alatchin

alatchin

Lives in Canada Mississauga, Canada
Works as a Graphic Designer, Photographer (in that order)
Has a website at www.alatchinphotography.com
Joined on Oct 1, 2012
About me:

Owner of a design firm, I do a great deal of product photography for clients. My work has expanded to some commercial portraiture and location shooting. I have recently begun working on improving my editorial/fashion style shooting.

Comments

Total: 59, showing: 41 – 59
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction article (1879 comments in total)
In reply to:

Adam Filipowicz: I bet most of the people that are complaining about paying a small fee to use photoshop, dont own a license and have a pirated copy.. becasue if your complaing about $20 then whats the likelyhood you bought it for $1000

Adam, you seem to miss the issue here, and it does take some sorting through. Basically Adobe is offering a great deal for what initially appears to be a relatively low monthly fee.

However when one looks again you realize that renting the software from a company "forever" isn't such a hot idea for many reasons.

If you run into any financial difficulties and cant pay, you also cant work.

You cant even open work you have previously done.

A credit card issue or billing issue, or even an internet connection issue will bring your work to a crashing halt if it happens to coincide with the subscription authentication.

Add to that we've no guarantees of their pricing next year or the year after. It's quite conceivable that I will be paying $400 a month to adobe soon enough for all my copies in my design studio. That is nearly $5000 a year, every year. $25000 over 5 years, $50,000 over 10 years and if in 10 years I can't pay them all my work is inaccessible to me until I pay them again.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 04:20 UTC
On Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction article (1879 comments in total)

It is a TAX they know plain and simple that there is less and less incentive for users to upgrade and need an income model. Holding your work ransom is their answer to their financial goals.

It is laughable suggesting it was too much work keeping both products on the table... Just them talking out of the side of their mouth.

Direct link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 01:45 UTC as 768th comment
In reply to:

alatchin: Here is my issue with their model. Pay forever to use our software... Now if you run into some hard times either as a professional or a consumer we pull the plug. Add to that you wouldn't be able to go back to a previous version and keep working as you wouldnt be able to open the files.

This is basically a TAX on the working professional. Sell me a product, set a price and I will choose to buy it or not. Dont buy up the competition and then hold me to ransom so that I can work and earn a living.

This is a double blow for me as I own a design firm, I used to upgrade the designers software every one or two cycles, now my monthly software fee would be $400 every month so they can work. Or $4800 a year every year, forever.

Onlooker, it isnt only about TIFFs and JPEGS but PSD, AI and ID, not to mention DW and FL.

Also remember this, buy buying up macromedia and merging it with their software they eliminate choice, near monopolize a market then extort it.

Direct link | Posted on May 7, 2013 at 02:20 UTC

Here is my issue with their model. Pay forever to use our software... Now if you run into some hard times either as a professional or a consumer we pull the plug. Add to that you wouldn't be able to go back to a previous version and keep working as you wouldnt be able to open the files.

This is basically a TAX on the working professional. Sell me a product, set a price and I will choose to buy it or not. Dont buy up the competition and then hold me to ransom so that I can work and earn a living.

This is a double blow for me as I own a design firm, I used to upgrade the designers software every one or two cycles, now my monthly software fee would be $400 every month so they can work. Or $4800 a year every year, forever.

Direct link | Posted on May 6, 2013 at 22:13 UTC as 587th comment | 6 replies

Now personally I dont have much interest in this. But, open your mind, reach with a scope or binoculars is different to a lens.... and to get a nice lens you need a camera.

Now sure enough you could get a point and shoot, but if you are someone who likes "watching" wildlife sports etc. clipping on this adaptor means you can get images and video right on your phone and you can share immediately.

Dont know what this will cost, and it may not work if only because it could be difficult to communicate the advantages... but for someone who enjoys viewing through binoculars (and there are lot of people) this replaces most cameras and you can share immediately... Just saying.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 26, 2013 at 18:45 UTC as 17th comment

Well designed camera. Its look on the back seems to be based on a phone :)

Direct link | Posted on Mar 22, 2013 at 01:38 UTC as 9th comment
On Confessions of a camera snob post (90 comments in total)

Great writing Amadou, and an interesting article I really enjoyed reading. While relatively young (33) I dont really use too much social media sharing, and therefore my phone cam rately gets used (I dont own any apps)... Maybe I will get snapseed as a lot of your images were very attractive!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2013 at 17:04 UTC as 45th comment
On Dblcam app captures both sides of the story post (17 comments in total)

A really good idea!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2013 at 20:08 UTC as 22nd comment
On Cine System Tripod Dolly and Mount Review article (70 comments in total)

Makes me want one, good review!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2013 at 21:18 UTC as 33rd comment
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 review article (546 comments in total)

Handled it the other day in the store, it is a lovely camera... But, I could get an OMD, 17mm f1.8, 45mm f1.8 and 75mm f1.8 all inside the cost of this, if you want an EVF for this as well then I have another $300 to spend... Sure IQ is really nice, and many will buy it, but many here enjoy flexibility.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 05:34 UTC as 124th comment
In reply to:

Shashinkaman: Sorry to drop a bomb like this, being a newbie and all, but I can here by confirm (live in Japan, and am 'very well' connected to Olympus - but am not allowed to "talk to the press") that there won't be anything like the e-5 in the future ever again...
So Don't hold your breath, don't keep hoping and dreaming, it is time to move on or, better, do your Zuiko lenses proud and go out and shoot pictures with your current e-5 (which, after all, is still a very nice and capable little piece of equipement, if I may say so...)
The Olympus die has been cast, and e-7 wasn't in the stars I'm afraid...

My god, the shills are out in force.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 15, 2013 at 18:43 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: The disappointing part of this story is that Olympus is losing money selling M4/3 cameras and lenses. This is really troubling.

Lets face it... they probably sold very few E5 cameras last year. It's hard to lose $170 million on DSLR sales when you don't sell very many of them. MILC cameras and lenses probably account for 95% of the sales of the imaging division today.

Considering the fact that M4/3 cameras and lenses aren't cheap, I don't know how they can raise their prices much. And M4/3 outsells every other mirrorless format.

I wonder if Sony, Nikon, Samsung and Fuji are losing money on their MILC cameras too? I would imagine that Canon and Pentax are losing money on theirs, due to extremely low volumes.

I think the point is, noone knows exactly where the money is being lost. If what is said here is to be believed then Olympus has done nothing for 43rds in years, how could their DLSR business contribute to their losses?

If Olympus follows the thinking that many here prescribe to, then Olympus should stop m43rds, after all they are losing buckets of money right? Unless we know how many active DSLR users are out there and the specific areas of profit and loss you have the m43rds group crying out for a high end zoom why complaining about the cost of lenses... and they seem to be the biggest current detractors from 43rds... The other big group are those that left the system... Why would Olympus listen to those two groups over its current userbase?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2013 at 14:23 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: i dont know that 4/3rds ever made sense for full size cameras. seems like a good idea. going foreward you can adapt the lenses to micro 4/3rds body. The slr line clearly has been a commercial failure. mostly in my mind because it was ill conceived. kill it off

If you dont understand what i am talking about then how on earth are you capable of unravelling olympus' areas of specific profit and loss as well as knowing they should kill off an area of huge investment.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2013 at 13:45 UTC
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: i dont know that 4/3rds ever made sense for full size cameras. seems like a good idea. going foreward you can adapt the lenses to micro 4/3rds body. The slr line clearly has been a commercial failure. mostly in my mind because it was ill conceived. kill it off

Look at this, people who "know" what is best for a full size Camera company... My word, weekend warriors unite in business fortune telling.

Only olympus knows how many active users are using their lenses, how many potential upgraders exist in m43rds etc. So you would think that they have given it a little more thought than just "kill it off".

Just to finish, people here like to rewrite history, Olympus made some lovely cameras and only seriously lagged the competition around the time of the E-5 as the E-30 was even considered competitive by this site. They have lenses that are SMALL for their FL and aperture, they are called the HG line, get an 11-22 f2.8-35 a 14-54 f2.8-3.5 and a 50-200 f2.8-3.5 and thrown them in your bag, you have some incredible versatility, range, speed and build in 4 superb lenses. People seem to judge the entire Zuiko line based entirely on the SHG lenses... That is like me judging Canon and Nikon on their 600mm lenses...

Stop building strawmen.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2013 at 08:21 UTC

The effort Olympus has to put into assuring its customers that it will continue producing cameras for their lens owners is astonishing.

Not to say they havent had a few mixed messages out there, but the way the doom and gloom crew latch onto anything they say is almost amusing... almost if it wasn't so irritating.

With the stable of HG and SHG lenses which are top performers in their class, why would they simply dump the lot and try again in m43rds. It is more likely they will rethink their DSLR offering with how their success in m43rds has panned out. With more interesting body styling, maybe a bit more modularization and better performance.

When Olympus said in their annual report they would reduce their activities in compacts and focus on higher end offerings, well they have done... They didnt stop producing them. So I see them as offering 1, maybe 2 DSLRs on the market with stronger feature-sets and form.

Interesting times ahead...

Direct link | Posted on Feb 14, 2013 at 02:06 UTC as 58th comment
On CP+ 2013: Interview with Olympus' Toshi Terada article (242 comments in total)

Great news. Olympus makes excellent cameras and lenses, I look forward to seeing what they produce this year for their stunning 43rds lenses :)

Direct link | Posted on Feb 3, 2013 at 03:44 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

yabokkie: a 150mm f/2.8 FourThirds is a 294mm f/5.5 equivalent on 35mm format. compared with Canon and Nikon 300mm f/4 ones, this lens should worth about 750 dollars.

@yabokkie
You are still missing the point, you are comparing a lens to a fictional one and deciding pricing... okay so the 50mm f1.2 is $1600 and the 43mm f1.2 should only be $100... but wait when I put the 50mm f1.2 on my m43rds body it is really only like a 100mm f2.5 on FF, so that lens should cost about $500...

Your logic shows a lack of understanding about the application of equivalence. So using your terrible logic, I fell the 50mm f1.2 is worth about $500, and the 5Dm111 is worth about $600.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2013 at 07:29 UTC
In reply to:

yabokkie: a 150mm f/2.8 FourThirds is a 294mm f/5.5 equivalent on 35mm format. compared with Canon and Nikon 300mm f/4 ones, this lens should worth about 750 dollars.

Dont be silly. You have this all messed up, the lens isnt equivalent in the same way you suggest as your final result would have a light intensity 2 stops lower than the lens you equate it to... So juding by your methods because the noise and DR of the body we just slapped that lens on now performs like a $1000 OMD, the 5Dm111 is no way worth $3000, it should cost $1000, or in fact it has the same performance of the EPL5, so it should cost $600...

Inst equivalence fun, boy are those FF cameras expensive.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2013 at 06:45 UTC
On Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? article (1514 comments in total)

No matter how you look a it, a very good year for photographers!
My vote was for the OMD, innovation in a small package with options galore.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 21, 2012 at 04:01 UTC as 292nd comment
Total: 59, showing: 41 – 59
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »