to the times past. Give EOS 1DX to Weegee or Fuji X-T1 to Cartier-Bresson... see?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2014 at 07:13 UTC
In reply to:

Tommot1965: the snake images is pretty awesome ..such a shallow DOF and the eyes have it..

You probably didn't notice one thing: age category 11-14 years. Considering the void separating serious amateurs and professional photographers of any age and specialization from the rest of those (of any age) who just have cameras and don't even dare to peek in the direction of camera manual and techniques more advanced than point&shoot, I doubt the judge board had the choice broad enough to choose other picture as a winner.
I speak from experience here. You just try to explain the concept of shutter speed + aperture + white balance (not to mention things like focal distance, perspective transmission, angle of view, DOF, lighting, object speed, composition, decisive moment and non-destructive processing) to random person who shoots in Auto. Sometimes that words fall onto fertile ground, but that's quite infrequent. Add generally shorter attention spans of children combined with already significant number of other things considered more important in life and you'll get my point.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2014 at 06:47 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)

I was right. That was just new corporate slogan and launch of promotional campaign.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 18:13 UTC as 319th comment
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nindy5: The clock has counted down to Zero, now what?????

Here in Moscow it still shows 2 hours with minutes more... which means the bang occurs at 9am UTC+0400. And that's no glitch on my side.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 02:48 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)

It can be worse. Like... new logo. Or new corporate slogan.

I mean, stop guessing already, it's just two hours left.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 02:44 UTC as 594th comment | 1 reply
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nindy5: The clock has counted down to Zero, now what?????

No, it didn't yet

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 02:31 UTC
In reply to:

Robert Schambach: If Adobe was smart they would make the newer versions of CC created files not editable on CS applications, how much you want to bet that this will be the case in a very short while.

As for PDF, modern format iterations support things like "Fast Web View" and interactive, but when I design books and other things, I export it from InDesign to plain PostScript and then distill it to PDF compliant to PDF-X/2001, which is the strictest standard compatible to absolutely anything, even the most conservative print shops, which still use software, hardware and techniques from the times long passed. Before two years ago I myself used Acrobat Distiller 5 from mid-1990s along with PostScript-only fonts (PFB/PFM)... it still works with Windows 7 at least and without any trouble, if you manage to find the installer somewhere online. And you can save PDF to any iteration down to Acrobat 4.0, while even the most ignorant places you can find Acrobat Reader at, use at least 7.0.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 05:39 UTC
In reply to:

Robert Schambach: If Adobe was smart they would make the newer versions of CC created files not editable on CS applications, how much you want to bet that this will be the case in a very short while.

Strange enough, PSD format is backwards compatible to even pre-CS versions (7 at least... It's a problem now to find any older to check). As for other things, Premiere Pro projects and InDesign files are and were always editable only in the versions they were created in, or later (you can't open InDesign CS 6 document in CS 5.5 without saving it in another format). Illustrator offers save to older versions since I can remember (like v.5... just 5, not CS5), and still supports that feature: you can save Illustrator artwork (and Illustrator EPS) into any Illustrator format all the way back to Japanese Illustrator 3, even in CC2014. JFYI, Illustrator 3 was already considered obsolete way before many of current Adobe users were even born. Of course, there are some real compatibility issues sometimes, but they are about gradient mesh, interactive features, some brushes, etc. Never had any problems saving logos to AI 10 EPS format for other people to use (print shops, customers, etc.).

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 05:30 UTC
In reply to:

rarufu: Some folks outside are writing, that all those outraged guys here would just cry because they cannot use pirated versions anymore, why ?

If i read at Adobe CC:
2.5GB of available hard-disk space for installation; additional free space required during installation.

So even the CC version is writing it's basic stuff on the harddisc - right ?
If is is written on the HD, what keeps the crackers from unprotecting and disassembling and removing the relavant SW switches ?

I cannot see any higher level of piracy protection of the CC version here, why should it be safer ?

Reducing the prices for younger people and hobbyists may be the best piracy protection.

I know lots of people dealing with PS but me, all my friends and colleagues really BOUGHT Photoshop, i have spent 950,- Euros last year and now they are treating me like this !!! what the hell......

Nothing keeps. Not only all the latest CC software is already cracked, but you can find it assembled in a thing called "Master Collection CC2014", which does not exist officially. Essentially, it's like the "all in one" many people are used to: Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Premiere Pro, Acrobat Pro, Audition, AfterEffects, Encore, Flash, Muse, InCopy and whatever else products Adobe has... Moreover, software in this cracked pack can be updated as smooth as legit.

As for reduced price, it exists, at least as the special offer. That program is called "Photoshop for Photographers", the package includes Photoshop, Lightroom and Bridge, and costs $10/month plus tax, which allows simultaneous installation on two computers and some number of tablets/smartphones. I'm subscribed, although use only Photoshop, since I never needed Lightroom or Bridge in my workflow (I'm pro), they are both too slow and useless for me. Also there is and always was student discount, they say it's "up to 60%".

Direct link | Posted on Oct 5, 2014 at 05:16 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ignat Solovey: I carry 70-200/2.8L IS, almost every day, in addition to other lenses in belly pack, and backpack with camera (EOS 1D4 body or/and 5D3 with BG), tripod, flash (or two) and often laptop, plus small stuff like remotes, cables, batteries, etc. I don't see a problem in carrying less than 10 kg/20lb for many hours, on vacations as well. My own weight is 70 kg/155lb, and I'm absolutely not into any kind of sports. I'm just news photographer.

Ok, I understand when anemic high-heeled girl with styled nails complains that anything heavier than current swarovski'ed iPhone is too much for her. What I don't understand is why totally capable and obviously not handicapped male of the species whine on how heavy 2-3 kilos of camera and lens are. Rifles aren't heavy, beer bellies, girlfriends and kids are feather and down, but cameras, judging by your words, are made of crude iron enforced with led and uranium.

@repdetect just regular cigarettes. My first full-time job was on the radio, and there are two things which are very hard not to do if you work there: not to smoke and not to cuss (at least so that was in Russia 16 years ago). Both strictly off the mic, of course, but when the mic is off... beware, ye guardians of public morals.

As for other smokeable stuff... well... I'm really afraid of myself in altered state of consciousness, so I never tried any kind of substances and never tried to alter my perception. You'll laugh, but I never saw weed, hash, crack or opium other than in Wikipedia pics. Smelled (it's hard to avoid pot stench in Barcelona Old Town on summer evenings, or in certain places in other cities, Moscow included), but never saw, nor tried, nor wanted to. Acid, stamps, pills, salts and injectable things share the same fate with me: no, never, no way. Better break my right arm, but don't even come near me with that, nor make me try it.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2014 at 16:54 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ignat Solovey: I carry 70-200/2.8L IS, almost every day, in addition to other lenses in belly pack, and backpack with camera (EOS 1D4 body or/and 5D3 with BG), tripod, flash (or two) and often laptop, plus small stuff like remotes, cables, batteries, etc. I don't see a problem in carrying less than 10 kg/20lb for many hours, on vacations as well. My own weight is 70 kg/155lb, and I'm absolutely not into any kind of sports. I'm just news photographer.

Ok, I understand when anemic high-heeled girl with styled nails complains that anything heavier than current swarovski'ed iPhone is too much for her. What I don't understand is why totally capable and obviously not handicapped male of the species whine on how heavy 2-3 kilos of camera and lens are. Rifles aren't heavy, beer bellies, girlfriends and kids are feather and down, but cameras, judging by your words, are made of crude iron enforced with led and uranium.

@repdetect If you want to get somewhere in time in Moscow, you use metro (subway), regardless of the car. Traffic jams are bad enough to compare Moscow to Cairo and Jakarta, not to NYC or Tokyo.
Alexander Zemlianichenko Sr., AP chief photographer in Moscow, is 64. He can still outrun me and even younger guys, when it comes to the picture (anyway, already 2 Pulitzers and 2 WPPs, not to mention other). Vladimir Vyatkin is 69. At last, Russia's Foreign Affairs Eduard Pesov is EIGHTY TWO, shooting official FA events for 50 years (I'd die from boredom). He still works... and, although skipping minor events, he still flies with minister Lavrov around the globe... of course, not in economy, but on dedicated govt. plane, but even 1st class transcontinental may be tiring.
Anyway... average US/EU wire services staff guys age is more than 45, Russia's are younger, 23 to 43 mostly. So look who's tougher.
One more: I never tasted alcohol in my life. Even beer or wine. Ever. No religion involved.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 23, 2014 at 04:22 UTC
On Opinion: Bring on the 70-200mm equivalents article (328 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ignat Solovey: I carry 70-200/2.8L IS, almost every day, in addition to other lenses in belly pack, and backpack with camera (EOS 1D4 body or/and 5D3 with BG), tripod, flash (or two) and often laptop, plus small stuff like remotes, cables, batteries, etc. I don't see a problem in carrying less than 10 kg/20lb for many hours, on vacations as well. My own weight is 70 kg/155lb, and I'm absolutely not into any kind of sports. I'm just news photographer.

Ok, I understand when anemic high-heeled girl with styled nails complains that anything heavier than current swarovski'ed iPhone is too much for her. What I don't understand is why totally capable and obviously not handicapped male of the species whine on how heavy 2-3 kilos of camera and lens are. Rifles aren't heavy, beer bellies, girlfriends and kids are feather and down, but cameras, judging by your words, are made of crude iron enforced with led and uranium.

So it means exactly this: if you fly with Ryanair from Luton to Canary Islands or Madrid, or from Antwerp to Nice in early August, you have your 9,5 kilos leprechauns-approved rolling suitcase or bin-fitting backpack. Everything else goes to your vest pockets (for example, the one I've got in Shenzhen at 2011 Summer Universiade can easily take 70-200/2.8L IS in it's largest pocket, which is one of 12). And somewhere to your carry-on or vest goes self-packing duffel bag. Your camera is on your neck or shoulder, probably with the heaviest lens attached. 10 minutes of sweating at the gate and voila! — you're on board, your suitcase goes to the overhead bin, your vest goes to the duffel bag (or suitcase exchanges content with it, if you like your gear in hard package), which goes the same direction), your camera is kept handy just in case... but just now you managed to sneak 17 kilos and two bags instead of one 17-pound, not paying a penny over your original ticket cost.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 22, 2014 at 19:58 UTC
Total: 119, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »