Reg Natarajan

Reg Natarajan

Lives in Canada Vancouver, BC, Canada
Works as a www.esecuredata.com
Has a website at www.regnatarajan.ca
Joined on Nov 9, 2001

Comments

Total: 169, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article A stock Android Sony Xperia Z too? (5 comments in total)

I've only purchased Nexus phones for this exact reason. Removing this layer of manufacturer's software that I do not want or need is a huge step forward.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2013 at 15:19 UTC as 2nd comment

You know what's really telling? DP Review just posted some help wanted ads. You know what they're looking for? Writers who can take photos. This ship has sailed. Might as well get over it.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2013 at 15:14 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

Joe Ogiba: I bet the daily payroll for the 28 photographers was about $15,000 and they made the correct business decision to lay them off and switch to ( photo, video, bloggers) freelancers. I am sure the paper editions will be history soon since I have not seen anyone under 50 subscribing to one.

It was clearly a good business decision, and I doubt it will be the last of its kind. I have nothing against this guy and I wish him well in rebuilding his life. He's in a dead end profession, however, and he should look at a career change if he's smart, which he seems to be. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see other large journalism organizations make similar cuts to photographic staff in coming months. I also expect the results to be just fine for the organizations making the cuts.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2013 at 14:56 UTC
On article Eye-Fi Mobi SD card sends photos to mobile devices (34 comments in total)

I'm baffled at the weird workflow many people use. Eye-Fi has (for years) been uploading my photos to Dropbox/Google-Drive/Flickr using my phone's tethering, at which point they can be edited or resent in-phone, in-tablet or on a PC.

This new feature only addresses those cases where your phone isn't connected to the net AND you desperately want to edit your photos on a mobile device before you get to somewhere there's net, although God alone knows what you'll do with those edited photos in your mobile device without net.

"Downloading digital camera photos onto mobile devices just got a lot easier"? Maybe if you don't really understand how to use tech to your advantage. Superior workflow has been available from this very company for years.

Link | Posted on Jun 4, 2013 at 10:39 UTC as 10th comment

I remember the Nikon vs. Canon feud from the 70s. Haven't paid much attention in recent years, but it's nice to see it still going on. It's harmless enough as long as you don't let it consume you and try to fit in some actual shooting between posting about what gear is best.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2013 at 08:51 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

Reg Natarajan: Supply and demand. When there are cameras everywhere, the need to pay people a lot of money to take photos ends. And no, the marketplace does not care about the talent of these photographers. Get over it. The photography most people want to see is the video of Toronto mayor Rob Ford smoking crack. You can bemoan that fact, but it is true, and there's a lesson there that everyone involved in photography should learn.

Great hobby. Terrible job/business.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2013 at 17:13 UTC

Supply and demand. When there are cameras everywhere, the need to pay people a lot of money to take photos ends. And no, the marketplace does not care about the talent of these photographers. Get over it. The photography most people want to see is the video of Toronto mayor Rob Ford smoking crack. You can bemoan that fact, but it is true, and there's a lesson there that everyone involved in photography should learn.

Link | Posted on May 31, 2013 at 16:18 UTC as 34th comment | 6 replies

She's largely correct. Photojournalism today is far more about finding new uploads on Youtube than sending out some reporter with a ton of gear.

Personally, I love the new Flickr, and I think my favorite thing about it is the entertaining reaction of the obsessive weirdos who frequent this site.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2013 at 16:32 UTC as 34th comment | 3 replies

I paid up to 2017 awhile ago. I'm now glad I did. I'd pay the $50 if I had to, though. I love the new interface.

Link | Posted on May 21, 2013 at 02:53 UTC as 111th comment
In reply to:

masterofdeception: I try to avoid Dpreview, for the simple reason that the people here seem to know (or care) very little about photography, but seem to enjoy positing on the next great thing in terms of technology. This thread is a perfect example of why I feel this way. I posted a long time ago about why I loved the Jpegs from my X-Pro 1, and nothing has changed for me. I don't claim anything special for my pictures, but you lot can keep on bickering about your pixels in your RAW files and it won't matter a damn to me. You're still all wondering why your camera didn't make you a great photographer, and why the latest C1, LR, Silkypix, DXO, ACR .1.1.1.1 update didn't make any difference to your terrible (soft/over sharpened/ "slightly milky") pictures of your cat? Well, I guess you'll never get the point!

@masterofdeception Best comment I've seen here for a long time.

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2013 at 22:54 UTC

$50 less. They can't be serious. I thought this thing was a great idea when it was announced. It never occurred to me they'd sabotage it with absurd pricing.

Link | Posted on Apr 5, 2013 at 10:02 UTC as 14th comment
On article Online images and copyright infringement (255 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fotonaut: Copyright laws should be scrapped in their entirety. I hope someday future people will look back in disbelief at this intellectual failure just like we look at those who supported slavery or blasphemy laws.

"Intellectual property" = "dark matter" = all the moronic things people conceive when unable to deal with reality.

Really really sad how much otherwise productive energy is wasted on this nonsense.

Absolutely right, Fotonaut. You won't get any traction here in this forum full of people hoping to make money with their photos, but the simple fact is that copyright law has been a total failure which stifles innovation rather than encourages it.

When a drug company can make a thousand times as much treating an illness as opposed to curing it, is there any wonder our chronic diseases get treated rather than cured? And really, who honestly believes art has gotten better since copyright law? Before it, we got Beethoven, Bach and Mozart. Now, we get Justin, Avril and Eminem. Why should I pay to enforce some artist's perceived notions of what his rights may be? Why should my tax dollars go towards codifying the rights of some giant media corporation to sue kids for downloading music?

It's time we scrap the whole thing. All of it. Start over. And if that means it becomes a lot harder to make a living as a photographer, well, so be it.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2013 at 11:55 UTC
Total: 169, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »