GaryJP

GaryJP

Lives in Hong Kong Hong Kong
Works as a TV Production, Directing, Shooting, Editing
Joined on Mar 11, 2006

Comments

Total: 702, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ABM Barry: Here in Australia users who have long complained that they are price gouged by major companies such as Apple, Adobe, and Microsoft. In fact, pricing is such a source of contention within Australia that executives from Adobe, Microsoft, and Apple have been summoned to appear before Australian Parliament to answer questions specifically about pricing.

All three of these companies had previously refused to appear before Parliament.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juM46ny1WhM

Check out this link, then tell us your thoughts? (after being sick!)

I agree with you, but right now, with these repeated posts, it is a toss up whether the Adobe CEO is more annoying or you are.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2013 at 02:02 UTC
In reply to:

GaryJP: Adobe unilaterally changed the terms on which I may use their software. Once trust is gone, it is gone.

I have several boxed versions, which will work - in the case of photography - until my cameras update too far. So I have now bought a few competitive packages. As for video editing, also part of my Adobe usage, the problem is more complex. They may fornicate with themselves as far as I am concerned. No more. Apple screwed up with Final Cut Pro and many pro editors went to Premiere in droves. I had been with Premiere for years, and - now that Apple have listened to customers while Adobe has reamed us - am going to Final Cut Pro.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2013 at 01:53 UTC
In reply to:

acidic: "This new package will set you back $120 per year, which seems like a good deal, considering how often Adobe updates their products."

Adobe will have far less incentive to update their products frequently once everyone is on subscription.

Additionally, many like myself, did not upgrade to each and every new version. For the most part, I was perfectly happy skipping versions of Photoshop and upgrading to every other version.

The REASON for the subscription model is that the software is mature and new updates can only be small increments. I think you are missing the point of the strategy.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2013 at 01:13 UTC
In reply to:

davinci953: It's no surprise that Adobe wants to push the subscription software model. I worked for a software company that went down this path a number of years ago, and at the time offered a lot of the same reasons that Adobe is giving now to entice customers to bite the fruit. Subscription models are one of the best revenue generators for software companies. As one of the senior VPs described it, "It's the gift that keeps on giving."

Actually it's the GIVER that keeps on giving, and I have no intention of being that giver.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2013 at 01:09 UTC
In reply to:

gavin: I mainly use lightroom and upgrade yearly so thats $80 I think. I do have CS3 and CS5 but I just don't use PS that much so for $40 I get updated version vs buying upgrade every 2-3 years for $120. Its about the same for me then on average. I did not consider CC before since I don't need all that stuff and its way too much. I can handle $10/month.

This is of course a great deal for Adobe as they get annuities.

Ultimately, if it worked in your favour instead of theirs why on Earth do you think Adobe would be offering it?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2013 at 01:07 UTC

Adobe unilaterally changed the terms on which I may use their software. Once trust is gone, it is gone.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2013 at 01:06 UTC as 59th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Raincheck: Adobe Creative Cloud has been the greatest thing since sliced bread for me. I love having that 4 inch long string of apps. in the Finder on my Mac. No way could I justify the thousands of dollars to buy them outright, but HAVING them has opened the door for me to make 14 times the cost of the subscriptions (during the time I've had them) in graphics work, As A Sideline.

The part I've always thought about first is the hordes of young talented artists and photographers who now have within their reach a way to load up the needed thousands of dollars worth of software they need to start out.

"Adobe Creative Cloud has been the greatest thing since sliced bread for me." That is a good argument for making it an OPTION. It is no argument for making it compulsory.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 00:28 UTC

You can't trust Adobe. Ever. We know that now.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 6, 2013 at 00:26 UTC as 88th comment

Sorry. Adobe will never get me to rent my software. I am sticking with what I have until I decide to change software companies. I know how much I can trust you now, which is not at all.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 5, 2013 at 09:28 UTC as 154th comment

One worry is that in most fish tanks the glass is inside the metal frame, because they are designed to resist more internal pressure. Here, you are subjecting the tank to EXTERNAL pressure, which makes it easier for thew glass to cave in.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 3, 2013 at 07:57 UTC as 21st comment
In reply to:

Ed_arizona: The alligator tasted a Canon and barfed

I was going to make a jokey post like this at the expense of fanboys. I did not think anyone would be dumb enough to do it for real.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2013 at 02:31 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: This is why I love these new chinese lighting companies. i cant believe they want 200 bux for this. I just bought a similar thing for $25. I have been in photography for a long time and its great to buy 50 dollar soft boxes and the like

"copyright infringement and corporate theft are wonderful things...the Samsung corporation LIVES off it." Well, first, some of the things companies try to copyright/patent are absurd. "A tap is a zero length swipe" - Apple.

Second, Apple have been known to lift from Samsung and Microsoft too. It is shameful and protectionist that when the U.S. International Trade Commission finds Apple have copied Samsung that the President overturns the ban on their sales.

And third, my significant other's Samsung Galaxy Note actually outshines my iPhone and makes it look sad and retro. As does the S4. We'll see in September how much Apple are following on Samsung's design lead, including the larger screens they initially mocked. If they don't up their game, I am going Samsung for my phone, although not my computers. I'll take a hit on integration for the sake of the better product. Both sides should compete on quality and customer satisfaction, not lawsuits.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 25, 2013 at 02:15 UTC
In reply to:

micahmedia: Great! I can wait for the knock off version!

Seriously though, I would prefer the legit one, regardless of price, if only they supported their product better. I bought one of their original Ray Flash units that had internal elements fall apart and rattle around. When I called, they told me to go swap for a new one at the brick and mortar store I'd bought it at. So I did, but that one gave uneven illumination, and they didn't have any more that fit my flash in stock.

So I returned it.

A year later I bought a knockoff version. Same quality of light. Not perfectly symmetrical, but for under $50, I'm not going to complain. Unlike the Ray Flash which cost me $200. Not falling for that again. No, I'll just wait for the knockoff again.

I live in Hong Kong. All I have ever seen in the stores is the Chinese knock-off.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2013 at 09:22 UTC
On Nearly deleted photo helps shot putter secure gold news story (37 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mekka Man: I am not sure if this photo proves anything. After a shot putter, discuss thrower or even javelin thrower release the projectile, their momentum is what usually pushes them out of the legal boundaries for a good throw. We would need to see a few more frames of and after the release to confirm the validity of this throw. The judges must have viewed other frames to make their decision.

Once they have released it, the throw is done.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 24, 2013 at 01:58 UTC
In reply to:

jaygeephoto: The Parthenon should be ready for that first coat of Weatherbeaterâ„¢ or Benjamin Moore any time now. Will look worlds better than it does now. Hope Sanna is free to wield a brush.

It had its first coat thousands of years ago. I am not a fan of colourisation, but the Parthenon WAS highly coloured. And academics have already wielded that brush.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 21, 2013 at 02:01 UTC
On Bolivian airline's demise documented in haunting photos news story (95 comments in total)
In reply to:

JDThomas: As a bird lover I find it highly offensive that DPReview posted that 2nd photo.

How can they have the audacity to make that image viewable to the public knowing full well that at least 87.6% of "normal" human beings are adamantly against the death of innocent little birdies?

This is nothing short of promoting AVICIDE and I won't stand for it! I demand this post be taken down!

Shame on you Barney Britton for condoning birdie-bashing on a photography website!

Gosh the political drum bashers ARE crawling out of the woodwork today aren't they? And we all know NO airline has ever failed in the US. That's why the flight attendants are 100 years old. .

Direct link | Posted on Aug 17, 2013 at 09:14 UTC
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fatal Farter: Anyone else thinks the colours for the rooftop party shot with the Sony Cyber-shot RX100II isn't so nice?

Please read what I actually wrote. Why did you deliberately remove the word "well", as in "not well adjustable"? What I find with my RX100 raws is that you can make smaller adjustments than you can with other raw files before they begin to go haywire. I have recently sold my original RX100 to buy the Mark II. It is useful for portability. But I am not kidding myself about its IQ. And the raws are indeed less flexible in both Lightroom and Capture One.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2013 at 23:59 UTC
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

plasnu: DSLR is a tool for a bad carpenter who tends to blame his tools.

What a daft comment.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 4, 2013 at 00:17 UTC
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

GaryJP: Simple. If YOU can't see the difference between a little pocket camera and a DSLR, you don't need a DSLR. Personally, I need a DSLR. (And yes, I do have plenty of "pocket" cameras).

"With the exception of the D800, you can keep your pathetic DSLR." As I said, if you can't see the difference, be happy.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2013 at 05:16 UTC
On 5 Reasons why I haven't used my DSLR for months article (590 comments in total)
In reply to:

GaryJP: Simple. If YOU can't see the difference between a little pocket camera and a DSLR, you don't need a DSLR. Personally, I need a DSLR. (And yes, I do have plenty of "pocket" cameras).

"the resume of your comment = only rich people can make good pictures" A rather stupid summary, as a DSLR doesn't necessarily cost more than many of the compacts.

It's also a straw man argument. There are times I use a compact. I just don't try to kid myself that the IQ is (a) the same or (b) better. When I don't care as much about the IQ and portability takes precedence, that's one thing. But people trying to convince themselves there is IQ equivalence here, are either fooling themselves or simply unable to tell the difference. In which case a DSLR is meaningless to them.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2013 at 05:16 UTC
Total: 702, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »