A great lens put to great use!
The soldier in Kiyv is the big standout from this selection.Some other good ones too, though.
Revenge of the Iron Frog!!Great shot, BTW - a triumph of texture.
soloryb: The logic displayed in Wikipedia's decision not to credit the photographer would mean that if a fellow uses a gun to shoot somebody, he should be found not guilty since it was really the bullet that did the dirty deed.
wrong comparison.If I own a gun and someone else uses it to kill a person, the actual shooter will stand trial.If a monkey grabs my gun and shoot somebody, there will not be a murder trial in which the monkey stands trial. But I may have to stand trial for negligence resulting in death.The bullet has nothing to do with it.
saw this item only after having already writting in a forum discussion:http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54163344
looker: One comment laments that similar photos are no longer legally possible. The greater lament is that these photos are only barely technically possible. When these shots were taken, Paris was a French city. Now, Paris is an African & Asian city.
I am sorry but that is racist remark. Pure and simple.I would love to make a Doisneau hommage with an african man kissing an asian woman (or vice versa).Society changes. Photography should just keep up.
PedroMZ: Sad to say that in France((where it all started) these spontaneous photos are legally no longer possible.I gather the same is now true in Budapest. How long before it applies everywhere? That will just leave us with landscapes that have been copied a million times and macro,oh and of course Selfies! Hence the emphasis on phone cameras which nobody in the street takes any notice of.
Rubbish.It is still perfectly possible.Here is a series I made a while ago in Paris:http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p187119431Or if you prefer them in a slideshow with music:http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p1046028174/h5854a6ba#h5854a6baI was never stopped by any policeman and never had any discussion with people I photographed.I guess that the attitude of the photographer makes the difference.Privacy rules are imposed because many people are fed up with a zillion cameras being stuck into their faces.But if you work discreetly (and most of all : friendly) there is hardly ever an issue.And I do NOT ask permission first.It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.
bob81: The second book is available at AmazonCreative Digital Photography by Christopher Gatcum (Oct 5, 2009)$1,163.60 new (1 offer) $930.88 used (4 offers)
Hardly what I would spend. It must be a grat book, but I would rather put that money towards some equipment.
That really must be a mistake.I don't know how you came up with those ludicrous prices.It is not an expensive book by any means.I quickly checked amazon and found it at 10.24 GBPRoel
How can you seriously expect the readers to vote for "best" of several cameras.Any reader probably bought only one of these in 2013 - if he bought ANY camera in the first place...So everyone is just going to vote for the one they bought (or wished they could have bought), without on-hands knowledge of the others.Such a poll does not search for "best" but for "most popular in sales/wishlists".
JL Martin: In 2001, a Spanish photographer, Marcos Vilarino. who has long worked the same subject, published a book with Lego and famous photographs: Have a look
Seems like his are at least as good if not better
I can see the fun in this.Cheesy, but fun.
edu T: (what I'd like to know is) WHO's the soundtrack by...?a nice juxtaposition of '70s-ish all-too-familiar elements --hence the integration with the cliche images-- but with the bonus of elaborate, haunting vocal harmonies (0'48").thanks anyone!
The soundtrack is 'Gold on the Ceiling' by the Black Keys.Here's the same (full) song used for a dynamic slideshow of volleyball images:http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p1046028174/h5854a698#h5854a698
It's a testament to how un-original we all are .But fun to watch nonetheless. At least once.
It's a revelation that rings true : many "best shots ever" must actually be lucky shots.But that does not diminish the merit of the photographer : aiming and shooting blind is an art in itself (it requires intimate knowledge of camera and lens) and most of all: the photographer still had to be there and have the wit to make such a maneuver to get an interesting shot while staying with his head in the trench and camera to the eye would have resulted in an interesting photo of a wall of dirt.
At some points during the video, I think I see the silhouette of an obscured man behind the skeleton: could be the person who does the light painting with the small (probably bright LED) light.But when the skateboarding skeleton is on his way from A to B and suspended in mid air in the frames that constitute that movement, I am still puzzled how the man behind can be there long enough to do the painting (must be at least several seconds).Curious.I once tried it (much simpler) in a single shot and that was fun.Roel
Nice to know a bit about this.You can tell that Kubrick started out as a photographer (and actually a very good one too). Near the end the costume designer talks about his attention for the fabric of costumes, in order to recreate the light-reflection characteristics seen in period paintings.Gotta love this if you are interested in available light.
RoelHendrickx: While visiting the SW I shot with my regular camera.I recognize most of the places here.However, I also used my Iphone to shoot, process and upload first sample images while on the road (think: "look, family, we are now here...").Those images are numbers 26-65 in this gallery:http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p402011222Real final photos elsewhere on my pages.
Thank you Stu
While visiting the SW I shot with my regular camera.I recognize most of the places here.However, I also used my Iphone to shoot, process and upload first sample images while on the road (think: "look, family, we are now here...").Those images are numbers 26-65 in this gallery:http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p402011222Real final photos elsewhere on my pages.
That guy seems to have almost the same expression on many occasions.I had an instant flashback to a few years ago.Look here (images 12-22):http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p490274999Good shot you got there (especially the angle)
I don't see how regulations issued today, can prohibit a certain custom or use that predeces it, unless those regulations are just a repetition of general law.But in that case, Instagram should not include it now to try and crack down on use they seem to have tolerated and encouraged before.Adding it to corporate regulations seems to be a message that "there is no more Mr. Nice Guy" (from now on), which is kind of an admission, that previously much more was tolerated.