JosephScha

JosephScha

Lives in United States Suffern, NY, United States
Works as a Software engineer
Joined on Apr 26, 2004
About me:

Former Pentax K1000 user, then Canon A70, then Panasonic FZ7 (an amazingly flexible camera), now Panasonic G10.

Comments

Total: 142, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

I can't find the train

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2015 at 05:02 UTC as 1st comment
On Playing with Death in the -Dumb Ways 2 Die- (Full Colours Only + Border ) challenge (2 comments in total)

Looks like probability is high he is about to be gored.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 30, 2014 at 18:15 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On Faux Old challenge (1 comment in total)

There were 3 or 4 pictures entered that appear to be truly old, not modern photographs pp'd to look old.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2014 at 04:45 UTC as 1st comment
On Engineer & Iron Horse in the Faux Old challenge (1 comment in total)

circa 1910: does that mean this is actually an old photo, and looks this way without PP? If so it does not meet the challenge's goal. I will stretch my imagination and imagine that this was a live scene photographed on 4 May 2013 and you've PP'd it look circa 1910. I hope I'm right.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2014 at 04:41 UTC as 1st comment
On 1921. Soldiers in the Faux Old challenge (1 comment in total)

This photo is ACTUALLY old, it seems from the notes, not faux old.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2014 at 04:32 UTC as 1st comment

I just looked at all the pictures. I find I have no idea how to rate them. Photographic excellence? The monkey's behavior/pose? Monkey appearing to do something recognizable in human behavior? Or showing a defining feature/behavior for that kind of monkey? I'm glad there are over 1000 votes already, I give up ...

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2014 at 01:20 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On Joplinesque in the Panasonic Lumix FZ Series challenge (1 comment in total)

Sometimes greater depth of field is an advantage!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 27, 2014 at 03:30 UTC as 1st comment
On Panasonic Lumix FZ Series challenge (3 comments in total)

I think these photos, considered as a group, are very impressive!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 26, 2014 at 15:02 UTC as 3rd comment
On Windmill and Star Trails in the Long Exposure in the Night challenge (4 comments in total)

Wow, that's amazing.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2014 at 03:57 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

stemcell: How long must it be to qualify as a "long exposure"?

Huh? Is this a question from a different challenge? Nothing in the rules for this challenge mentions "long exposure".

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2014 at 04:20 UTC
On -Domestic Cats- (Full Colours Only + Border) challenge (11 comments in total)
In reply to:

Solar Ben: We love kitties!

Honestly, I wonder if very young kittens qualify in a challenge about "domesticated cats". But for the sake of peace I'll assume they do.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 04:04 UTC
On Street Cat in the -Domestic Cats- (Full Colours Only + Border) challenge (2 comments in total)

How can a picture labeled "street cat" be in a challenge for "domesticated cats"?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2014 at 03:46 UTC as 2nd comment
On -Domestic Cats- (Full Colours Only + Border) challenge (11 comments in total)

Re: "(Watermark can be on the Border as it is considered part of the Photo)"
This is the first mention of watermark in the rules. The rules do not appear to require a watermark.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 10, 2014 at 02:39 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
On panasonic_gm5_ISO-25600_P9580815 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)

ISO 8000 looks surprisingly good. 16000 begins to look like a painting at full resolution. 25600 definitely looks like an oil painting at full resolution. But at "large" they look fine. I have an old Panasonic G10 (same generation as G2), it's 12MP but does not even go to these ISO values. The improvement in sensor technology and probably in processing (assuming these were converted to JPEG in the camera) is really clear to me.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 13:18 UTC as 1st comment
On Thamnophis sirtalis in the -Snakes- (Full Rich Colours Only + Border) challenge (1 comment in total)

a.k.a common garter snake

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2014 at 00:23 UTC as 1st comment
On Food! challenge (9 comments in total)

Amazing. I clicked "Enter" just to see if it would enforce maximum of 0, and it did! It said "...already reached the maximum limit". No wonder there are no entries, no one can possibly enter!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2014 at 03:05 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2076 comments in total)
In reply to:

JosephScha: I remember when "GreatBustard" posted a very similar (but longer) treatise on what he meant by equivalence in the u4/3 forum. The point was to make images that COULD NOT BE DISTINGUISHED - that means, same depth of field, same shutter speed, which means different ISOs to make up for the different f stops - which leads to smaller f stops and higher ISO on the larger sensor camera - which SHOULD (if all else is equal) give approximately the same noise. To the extent that isn't true, it tells us something about the sensors and lenses in use (as demonstrated in the article). I got it, I understood and still understand to this day.
And I almost never need that information. I have a 25mm f/1.2 lens for my u4/3 camera and yes that's equivalent in these terms to 50mm f/2.4 on FF but it makes me very happy. It is more often worthwhile to think of equivalent light intensity = equivalent shutter speed and f stop.

And I have to say: it is great to read that web site again. Still the clearest explanation of what "equivalence" means the way this article uses it, and a good explanation of why we bother to use that definition - to compare different formats at settings that do not favor one over the other. Anyone who didn't get the article should read the web page posted by Great Bustard above.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 03:13 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2076 comments in total)
In reply to:

JosephScha: I remember when "GreatBustard" posted a very similar (but longer) treatise on what he meant by equivalence in the u4/3 forum. The point was to make images that COULD NOT BE DISTINGUISHED - that means, same depth of field, same shutter speed, which means different ISOs to make up for the different f stops - which leads to smaller f stops and higher ISO on the larger sensor camera - which SHOULD (if all else is equal) give approximately the same noise. To the extent that isn't true, it tells us something about the sensors and lenses in use (as demonstrated in the article). I got it, I understood and still understand to this day.
And I almost never need that information. I have a 25mm f/1.2 lens for my u4/3 camera and yes that's equivalent in these terms to 50mm f/2.4 on FF but it makes me very happy. It is more often worthwhile to think of equivalent light intensity = equivalent shutter speed and f stop.

To quote your own web site, it says multiple times "..then the resulting photos will not merely be Equivalent, but be identical."

I used the word "indistinguishable" in the same sense you used the word "identical". I do realize that relies on some extra assumptions that are unlikely to be completely true.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 03:05 UTC
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2076 comments in total)

I remember when "GreatBustard" posted a very similar (but longer) treatise on what he meant by equivalence in the u4/3 forum. The point was to make images that COULD NOT BE DISTINGUISHED - that means, same depth of field, same shutter speed, which means different ISOs to make up for the different f stops - which leads to smaller f stops and higher ISO on the larger sensor camera - which SHOULD (if all else is equal) give approximately the same noise. To the extent that isn't true, it tells us something about the sensors and lenses in use (as demonstrated in the article). I got it, I understood and still understand to this day.
And I almost never need that information. I have a 25mm f/1.2 lens for my u4/3 camera and yes that's equivalent in these terms to 50mm f/2.4 on FF but it makes me very happy. It is more often worthwhile to think of equivalent light intensity = equivalent shutter speed and f stop.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 02:13 UTC as 198th comment | 3 replies
On What is equivalence and why should I care? article (2076 comments in total)
In reply to:

Babka08: Equivalence of total light is moot because sensor quality, pixel density, etc have much more to do with "clean" images these days. You can certainly generalize that a full-frame camera will have less noise. But my Sony a850 had as much noise at iso1600 as my Sony RX100 (well, not quite, but...).
Your explanations of depth of focus are helpful, and the more basic understanding of sensor crop. But other than that, you just confuse and cloud the issues.

There are differences between different manufacturer's sensors, of course. But if those are minimal yes, in fact, I expect a 16MP APS-C sensor to give close to identical results to a 36MP FF sensor .. especially if you let me use depth-of-field equivalent f stops!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 9, 2014 at 02:05 UTC
Total: 142, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »