Kodachrome200

Kodachrome200

Joined on Mar 11, 2012

Comments

Total: 531, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | Art Lab Test Review preview (152 comments in total)

alllow me to summarize this test

DAYUM

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2014 at 20:40 UTC as 21st comment
On Adobe launches Lightroom for iPad post (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: The #1 reason i bought the iPad was to have an easy way to show people especially clients and potential clients images on the retina display. This is a absolutley beautiful way to make that easy. i love it

over your lifetime you might save a few bucks but honestly this cost what a visit to subway once a month cost. also there is a value to having the money now. It takes to long to break even to fuss over this amount of money. It might take as long as like 15 year before you save an appreciable amount of money. ITs a silly thing to be worried about

Direct link | Posted on Apr 14, 2014 at 08:35 UTC
On Adobe launches Lightroom for iPad post (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: The #1 reason i bought the iPad was to have an easy way to show people especially clients and potential clients images on the retina display. This is a absolutley beautiful way to make that easy. i love it

well like it or not adobe nolonger allows 5 years between upgrades. also you did not price lightroom in there. I bet just about everyone buy every lightroom upgrade still. Lightroom and a coupl upgrades for it are going to add 2 and half years. witch means 7.5 years and you are probably going to upgrade lightroom and ps then so will bring you to 9 years and probably by then atleast one more lightroom upgrade so will call it an even decade.

10 years to break even

And your photoshop may not open your camera raw files. lightroom wont be able to open directly into photoshop with out making a tif file you may not need and you wont have this nifty program for your mobile

I know everyone wants to be upset about this but honestly it stopped being something to be upset about so long as they keep doing this program its cheaper for goodness sake its to your benefit.

and not for nothing but new ps licenses were $699 to my knowlege

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2014 at 22:36 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: Im actually surprised that its more expensive than the 35mm 1.4. Traditionally that would be a more expensive lens

I had hoped the quality and price of the 35mm 1.4 was a sign of things to come. apparently only in price

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2014 at 22:23 UTC

Im actually surprised that its more expensive than the 35mm 1.4. Traditionally that would be a more expensive lens

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2014 at 10:52 UTC as 6th comment | 15 replies
On Adobe launches Lightroom for iPad post (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: The #1 reason i bought the iPad was to have an easy way to show people especially clients and potential clients images on the retina display. This is a absolutley beautiful way to make that easy. i love it

it would take years and never upgrading to get it cheaper by buying the stand alone

Direct link | Posted on Apr 11, 2014 at 22:17 UTC
On Adobe launches Lightroom for iPad post (131 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: The #1 reason i bought the iPad was to have an easy way to show people especially clients and potential clients images on the retina display. This is a absolutley beautiful way to make that easy. i love it

Lightroom is more hassle free then the way i was doing it before. cloud syncing with my catalog works beautifully. I already have the ability to trasmit preiews for a client wirelessly as soon as i shoot them. thats a different function. lightroom allows me to send work to my tablet directly from lightroom catlaog. and its big enough for the retina display and the client can even zoom on it. all with one click. easiest way i have ever had to share work. its free with photoshop for photographers subscrition witch is the cheapest way to get photoshop and lightroom

Direct link | Posted on Apr 10, 2014 at 17:32 UTC
On Adobe launches Lightroom for iPad post (131 comments in total)

The #1 reason i bought the iPad was to have an easy way to show people especially clients and potential clients images on the retina display. This is a absolutley beautiful way to make that easy. i love it

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2014 at 18:10 UTC as 3rd comment | 9 replies
On Nikon to offer D600 replacements if 'spots' continue news story (173 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike99999: I'm surprised people are still so upset about this sensor spots non-issue. You can just wipe them off with a cleaning kit. It takes 2 seconds.

If I were to complain about the D600, I'd complain about the pathetic APS-C autofocus module, the hunting in low light, the constant missed focus, and how the focus points are all bundled in the middle (there might as well just be one focus point).

And I'd complain about the lack of decent lenses, first an foremost the complete lack of an even borderline decent 50mm Nikon prime.

I agree on the af module drives me crazy they use this on full frame cams.

that said proper cleaning is really annoying today and a very careful process. not something you want to do constantly

Direct link | Posted on Apr 1, 2014 at 00:08 UTC
On Nikon D4s First Impressions Review preview (819 comments in total)
In reply to:

mitsosmitsou: Setting "print size" above, which is what matters when comparing noise between
different resolution cameras, actually D4s is about 1/3 stops better than D4 but
what is most impressive is that D800E is better than both, till ISO12800 and not only that, it has more clarity in the image due to high downsampling.
That is trully impressive given that D800E is 2 years old now!
At 25600, D4s goes a bit ahead the D800E.
XT-1 is very good but soft, so comparison is not that easy.

Love the D800 but the image from the D4s is bit better at those high iso's it is certainly less noisy

Direct link | Posted on Mar 18, 2014 at 09:35 UTC
On Chicago-based Calumet Photographic closes U.S. stores news story (193 comments in total)

I worked there once. and as a former Chicago pro and one who is moving back. I will say that Chicago photographers lost a great institution. Sad day in photography

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2014 at 11:38 UTC as 54th comment
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (580 comments in total)

it does look like a joy to use though compared to other mirrorless cams

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 11:03 UTC as 170th comment | 1 reply
On Nikon 1 V3: a quick summary article (580 comments in total)

the nikon one sensor is silly small. nikon needs to do a mirrorless reboot and move up to aps c or they will never be taken seriously

Direct link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 11:02 UTC as 171st comment
On 500px Prime goes live, photographers now get 70% not 30% news story (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: The biggest reason this is never gonna make you money is that nearly as I can tell you cannot submit to it. they curate images from the 500px website. This means you have to be publishing full res images to 500px for either no reason or just on the off chance your image will be selected. It takes 1000s of images in a collection for a photographer to draw regular income from stock. If they dont allow photographers to submit images to be reviewed and added to the collection it will never include enough of any one photographers work to make any money. Relying on the off chance that a 500px employee finds your image and selects it is never going to get you anywhere. also it is clear that they dont understand the stock industry as they are mostly selecting pretty pictures. instead of pictures of people doing things.

The way to make money in stock is to shoot images of people that you have model released expressly for the purpose of stock. people working. people engaged in outdoor activties

Joel i did a few searches of what i honestly thought were softball keyword. Doctor, office, family, camping, smart phone ect. no results, results that had little to do with what i was looking for. the kind of images that stock agency needs are never gonna be shot with no garuntee of even being considered for the collection. This is half baked. Landscapes and cityscapes and flowers does not a stock collection make. they can do what thye want. But I am just asserting my belief this wont catch on with image buyers or photographers. i can do that if i want too

Direct link | Posted on Mar 12, 2014 at 18:28 UTC
On 500px Prime goes live, photographers now get 70% not 30% news story (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: The biggest reason this is never gonna make you money is that nearly as I can tell you cannot submit to it. they curate images from the 500px website. This means you have to be publishing full res images to 500px for either no reason or just on the off chance your image will be selected. It takes 1000s of images in a collection for a photographer to draw regular income from stock. If they dont allow photographers to submit images to be reviewed and added to the collection it will never include enough of any one photographers work to make any money. Relying on the off chance that a 500px employee finds your image and selects it is never going to get you anywhere. also it is clear that they dont understand the stock industry as they are mostly selecting pretty pictures. instead of pictures of people doing things.

The way to make money in stock is to shoot images of people that you have model released expressly for the purpose of stock. people working. people engaged in outdoor activties

cont. people using smart phones and tablets and mobile devices. but who is going to shoot this kind of work if there is no guarantee anyone is even going to look at it and consider adding it to the collection

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 20:23 UTC
On 500px Prime goes live, photographers now get 70% not 30% news story (91 comments in total)

The biggest reason this is never gonna make you money is that nearly as I can tell you cannot submit to it. they curate images from the 500px website. This means you have to be publishing full res images to 500px for either no reason or just on the off chance your image will be selected. It takes 1000s of images in a collection for a photographer to draw regular income from stock. If they dont allow photographers to submit images to be reviewed and added to the collection it will never include enough of any one photographers work to make any money. Relying on the off chance that a 500px employee finds your image and selects it is never going to get you anywhere. also it is clear that they dont understand the stock industry as they are mostly selecting pretty pictures. instead of pictures of people doing things.

The way to make money in stock is to shoot images of people that you have model released expressly for the purpose of stock. people working. people engaged in outdoor activties

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 20:21 UTC as 7th comment | 4 replies
On 500px Prime goes live, photographers now get 70% not 30% news story (91 comments in total)

I cant see this model being effective. Most uses you can get the images for less.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 00:28 UTC as 10th comment
On 500px Prime goes live, photographers now get 70% not 30% news story (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mark Smiles: Suppose a guy went to an hardware store to purchase a tool, say a hammer. The clerk would then run a credit check to see how much he could afford and quiz him about his intended use of the hammer including if he was going to make any money using the hammer. Then the clerk could then decide on what would be a fair price to charge for the hammer.

Suppose a gal had a sore throat and went to the drugstore to get some cough drops. The clerk would then check how much she could afford to pay, and determine how important her voice was to her earning a living. The clerk could then determine what he could then charge the gal.

In both of these examples the selling price of the product was not based upon the cost of production, but rather the intended use of the product.

I can hear the hammer manufacturer saying he used my hammer to build a million dollar house, of course I deserve a cut of the action, for I made him a tool. Likewise for the gate at the gal's concert ...

Mark they are not buy hammers or cough drops though. they are buying intellectual property. and specifically the right to reproduce intellectual property. That right reasonable cost more to use in a world wide add campaign than to post an image on a blog. I will never understand why people make up silly examples to try to invalidate something that is entirely reasonable

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 00:27 UTC
On 500px Prime goes live, photographers now get 70% not 30% news story (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

Louis Dallara: It's the licensing agreement that sucks. Unlimited everything and does sellerl aloud to sell the same image? Devils in the details.

the seller cannot re license an image.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2014 at 00:23 UTC
In reply to:

InTheMist: It's basically YouTube for photos.

no, it would not. photographers will never make any money from this kind of advertising its two small a pie.. Photographers sent these images two getty with the expectation they be licensed. A pie that should have been big enough for everyone. that said there has been ample reasons for years not to trust getty to market your stock

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2014 at 20:19 UTC
Total: 531, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »