Jeff Greenberg

Jeff Greenberg

Works as a full time stock shooter since July 1988
Joined on Jan 21, 2003

Comments

Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM goes on sale in UK article (218 comments in total)

> This lens is really a joke...

But has it gone up in value as collectible???
About year ago I read my Canon 50mm f1.0
is still worth (ignoring devalued dollar) what
I paid "used" for it ~1999, about $2K...

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2014 at 22:30 UTC as 2nd comment

What about Harvard?
What are they offering free?
Does the University of Albania offer a photography degree?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 20:02 UTC as 6th comment

Clever.
Like some microstock.
Or Getty commercial.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2014 at 02:35 UTC as 42nd comment
On Walmart sues photographer's widow over family pictures article (200 comments in total)

If nothing exists that specifically states a copyright transfer
then AFAIK copyright stays with shooter...

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2014 at 22:10 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
On Getty and Flickr to cease partnership article (19 comments in total)

If Getty licensed enough of your flickr images to allow you
to quit your day job & shoot stock full time, raise your hand...
How about enough to buy a very large memory card...?
A Happy Meal???

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 10:27 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies

Its $175 net Royalty Free, right?
Yeah, that's going to be appealing
to anyone NOT full time stock shooter.
They will get occasional thrill of licensing
& never know they have KILLED their
chances of being full time self employed
stock shooter making reasonable income.
And despite the ambient moaning that
stock no longer provides reasonable income,
some ARE still achieving reasonable income,
some well above their nation average incomes...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 9, 2014 at 13:20 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

dantome: Photography should move an emotion, and these images do, if you like you do, if you don't you don't. But the negative comments I don't get, those of you who continue to nock these images put you're work up, lets see what you can do, I am sure you can't, thats why you knock. Every photographer has a style, and she has developed her style.

If you can't do, just shut up.

Critics of contemporary photography have no effect
on pricing. Those who buy it as investment depend
on branded galleries & dealers for advice-direction.

Criticism back & forth between hobbyists is...a hobby.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 20:49 UTC
On Wyoming's stunning weather and landscapes in time-lapse article (231 comments in total)

Snow scene with footprints arranged?

I don't know video but it led me to wonder:
what about series of scenes, snow, sand,
wet rock, etc., in which each footprint
is seen to be made by "invisible" person & each scene
relates to next to create one long "walk" through WY
or wherever...?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 15, 2014 at 20:32 UTC as 68th comment | 1 reply
On Sony Cyber-shot RX10 Real-world Samples article (162 comments in total)

You bunch of flat-light-whiners.
Lots can be learned despite.
Would you rather have NO early samples??

What I found most interesting of all:
amongst all the whining, NOBODY
commented negatively on IQ, nobody
pointed out softness, artefacts, poor IQ, etc.
Lack of negativity, even amongst super whiners
doesn't replace a stellar DxO rating, but still...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2013 at 22:09 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
On Sony DSC-RX10 preview (725 comments in total)

Have been using Canon EF 17-55mm f2.8 on 7D body
for almost 4 years. (yeah, as if it was fixed lens)
And as a stock shooter with very limited processing
skills, never went above ISO 1000. Nearest camera
store told me they'll sell ALL their RX10s as new &
won't have floor model, so don't know how I'll test
RX10 IQ in advance.

Obviouly increased zoom range would open up
amazing amount of new photo opps.
BUT ANY OPINIONS ON WHETHER THIS WOULD
BE STEP UP IN IQ APPRECIATED. Also, I take a
fair number of wide angle f2.8 images using
onboard fill flash. Will RX10 at 24mm + shade
cast lens shadow when using its onboard flash?

Am also surprised no one here reports they are conflicted
between RX10 vs. A7r + fast lightweight zoom? I am...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 11:44 UTC as 57th comment | 2 replies
On Sony DSC-RX10 preview (725 comments in total)

Typo?
"Here you can see that the RX100 can receive around 0.7EV..."
Should be RX10?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 01:33 UTC as 60th comment
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2372 comments in total)

No image stablization.
Why? Shame.
Need fast zoom, too.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 15:16 UTC as 564th comment | 4 replies

If this is work of photo savant,
its probably the images that are
NOT being shown that have been
dismissed as mistakes by newspaper
photo editor, but are, paradoxically,
breaking new ground...?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 9, 2013 at 11:55 UTC as 17th comment

Blue skies over HK Harbour still happen,
according to Alamy search:

http://www.alamy.com/search/Imageresults.aspx?CreativeOn=1&adv=1&ag=0&all=1&creative=&et=0x000000000000000000000&vp=0&loc=0&qt=hong%20kong%20harbour%20blue%20sky

Direct link | Posted on Sep 2, 2013 at 16:18 UTC as 15th comment

When I downloaded "original" size & look at
histogram, it is clipped at both ends...? Why?
(flower shop display)
Hey, straighten me out on this if necessary!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2013 at 20:01 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

El Cajun: "apeture"? Could a writer for Digital PHOTOGRAPHY Review be troubled to spell one of the most basic photographic terms correctly? Or how about using spell check?

I'm sorry - this makes it hard to take the author seriously.

El Cajun: "Or how about using spell check?"

Starting sentence with "Or" will
get you points off on your 6th grade grammar test.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2013 at 23:55 UTC
On Adobe releases subscription-only Photoshop CC article (398 comments in total)

If it allows:
a. month to month subscription
b. use on more than one laptop
c. further processing via earlier CS#s
then YES to once or twice yearly.

Otherwise, no, NEVER.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 18, 2013 at 21:04 UTC as 120th comment
On Leica announces X Vario zoom compact with APS-C sensor article (757 comments in total)

No IS
No f2.8
No thanks.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 11, 2013 at 15:50 UTC as 264th comment | 1 reply

Not sure these routes match reality...?
EU<-->US & Asia<-->US are often polar, no?
(at least my flights have skirted Alaska, Iceland)

And, yes, nothing to do with general photography.
Barely related to travel photography.

Direct link | Posted on May 30, 2013 at 17:40 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: At least if these people were celebrities we could say they forfeited their right to privacy. I'm sure any proceeds from the use of the photos are given to these non-volunteering subjects.

>>In the US, so long as the photographer is standing on public property, they can take a picture of anything they want
=====
False! Its still possible to illegally invade privacy
in US public places, e.g., if someone was carrying
prescription bottle or private papers in non-overtly
exhibited fashion, but the image allowed one to
zoom in & read details...
The legal test is "expectation of privacy".
It is clearly expected in public restroom.
It is clearly expected within one's clothing.
Many many other examples.

This drive-by freelancer is going to have his hands full
if he does this to minors, IMO, whether or not legal.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2013 at 17:14 UTC
Total: 37, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »