For me, "the best vacation photos possible" would be those that are original and reflect the way I experience a site, NOT a replica of photos made before by other people.
Mssimo: Can't wait for the "using fisheye for wedding photography" article.
Look here for fisheye shots (not all of them of course) at a wedding:http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p627552318In my book, anything goes as long as it supports a creative vision.
My two first Splice-slideshows are here:
Paris Streets: http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p1046028174/h5854a6ba#h5854a6ba
I'm always interested in constructive feedback. Thanks.
I found the above slideshow a bit underwhelming (good music and some, though not all, good images; but the sequencing and transitions were sketchy at best).
Nevertheless, I took a look at the app. Glad I did.
I'm currently in the process of uploading my own very first efforts : a B&W slideshow of Paris images and a colour slideshow of volleyball action shots.
Stay tuned.They will come in this gallery: http://roelh.zenfolio.com/p1046028174
chkproductions: Here's my video made from stills back in 2009. From the 2 days we spent with our daughter and her sister in NYC, All photographs in order of our stay, everything we did, everyone we encountered all in 1 minute.
Took a look at your video/slideshow.Pretty cool way of presenting the images.
The most optimistic/inspiring aspect of this story IMHO is that it was pro bono personal work that prompted the photographer to follow his own vision, and that is what made him stand out.
seems like we are almost back to the daguerrotype: photography is coming full circle.;-)
Deleted pending purge: I hope someone comes up with an app that automatically blocks all app attempts to automatically transfer anything to anywhere until the owner decides to do it... ;-/
Virtual Reality? Mixed Reality?Unreal, dude!!!
I can see the potential here:a remake of "Jaws" from the POV of the monster !
Excellent samples that illustrate obvious guidelines.
40daystogo: That's an outrageously high proportion of "keepers" from one 36-roll of Kodachrome. Shows the quality of Steve McCurry's ability to see -- although, I guess, using the last roll of Kodachrome might have heightened the sense of gravity before clicking the button.
OK, pre-shooting with digital explains why he gets settings spot-on for every exposure and it has undoubtedly helped with composition. So yes, that makes it a little less magical.But still : amazing use of the exact moments in a few of those images.
Let me add one more thing: the roll yields at least one image that is truly fabulous; that the portraits are excellent is to be expected from McCurry, but that one with bridge-like constructions, and the persons and shadows and chandeliers and ...., is breathtaking.
a lot of good shots from one roll of film: that is probably the most amazing aspect of this experiment.
I think that watching "Minority Report" will definitely give somebody else another great idea.Helicopter Cams are so 201X!I want my own personal thing that moves on its own to crawl through a living environment and scans people's irises!
Some good tips for street photography, of which most are generally valid (with any camera) and a few are mobile-photography specific.There was not much new here for me, but it is a nice summary of useful information, especially for those who are new to street photography.They might want to consider checking out some of the forums on DP Review for more inspiration.
RoelHendrickx: This sounds really good.I hope it works as well.I'll try it out on posts by others and my own (always image-related).Does the new system apply to older posts too?What I DO NOT like is the very clearly labeled option to "DOWNLOAD ORIGINAL", as a default option.What if I only want to SHOW images in a forum post, but not allow other forum members to download my images?I believe this should be up to the image-poster to decide, whether or not he allows downloading (just like on eg Zenfolio).If not, I will limit image posting to small versions with a clear watermark.Roel
I understand.If a person has bad intentions, sure, they can go ahead and do nasty stuff.But the point of the whole discussion is that DPR should not be seen as encouraging that.
xtoph: i have not given anyone permission to 'download original' files of my photographs. dpr's inclusion of a dedicated button for this is bizarre, and suggests that i somehow do give such permission.
i am aware that people can copy my photos, but there's a difference between that being technically possible and it being actively encouraged and tacitly approved.
please change this. and shame on dpr, after facebook's photographer unfriendly changes (including a 'download original' button we have no control over) and the backlash against them, you would think that a photographer-centered site would have handled this differently.
Thanks to Simon for changing the wording from "Download" to "View".Even if the technical operation that ensues remains exactly the same, it still sends a different message.Nobody can deny that in the world of today, "downloading" something from the web has a different connotation than "viewing".
Jimmy jang Boo: Nice! This is a great improvement and it is much appreciated.
As for those who are so concerned about their images being downloaded, if they want to use your website to promote and protect their business interests, they should pay for special privileges. And in addition to that, if they actually sell anything, charge them a royalty.
@Manic Tuesday:Hard to discuss with you if you do not seem to understand the basic concept of Copyright.The word is quite self-explanatory.COPY-right boils down to the exclusive right to make copies or other legally defined use of the protected material.Sure : it I show anything, it can be viewed and talked about by whoever feels like that. But it cannot be COPIED. And the first and most important aspect of that, is that it cannot be downloaded for a use that I have no control over.Roel
Excuse me?Respect for authorship is not a special privilege.It is a natural asset of anyone who creates.You got things quite a bit upside-down, I'm afraid.And that is what worries me about the current state of looking at authorship of images.In the analogy that I used below (please look below): if I participate in a car show, I don't think I should be paying the organizers for not letting a visitor drive off with my car.It really is that simple.Roel