Jacques Cornell

Jacques Cornell

Lives in Kazakhstan Almaty, Kazakhstan
Works as a photographer
Has a website at jacquescornell.photography
Joined on Jul 13, 2002
About me:

I co-founded event photography company Happening Photos in New York and serve clients around the world. I also shoot, print, exhibit and sell fine art travel & landscape photos.

Comments

Total: 159, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ImagesToo: Quite well explained except for one major mistake. You talk about sensor size as being important. It is only part of the story. The real issue is pixel size. A FF sensor with 4 times as many pixels as a 4/3 sensor is identical in noise performance as each pixel is now only 1/4 the area so it captures the same amount of light.

The other thing which has been omitted is that because of shot noise a raw file only contains about 250 levels of brightness for a pixel which is what a jpg file has. Virtually all the extra information in a raw file is nothing more than digitised noise. You can do the calculations quite easily remembering that noise is the square root of the number of photons.

I used to believe the ideas in the first paragraph, but the consensus of experts now seems to be that sensor size, not pixel pitch, most affects the noise level.

As for the second paragraph, a JPEG has 8 bits of luminance data per pixel. This represents 256 levels of brightness. OTOH, most RAW files contain either 12 or 14 bits of data, which equals 4096 or 16384 levels. Whether this full potential is actually reached, I don't know. But, I think pretty much everyone agrees that RAW files provide highlight recovery and can withstand shadow lifting and tonal stretching far better than JPEGs because there are more levels available.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 03:36 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: The right to record such incidents is absolutely a constitutional right, and must be maintained to preserve our freedom. I'd be VERY concerned to see this taken away.

However, we still have another problem, in that much of the media is more interested in a story then the truth. And much of the general public - as well as juries themselves - fail to view such video clips with common sense. The whole incident, situation and context must be taken into account. This problem goes back at least as far as the Rodney King incident, where people ignored the fact that King refused to pull over for 20-40 miles, driving at high speed under the influence, and was a big man who then charged officers just as a person under the influence of PCP would. The police had to use batons because their use of firearms (and even tazers now) is restricted. King's skin color and last name made it sound worse.

But the Texas law is an AWFUL response to the public's lack of discernment. There's no place for it!

wetsleet wrote:
"Did you read the First Amendment?"

Did you? And, did you understand it better than the Supreme Court does? Are you such an esteemed Constitutional scholar that we should take your word for it that the Supreme Court has been wrong for decades in repeatedly affirming that the First Amendment protects speech and photography is speech? I might not agree with the Court always, but I'm certainly going to take their word over yours.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: The right to record such incidents is absolutely a constitutional right, and must be maintained to preserve our freedom. I'd be VERY concerned to see this taken away.

However, we still have another problem, in that much of the media is more interested in a story then the truth. And much of the general public - as well as juries themselves - fail to view such video clips with common sense. The whole incident, situation and context must be taken into account. This problem goes back at least as far as the Rodney King incident, where people ignored the fact that King refused to pull over for 20-40 miles, driving at high speed under the influence, and was a big man who then charged officers just as a person under the influence of PCP would. The police had to use batons because their use of firearms (and even tazers now) is restricted. King's skin color and last name made it sound worse.

But the Texas law is an AWFUL response to the public's lack of discernment. There's no place for it!

dark goob wrote:
"Please quote me the line in the Constitution where it says 'You have the right to take pictures of cops.'"

Please quote me the line in the Constitution that says "You have the right to be a Catholic." Go ahead.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 09:13 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: The right to record such incidents is absolutely a constitutional right, and must be maintained to preserve our freedom. I'd be VERY concerned to see this taken away.

However, we still have another problem, in that much of the media is more interested in a story then the truth. And much of the general public - as well as juries themselves - fail to view such video clips with common sense. The whole incident, situation and context must be taken into account. This problem goes back at least as far as the Rodney King incident, where people ignored the fact that King refused to pull over for 20-40 miles, driving at high speed under the influence, and was a big man who then charged officers just as a person under the influence of PCP would. The police had to use batons because their use of firearms (and even tazers now) is restricted. King's skin color and last name made it sound worse.

But the Texas law is an AWFUL response to the public's lack of discernment. There's no place for it!

"Actually there is no constitutional right to shoot pictures of cops."

The Supreme Court has long held that the First Amendment protects the rights of citizens to photograph anything that is readily visible when the photographer is standing in a public place. This right can be abridged only when there is a compelling public interest at stake.

One such public interest exception is that in the exercise of their First Amendment rights, citizens may not interfere in the performance of their duties by law enforcement officers. Pretty much everywhere in the US, there are already laws against such interference, so the new Texas law criminalizes something that's already criminal - interference - and something that shouldn't be - recording from within 15' even when this does NOT interfere. Furthermore, the law may effectively outlaw recording from ANY distance, since a photographer 100' from the scene could be forced to stop if an officer approaches within 15' of him.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 08:05 UTC
In reply to:

jeffc1: Draconian?
If someone is within 15ft they are likely getting in the way of the police officer trying to do their job.
DPReview should stick with reporting the facts and stay out of making editorial comments/conclusions.

Problem is, if an officer approaches within 15 feet, you have to stop recording. In effect, he can force you to stop recording from ANY distance simply by continuing to approach you.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 7, 2015 at 07:47 UTC
In reply to:

whumber: That seems really cheap for a new top of the line geared head. Isn't the current version 480 GBP?

EDIT: Seems like the load capacity is pretty low at 4KG.

This replaces the 410 Jr., the BOTTOM of the line.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 05:29 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Since Manfrotto heads and tripods are cheap, that means the effort needed to turn those adjustments will be noticeable. Check how your hands feel after cranking those knurled knobs a dozen or so times. This is why I'd never own a tripod with circular leg tighteners, they KILL the hands after a while.

I find the 410's resistance a bit heavy, but not the problem you describe. However, people with arthritis in their hands or wrists might have trouble with a 410.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 05:27 UTC

I don't know why DPR describes this as a "heavy-weight" head for "weighty" equipment. It replaces the 410, which was always Manfrotto's smallest, lightest geared head, and it holds no more than 9lbs. Also, the XPRO is clearly designed for weight savings, not tank-like construction, and for use on lighter tripods.

Yea! Finally, a geared head for hikers and walkers.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 05:25 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

Digitalis32: As a manfrotto 405 user here I have to say I'm disappointed they chose to "update" the 410 first with all that ...plastic. They can say whatever they want about engineering plastics but I'm not sold on using them to stabilize and secure $10,000 dollars worth of photographic equipment on. Also manfroto: your tiny QR platforms defeat the purpose of using a heavy tripod head in the first place. I'd rather have a broader QR plate that spreads the weight out evenly and has enough mass to help dampen vibrations than a small one that is going to be prone to vibration and easily misplaced.

As a 410 owner and Micro Four Thirds shooter, I welcome this as a 410 replacement. I often leave the 410 behind due to the weight when I go out to shoot outdoors. I've long thought it would be useful to have a lighter geared head for such use with small cameras. And now it's here. Yea!
If you want a heavy head or need bigger plates, there's the 405, which might suit you better than the 410 anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 05:18 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Review preview (484 comments in total)

DPR, would you please include info about the aspect ratio of EVFs? Just reporting the total EVF pixels tells us little about the appearance of 16:9 video and 4:3 stills.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 3, 2015 at 12:02 UTC as 18th comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

thxbb12: That's a shame DPR didn't show a comparison of the EVF size compared to other models (Sony RX100 III, Panasonic LX100 and some other MFT bodies).
It's difficult to gauge how small it is compared to a "regular" MFT body (E-M10, GX7, etc.).

You could say the same about sensors...😄

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2015 at 20:24 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review preview (446 comments in total)
In reply to:

thxbb12: That's a shame DPR didn't show a comparison of the EVF size compared to other models (Sony RX100 III, Panasonic LX100 and some other MFT bodies).
It's difficult to gauge how small it is compared to a "regular" MFT body (E-M10, GX7, etc.).

Yes, a graphic showing the relative apparent sizes of EVFs, similar to those comparing sensor sizes, would be very helpful.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 2, 2015 at 03:39 UTC
On Panasonic releases trio of compact superzooms article (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

straylightrun: Couldn't they go from 18MP to 16MP? Why 12? That's a huge jump down in resolution.

The 10MP LX7 can yield sharp prints up to 16"x24". That's plenty for me. It's the lens that makes all the difference.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2015 at 03:42 UTC
On Panasonic releases trio of compact superzooms article (102 comments in total)

Disappointed we still don't have an LF2 or similar with a high-quality 3x or 4x lens, something with LX7 IQ in a shirt-pocket package.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2015 at 03:40 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

Suntan: Bitorrent Sync and half a brain will get you all of that and more for no dollars a year.

-Suntan

How do you do this and make it SEAMLESS? Could you describe in more detail the workflow you're alluding to? And, does it work with RAW files? I don't want to rank in one app on a tablet, then have to export into separate folders, then transfer to computer and have to reimport the folders into yet another app. I want a way to rank on the tablet, then put it down and immediately start retouching on the computer. And, I want to then be able to pick up my tablet and have ALL that work accessible on it so that I can share the finished images online at any time from anywhere. That's what I mean by seamless, and that's where Apple seems to be headed with Continuity and Handoff.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 03:40 UTC
In reply to:

Suntan: Bitorrent Sync and half a brain will get you all of that and more for no dollars a year.

-Suntan

If you know of a way to download images to an iPad on the road, cull, rank & organize them, then seamlessly transfer to my Mac for adjustments & retouching, I'd love to hear about it.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 3, 2015 at 18:07 UTC

The scanty info we have so far indicates that this is the direction Apple is going with Photos - RAW editing and syncing to OS X and iOS versions of Photos via iCloud. I just got my first iPad in anticipation of such a cross-platform workflow solution so that I can cull, rank & organize photos from a job on the iPad while I'm still on the road, then seamlessly transition to my Mac on return to my office for adjustments & delivery. Of particular interest to me is Apple's forthcoming extensible RAW engine, which will give 3rd-party tools direct access to the RAW pipeline. I think this is why Apple is dropping Aperture: why should Apple build NR, perspective correction, lens correction, album layout and other tools, when 3rd-party devs can deliver them as extensions? It could really be a best-of-all-worlds a la carte solution where we can choose our favorite tools and have them all work seamlessly together without doing the TIF-export-round-trip shuffle.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 3, 2015 at 18:05 UTC as 2nd comment
On BPG image format aims to replace JPEGs article (205 comments in total)

What ever happened to JPEG 2000?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 15, 2014 at 23:35 UTC as 65th comment | 2 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (301 comments in total)
In reply to:

JEROME NOLAS: Great little camera without built in flash, what you do when you loose clip on unit, step on it...? Look mom pic isn't that bad considering it was shot at ISO 12800..

Built-in flash always looks terrible. The only use I have for it is to trigger an off-camera flash, and for that I'd rather have a radio trigger on the (now available) hotshoe.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 14:54 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (301 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: It would be better idea to put articulating screen and keeping built-in flash. Possible owners of this camera (likes control, yet pocketable) would not mind to be without evf.

Hopefully Panasonic's decision will be correct one.

Definitely not. I will never again buy a cam that lacks an EVF.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 8, 2014 at 14:52 UTC
Total: 159, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »