BartyLobethal

BartyLobethal

Lives in Australia Adelaide, Australia
Works as a Curdemudgeon
Joined on Apr 21, 2011

Comments

Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I admire Toni's commitment. I could make it a NY resolution to do something like this, but I know me. I'd already be behind by Tuesday next week.

Well done Toni.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2014 at 02:30 UTC as 4th comment
On Nikon D750 Review preview (1226 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: What are we all complaining about? Just 6 years ago we had pathetic burst rates, 12 Megapixels was the Max instead of the min available, Video was non existent, Quiet shutters were almost unheard of, Auto Focus was only slightly better than manual focus, and the cameras cost more than they do today.

If you can't take great pictures and videos with the latest cameras then you really can't blame the camera anymore.

All of the above specs are useless unless both camera and lens have "Pro version" printed prominently on them. It's the only way to be sure.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2014 at 22:50 UTC
In reply to:

photo_rb: This is a little off topic, but how many think that black and white photography is only valid when it is done with b/w film, or perhaps a monochrome sensor?

@photo_rb, how is it any less "honest" if the photographer had a B&W image in mind when taking the photograph and converts the image to B&W during processing?

Why might it be "dishonest" to take it with the intention of producing a colour work, then deciding at some later time that it actually works better as B&W?

Presented with three B&W images - one taken with a monochrome camera, one in colour with the intention to convert later, and one converted on a whim - but with no insight into the photographer's original intention, how would you detect or quantify the level of "honesty" present in each one?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 21:53 UTC
In reply to:

photo_rb: This is a little off topic, but how many think that black and white photography is only valid when it is done with b/w film, or perhaps a monochrome sensor?

Not me either.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 05:19 UTC
In reply to:

skiphunt13: So, let's say I had a friend who could spare $7million. I get him to buy one of my prints, generate a bunch of press releases about how "Now there's a new King of the Mountain! Skip Hunt has now beat Peter Lik for the most expensive image ever sold at $7Million!" Or something like that.

Now I bask in all the press glory, read all the articles about how my work isn't worth it, lots gf blogs recycle the story all over the net, different magazines print the story, news programming runs with it, interviews with me on morning programs, and then on to the nighttime talk shows, the value of the rest of my work skyrockets, a new photo-super-star is born, people who don't know better feel like paying $250k for a "Skip Hunt" is a bargain by comparison, etc.

You get the picture.

Meanwhile, somewhere down the trail I quietly "gift" my wealthy friend back his $7mil and a little extra for his trouble.

Jus sayin...

;)

Try the following:
a) Borrow the $7 mil from your friend.
b) Find an obscure artist who produces 'contemporary' work.
c) Pay them $6 mil for one of the pieces. Get them to throw in another 20 as a 'job lot' for the remaining million.
d) Capitalise on the rise of the perceived value of their work by selling the 20 pieces for ten times what you paid for them.
e) Pay your friend back with fair interest.
f) Keep the first piece and market yourself as a sophisticated collector and 'patron'.

It's less work, more money, and you survive being 'flavour of the month.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 03:07 UTC

I don't think there's enough veiling flare for it to be considered aesthetically valid. The photographer seems bound by the conventions of contrast, acuity and composition.

He probably hasn't spent enough time agonising over minor design limitations of his camera.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 12, 2014 at 02:45 UTC as 127th comment | 1 reply

Those complaining about the violence and horror in these images evidently failed to see half the images - the half that featured moments of triumph in sport, a fashion show, and a moment in the life of an outback family.

You only saw the images that represent conflict and tragedy, then complain that all the images represent conflict and tragedy?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 3, 2014 at 21:30 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Karl Summers: Truly amazing, the first recorded selfie?

I think you're being unnecessarily harsh on modems. They connect us to the web day and night, often working reliably for years, and ask nothing beyond the initial purchase price other than a little electricity. I don't see how that can be characterised as shellfish.

Oh wait. You actually wrote "modern". Sorry, my misunderstanding.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 29, 2014 at 20:00 UTC
On Inside RA001: World's first Boeing 747 'Jumbo Jet' article (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joseph Black: Without engineers science is just philosophy.

Science turns money into knowledge. Engineering turns that knowledge back into money.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 29, 2014 at 12:14 UTC
On SanDisk unveils 512GB Extreme Pro card article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: I still have a 4 MB Memory Stick i keep around.

I have a piece of graph paper I sometimes scribble alternating '1's and '0's on.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 11, 2014 at 21:18 UTC
In reply to:

Boerseuntjie: Canada Post is the example of how "union" workers kill a good thing, it's happening to all Unionized corporations around the world, I personally have had a few bad experiences with Canada Post and tend to avoid using them.

Right, because there's an axiomatic link between workers organising to ensure a decent return on their labour under decent conditions, and theft. Also, non-unionised labour is unfailingly honest.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2014 at 22:04 UTC
In reply to:

G3User: The demise of pro paid photography continues. Now, any soccer mom can have out of focus backgrounds. Again, another reason not to hire a paid photographer. Pro photography, RIP.

If all "pro paid photography" has to distinguish itself (and I think it has much more) are some cheesy 'out of focus' backgrounds, then its demise is well overdue.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 25, 2014 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

Steve Bingham: . . . it cycles! And the light value cycles with it.

Don't know about those circular tubes, but compact fluorescents contain electronic ballasts that switch them at between 10kHz and 20kHz. At likely shutter speeds there will be multiple cycles, and the average light values from shot-to-shot will be consistent.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 13, 2014 at 01:39 UTC
In reply to:

Shiranai: No photoshop was used...? Really? I don't think so.
At a 3200th of a second you'd always see the source where the water came from, even if its fragments of a bursted balloon. So I'm pretty sure they edited the source out with a second photo of the background.

They look to me as if they have been thrown into view from outside the frame, rather than created within the frame. The ones that appear to be 'standing up' threw me for a bit, then I realised they have simply been poured down from above with the capture occurring synchronously with contact with the ground. I can't say whether or not PS was used, but I don't think it needed to be, other than perhaps for cropping.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 2, 2014 at 03:30 UTC
In reply to:

peterstuckings: Ah yes, I recall the days as a photography student, when we used to mess around with all sorts of cool and fun concepts...

Did you stop doing that? If so, why?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2014 at 03:21 UTC

I think his role as the monstrous Frank in David Lynch's 'Blue Velvet' was his most powerful, but he was also excellent as the demented photographer in 'Apocalypse Now', appearing in his introductory scene with multiple 35mm Nikons slung about him. That scene will work even better now that I know he was actually a photographer.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 21:14 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

InTheMist: Wow, this is really a fantastic set.

He obviously has a patient family.

Benzodiazepine?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 15, 2014 at 01:36 UTC
In reply to:

Danny: Very beautiful, but these kind of images could have been done much easier imho, studio shots with some wind and wires, then post processing, if done well no-one will ever tell the difference.

And soon after that they'll stop producing pictures of us, and start producing images of themselves.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 13, 2014 at 10:49 UTC
In reply to:

Pat Cullinan Jr: Thou shalt not steal.

--God

God: "Thou shalt not steal. Unless we're talking about people who hold ideas about the world other than those I dictate, in which case it's OK to steal their entire nations and subject them to enslavement and genocide in the process". This is the Canaanite experience in the Old Testament. So, if the photographer didn't think the right things, god would not only steal his own graduation photo, he'd steal all of the photographer's equipment and kill the photographer too. Oddly enough, this doesn't seem to have hurt his career at all.

Direct link | Posted on May 28, 2014 at 23:41 UTC
On Portfolio: Photography student Luke Evans article (172 comments in total)

Interesting images produced using interesting techniques, driven by curiosity.

Direct link | Posted on May 26, 2014 at 21:51 UTC as 33rd comment
Total: 141, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »