PIX 2015
Jo Lovell

Jo Lovell

Lives in United Kingdom London, United Kingdom
Works as a Social Researcher (Ex photogrpaher)
Has a website at www.creativelight.co.uk/jo
Joined on Aug 2, 2001
About me:

Nikon D70
Nikon F501
Nikkor 20mm F2.8
Sigma 28-70 F2.8
Nikkor 35mm F2
Nikkor 50mm F1.8
Nikkor 135mm E F2.8 MF
Nikkor 70-210 F4

Comments

Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3
In reply to:

marshwader: Lovely photograph. I admired it when I first saw it a while ago. A well deserved award.
Which camera did he use. It's not specified and would be interesting to know. A "weather resistant camera" with a 70-200 f/2.8 zoom. Was it a Canon by any chance?

You're not far from the mark...

I went to the London exhibition, Sony branding was everywhere. But strangely and disappointingly all of the technical info such as camera, lens settings etc was missing from the gallery of entrants - something I had enjoyed pouring over at the Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition earlier that day (90% Nikon and Canon). Perhaps Sony just don't care about that sort of thing?

Oh wait, not to worry - as soon as you get to the 'Sony Ambassadors' gallery rooms at the end of the exhibition, low and behold every single image had detailed technical specifications and hardware info supplied - and of course they were all Sony!

They were all excellent - but that's not the point. Gear and settings are of interest to (many) photographers on a technical level ("how did they achieve that amazing shot!?") , but to me censorship of that information smacks of heavy handed editorial control by a sponsor.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 4, 2015 at 13:10 UTC
On App tutorial: Give portraits depth with HDR feel post (38 comments in total)
In reply to:

CollBaxter: Ieeeesh this looks like 4 steps form looking normal to homeless.

This is terrible. It was already overexposed, you can see the blown red channel in the histogram. Then the finla result has massively blocked in shaddows. Not HDR whatsoever. If it had been titled 'How to make a generic looking instagram style portrait' it would have been fine. Even then, the shot itself has no redeeming portrait features - nothing can be inferred about the subject whatsoever.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 15, 2013 at 10:08 UTC

I just can't believe Adobe would jepodise its brand image by being so completely dishonest about the technology. A company I used to trust just fell to zero in respect terms - lying to an audience of over 1 million people who have watched the clip! Any blur created by software is going to be much easier to correct for than real life motion blur - partly becasue you will able to tell photoshop the exact reverse parameters. Come on Adobe, apologise now. Promising software but this is a dishonest way to preview it.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2011 at 19:04 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3