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: 145, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
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.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 8, 2013 at 14:56 UTC

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.

Direct 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.

Direct 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.

Direct 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.

Direct 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.

Direct link | Posted on May 23, 2013 at 16:32 UTC as 33rd 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.

Direct 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.

Direct 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.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 5, 2013 at 10:02 UTC as 14th comment
On Online images and copyright infringement article (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.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 7, 2013 at 11:55 UTC
On Ubuntu shows off tablet operating system post (8 comments in total)

I'm seriously interested. A real SSH client. A real RDP client. Suddenly these devices could reach a new level of usefulness for me.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 11:20 UTC as 1st comment

There's only one reason to do this: sales must be sucking.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 16, 2013 at 04:36 UTC as 12th comment
On 41-megapixel Nokia EOS smartphone looking likely post (11 comments in total)

I don't need or want 41 mp, but I'd love a pocketable Android device that created decent 4 to 8 mp images in low light.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2013 at 17:35 UTC as 2nd comment
On Samsung Galaxy Camera in-depth review post (84 comments in total)

I was excited when this device was announced, but it's too big to become the single device I carry. Even the largest smart phones still fit in my pocket. This doesn't. It's less fuss to carry both a small camera and a phone than this one large device.

PS: Too much fuss is being made of the fact that it doesn't make calls using the cellular network. Use Skype or Vonage. It's a non issue. I hope future Android cameras don't waste time on cellular network calling, either.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2013 at 11:14 UTC as 34th comment
On Will Vine get too hot for the App Store? post (5 comments in total)

I have no interest in iPhone or Vine, but really, who cares if people want to send naughty pictures of themselves to each other? Or to everyone.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 05:07 UTC as 3rd comment

With every camera capable of ISO 12800 these days, tripods are about as useful as slide rules to me. (I'll bet some of the younger people here don't even know what a slide rule is. Trust me, you're not missing anything.)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 19, 2013 at 11:08 UTC as 19th comment | 12 replies
On Fujifilm X20 Preview preview (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

zinedi: I want to express my greatest respect to FUJI for implementing of revolutionary OVF in this compact camera category. FUJI goes against the consumerist main stream manufacturers who omit quality viewfinders or viewfinders at all. It is a good message for us who want better PHOTOGRAPHIC tool, not only spectacular toy. Thanks Fuji.

No, abortabort, no OVF will satisfy me. My eyes aren't as good as they were 20 years ago. I like the rear LCD. I realize almost nobody else here does, but that's how I shoot and it works for me as my eyes can easily focus on it and I have trouble squinting and focusing these days. I don't begrudge others their OVFs (or EVFs), but I'm saying there are at least some of us who will never use them. Different strokes and all that. :)

Interestingly, as an aside, I'd kill for an articulated LCD on the X20, a feature I'll bet most of the rest of you don't care about at all. lol.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2013 at 08:06 UTC
On Fujifilm X20 Preview preview (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

bollzy: Of course, I've just bought an X10, and the only thing I want now is this X20. Crap.

The 'orb problem' was first addressed with a firmware upgrade that did nearly nothing and was then readdressed with a new sensor.

I do not know if they are doing in-camera sensor upgrades for anyone else but Fuji replaced my X10 with an entirely new camera. They fussed a bit about my original receipt not being legible and made me get it reprinted at the store I bought it from which I found a bit stupid, but I did it as I wanted the new sensor. Since then, I've had no orbs at all.

The best way to see if you have the orb problem is to do a bit of street photography at night. The street lights will appear as white circles. Here are a few of my pre-replacement shots.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/regnatarajan/6912104717/in/set-72157622261469350
http://www.flickr.com/photos/regnatarajan/6911708111/in/set-72157622261469350
http://www.flickr.com/photos/regnatarajan/6937965933/in/set-72157622261469350

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 18:05 UTC
In reply to:

lacro: Too little, too late!

After the great expectations for a broader lens from "rumors" stating a 24~120 zoom lens (with the same light), as requested in my previous comments here in this forum, I'm terrible disappointed with the same lens, considering the already old launch of the Sony RX100...

Even then, same sensor size? Seriously? I've been avoiding a whole lot of compact cameras for the last couple of years, in order to get my dreamed X10 improved according to the current standards.

I really don't know what to do now.

You waited two years because you thought Fuji would design the X20 around your desired specs? lol.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 17:54 UTC
On Fujifilm X20 Preview preview (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

zinedi: I want to express my greatest respect to FUJI for implementing of revolutionary OVF in this compact camera category. FUJI goes against the consumerist main stream manufacturers who omit quality viewfinders or viewfinders at all. It is a good message for us who want better PHOTOGRAPHIC tool, not only spectacular toy. Thanks Fuji.

Your opinion is totally reasonable, and I respect it, but I want to note that I never, ever use the viewfinder on my X10 (which I otherwise love dearly), and I am eagerly awaiting my X-E1 partly because it doesn't waste time on an OVF. I don't need an OVF, I don't want an OVF, I don't want my camera made bigger by an OVF that I'll never use, and I don't want to pay for an OVF that I'll never use. I wish Fuji would move to the viewfinder-via-hotshoe model that some makers are using, so that those who value them can buy them.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 8, 2013 at 17:47 UTC
Total: 145, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »