Jacques Cornell

Jacques Cornell

Lives in United States Brooklyn, NY, United States
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 from around the country. I also shoot, print, exhibit and sell fine art travel & landscape photos.

Comments

Total: 94, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Nikon007: My advice has always been "stay away from wide Gamut unless you know what your doing". For me it's not worth the hassle to see colors no one else can. You don't see it in print, your clients don't see it, on the web they can't be seen. So what good is it? It's great for a dedicated graphics station but for general use it causes many folks a lot of head aches. So if WG is your cup of tea go for it. If your not sure do your research first, there are lot of threads on this subject going back for years and nothing has really changed.

You may not see it in prints from a lab, but photo inkjet printers have been able to print way beyond the sRGB colorspace for quite a while now.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 15, 2013 at 15:29 UTC
In reply to:

clv100: Interesting article, but, as others have mentioned, not including Aperture was a mistake. At the very, very least it warranted a significant mention in the intro and closing comments. I hope you can find the time to revisit this work with Aperture included in the not too distant future.

The "cross-platform only" stipulation is a fig leaf. This site has long stubbornly ignored Aperture. The editors have insisted that this reflects market share, but I refuse to believe that there are more DXO users than Aperture users.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2013 at 02:02 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

pizzolog: Tues, Dec 18, 2012
I agree with topstuff, The Sony RX100 is truly in a different class.
In spite of the fact all of these cameras and The RX100 are put together in this same article, dpReview also agrees with the premise topstuff puts forth, dpReview will not allow the RX100 to be compared with any of the other eight cameras on the RX100 conclusion page.
The Sony RX100 is an engineering marvel.
Sony has performed the unimaginable astonishingly well, but apparently blundered in doing the easy things badly, such as:
Vague clickless control dial
Unpredictable flash metering
Lack of ND filter
No lens filter option
Confusingly playback stills, MP4 and AVCHD
Irksome lag zoom in playback.
No hard copy manual.
These apparent quirks, on paper at least, seem to keep the RX100 from being the GEM it should be.
I hope that the RX200 overcomes all of these relatively simple shortcomings; then perhaps I would not mind spending $649.
The $299 Lumix LX7 is the better purchase and a great camera.

The RX100 RAW files look soft. Yes, the test images appear to be somewhat front-focused relative to some other cameras, but even objects near the front, like the watch, look soft and show less resolution than the GX1. In terms of practical resolution of fine detail, it doesn't appear to be any better at low ISO than even the 10MP LX7. I think the hype around the RX100's 20MP is overblown. If I really need to make high-resolution prints larger than 12"x18", I'd rather have a GX1. For prints up to 12"x18", I'd rather have the LX7 with its faster & sharper lens (especially at the tele end) and superb interface.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2012 at 16:18 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

ddtwenty: My only one complaint to panasonic is that...
Please please do the next lx serie with the same 24 mm. Wide and put bigger sensor on them. Imagine if lx7 has larger sensor that can perfome better on high iso ... I think sony rx100 will hardly makes such phenomenon in this year.
And I think it dose not matter if pricing will go up high just like sony's.

There's a tradeoff involved with sensor size. Bigger sensor = bigger lens = bigger camera, OR same-size lens with smaller max aperture. Look at the LX7 vs GX1. The GX1 has a bigger sensor and consequently higher usable ISO, but the kit zoom lens starts at f3.5 vs. f1.4 for the LX7. Where you can shoot the LX7 at f1.4 and ISO 100, the GX1 will be at f3.5 and ISO 640. That's why I have both. LX 7 for pocketable every-day carry, and GX1 for planned shooting in good light for large (16"x24") prints.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2012 at 16:04 UTC
On The Time magazine showcases Top 10 photos of 2012 news story (147 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhahilt: Every one of these photos required at least a paragraph of explanation to make them relevant, a good picture should be able to stand and deliver on its own. Time has in the past given the world some incredible images, this lot fails

And every movie should be silent.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2012 at 04:14 UTC
On The Time magazine showcases Top 10 photos of 2012 news story (147 comments in total)

I could have taken that picture! If only I'd thought of it. If only I'd been there. If only I'd anticipated the subject would be there and do that at that moment. If only I'd planned ahead to be at the front of the crowd. If only I'd been willing to risk my life traveling though shelling and war and checkpoints controlled by 17-year-olds with AK-47s. If only I'd brought a fast prime lens. If only I'd schlepped a heavy bag of equipment halfway around the world for weeks and weeks away from home and family. Yeah, I could have taken that picture.

But I didn't.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2012 at 04:09 UTC as 24th comment | 1 reply

Yea! Rendering of RAW files shot with aspect ratio set to 3:2 on Panasonic DMC-FZ38 is now fixed. Apple tech even called me to let me know ( - I reported the bug a while back). Classy!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 1, 2012 at 00:39 UTC as 17th comment
On Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM preview news story (151 comments in total)

I might have been interested if it were under $1000 like the 17-40 f4L and 70-200 f4L (both of which I own and recommend). That would make a nice lineup of affordable pro lenses. When I'm shooting events with very low ambient light, even f2.8 isn't enough and IS doesn't stop action, so I go with fast primes. Sharp f4 zooms fit nicely in my kit for those times when I've got plenty of light or am working with flash. I'm not too happy about the way Canon L lens prices have been climbing into the stratosphere.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 6, 2012 at 16:55 UTC as 44th comment
In reply to:

Pandaemas: I awe apple devices for their display, but offering a low res device doesn't seem like a smart move...

The reason Apple kept the same res as the iPad 2 is that this way developers do not have to make yet another version of all of their apps. One of the big problems on Android is that the wide range of hardware specs makes software developers lives miserable. The iPad Mini runs regular iPad apps exactly the same as the larger iPad 2.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 12:32 UTC

"Low-res iPad Mini...in Apple refresh"

Way to dis Apple, DPR.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2012 at 12:25 UTC as 14th comment | 3 replies
On _DSC0168 photo in ZoranC's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Classy.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2012 at 04:03 UTC as 1st comment
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 review news story (187 comments in total)

Doesn't really address changes in IQ from LX5. The studio shot comparison page shows the LX7 to be a bit noisier than the LX5, at least with RAW files, but I'm not sure I entirely trust what I'm seeing. Would have been nice to have this addressed by the reviewer.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2012 at 14:54 UTC as 30th comment
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 review news story (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

gsum: I have the LX5 - good image quality for a compact, well made, great lens and absolutely brilliant for macro photography. Therefore, I was looking forward to the LX7 but with trepidation and rightly it seems. Panasonic have done nothing to correct the considerable LX5 problems:

The totally useless thumbwheel that selects unwanted modes if you press too hard whilst rotating it.
The fiddly controls.
The useless clutter of scene selections and in-camera image processing.
The ridiculous intelligent auto that does everything that you *don't* want the camera to do.
The failure to separate out all the useless clutter from the camera's useful features as with Samsung's NX100 for example.

It's a real pity that Panasonic have again not produced a proper enthusiasts camera - a missed opportunity.

?! Seems to me that paring down and adding picture effects are two opposite movements.

I'm fairly old-school when it comes to camera interfaces. And yet, I don't find the extra features (e.g. scene modes) at all obtrusive. This is probably because the camera's superb customizability and custom settings allow me to set every aspect of the camera's operation exactly the way I want and just like my Canon 1-series: AE lock via rear button, AF activation via rear button, auto AF point select, burst mode, aperture-priority AE. Yes, there's a lot of extraneous stuff in the menus, but now that I've got the camera set up, they're completely out of my way. I actually find Panasonic's menu system much more comprehensible than Nikon's.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2012 at 12:04 UTC
On Canon EOS 6D preview (1044 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jacques Cornell: I sure wish Canon would make some decisions about their menu system and control layout and stick with them, instead of reconfiguring everything with every new model. Having a consistent and familiar set of controls on different cameras is important. Part of the reason I chose a 1Ds Mark III over a 5D Mark III is that its operation is identical to that of my 1D Mark III. The 1D & 1Ds make a perfect matched pair, and I don't have to think at all when switching between them. As it stands now, a pro who chooses a 5D Mark III as their main camera has no option for a matching second/backup body other than another 5D Mark III, as the 7D and 6D and 5D Mark II all have different controls. Sheesh!

JackM, you know, your "you don't know your cameras" comment really has an unattractively snarky tone of smug superiority. I'm just saying what I find helpful. Why do you have a problem with that?

Perhaps you don't shoot fast action under time pressure in the dark with two cameras. When I'm switching rapidly back and forth between two bodies with different lenses, I find I miss fewer shots if I don't have to take the time to think about which body I'm holding now to find the ISO button or the AF point selection button without taking the camera away from my eye.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 18:53 UTC
On Canon EOS 6D preview (1044 comments in total)

I sure wish Canon would make some decisions about their menu system and control layout and stick with them, instead of reconfiguring everything with every new model. Having a consistent and familiar set of controls on different cameras is important. Part of the reason I chose a 1Ds Mark III over a 5D Mark III is that its operation is identical to that of my 1D Mark III. The 1D & 1Ds make a perfect matched pair, and I don't have to think at all when switching between them. As it stands now, a pro who chooses a 5D Mark III as their main camera has no option for a matching second/backup body other than another 5D Mark III, as the 7D and 6D and 5D Mark II all have different controls. Sheesh!

Direct link | Posted on Sep 17, 2012 at 13:08 UTC as 331st comment | 3 replies
On Lightroom Photo Import article (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

MarkByland: Definitely like Lr's import utility. I've used Canon Utils for years and have switched over as it is so much easier. I would like to see them add the erase-after-import option. The card eject when finished option is great but that would make it - or... am I missing a setting some where?

I agree with graybalanced. After download I put the card back in the camera and don't format it until the next shoot. If anything goes wrong during import or editing, I can always download the card again.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 23, 2012 at 23:38 UTC
On Lightroom Photo Import article (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

harold1968: why convert to DNG ?
does this loose original NEF info ?
I keep my files as NEF and they work just fine in lightroom

can anyone point out an advantage of converting to DNG

"What you may miss out on by using DNG vs NEF or CR2 is some non-documented vendor-specific metadata like the active AF point overlay you can see in the camera makers' own raw converters with their proprietary raw files."

Does LR not show the active AF point? Aperture does.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 23, 2012 at 23:35 UTC
On Canon EOS-M: hands-on preview of Canon's first mirrorless EOS news story (1229 comments in total)

[Yawn, grumble] AAAaaaaaarrrrrrrmph. [Stretch]

SNOOOOOOOOOORE...

[Dreams of LX7 + LVF-2]

Direct link | Posted on Jul 24, 2012 at 02:46 UTC as 104th comment
On Apple releases Aperture v3.3 with iPhoto integration news story (41 comments in total)

The Lightroom fans who are Aperture haters are really having fits these days because they know that most of LR's "new" features were simply lifted from Aperture and that any day now Ap4 could leapfrog LR4 again, just as Ap3 leapfrogged LR3. Thing is, no matter what happens to the feature lists, LR still has a modal interface and a "loupe" that's not a loupe but just a zoom renamed "loupe" to make it seem more like Aperture but not really.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 12:45 UTC as 11th comment | 2 replies
On Apple releases Aperture v3.3 with iPhoto integration news story (41 comments in total)
In reply to:

Neil2112: Using Aperture here for small shoots, cataloging and I/O.
For serious work (1500 shot weddings) Lr4 is a must have. No debate.

It comes as a significant disappointment that in a field where Apple should outright dominate, they're a big fat nowhere. Why go to all the pain of producing a fabulous new laptop and then cede the market to Adobe with such a weak app?

Honestly, I really want to use Aperture, but it is nowhere close to the raw energy and power of Lightroom. Apple, if you ever want to step up your game and kick Adobe's keister, now would be a nice time to do it.
I'm waiting.

No debate, huh? Well, I'm here to debate you. You make some big fat generalizations. Care to back them up with specifics? I use Aperture to process 5,000-shot conference jobs, and its interface is far superior to LR's for quickly ranking, selecting and organizing large volumes of photos. I especially like that I can tweak adjustments as I select without having to switch back and forth between "Library" and "Develop" modes. Really, modal operation is for morons. Adobe is the Microsoft of imaging software.

The only advantages of LR right now are lens correction and NR, and both are available in Ap3 via plugins. Most of the stuff that was recently added to LR4 was lifted from Apeture... Version 1.0... From 5 YEARS ago. Lame.

"Raw energy and power"? Give us a break.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 12, 2012 at 12:35 UTC
Total: 94, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »