AlexeyD

Lives in United Kingdom Hampshire, United Kingdom
Works as a Software Engineer
Has a website at http://www.aletan.com
Joined on Feb 10, 2006
About me:

Cameras: Mamiya 645AFD+Kodak ProBack 645Mx2
Kodak SLR/n
Lenses:
Mamiya AF 35mm f/3.5
Hartblei Digital 45mm f/3.5 Super-Rotator Tilt Shift
Mamiya AF 80mm f/2.8
Mamiya Sekor 80mm f/1.9
Mamiya Sekor 120mm f/4 Macro
Mamiya Sekor 150mm f/2.8

Comments

Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

ambercool: No photography means no photography. Why are some of you guys against this? If it's that big of a deal to take a photo we still have our cameras(existed way before cell phones) and film for press related things.

> Someone (ambercool) making sense on the internet.
So you may argue that audio DRMs were good idea then (i.e. when someone controls how and what you do with them) ? The made an awful lot of sense to the recording companies and very littlle to users...

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 10:57 UTC
In reply to:

ambercool: No photography means no photography. Why are some of you guys against this? If it's that big of a deal to take a photo we still have our cameras(existed way before cell phones) and film for press related things.

>I mean technically and independent of devices, credit card companies already disable your card when they "feel" it's being compromised, or so they say. It is annoying but I know I agreed to it. They can also terminate your contract for largely most reasons, which I know in the fine print I also agreed to.

You are missing the point (again) - the cerdit card companies do it to help you not to loose your money. I am talking about the case if you were denied it for completely different reasons based on someone else arbitrary decisions.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 08:17 UTC
In reply to:

ambercool: No photography means no photography. Why are some of you guys against this? If it's that big of a deal to take a photo we still have our cameras(existed way before cell phones) and film for press related things.

@ambercool
It is really simple - imagine that you credit card/wallet decides when to allow you to pay and when not and that "not" decision is out of your hands completely. Would you like that?

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 07:03 UTC
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlexeyD: A much simpler approach would be to use tilt lens. No fuffing about in photoshop.

@Lassoni
Not really sure why you would need a speedbooster. A direct adapter to m4/3 (http://www.adorama.com/l/Lenses/Lens-Accessories/Lens-Adapters/Kipon~Lens-to-Camera-Tilt-Shift-Adapters?sel=To-Camera-Mount_Micro-Four-Thirds) will adapt it from other camera systems. To get 24mm T/S you need a system with 12mm wide angle lens available - so pick one and use that.

The T/S adapter does not have any optics so it does not degrade the image quality.

Also from personal experience, I would say wide angles need T/S less than others. I tend to use 45mm focal length for the landscapes the most and when I need wider occasionally, I will do two shots with max shift to the left and to the right (stitching the panorama this way becomes really easy since the edges will be nearly pixel perfectly aligned).

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2016 at 09:32 UTC
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlexeyD: A much simpler approach would be to use tilt lens. No fuffing about in photoshop.

@Lassoni, for your system considering smaller back focal distances there are plenty of adapters for even more camera systems. So in your case it is actually a lot less of a problem to find decent tilt system. Kipon does TS adapter for example.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 20:18 UTC
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlexeyD: A much simpler approach would be to use tilt lens. No fuffing about in photoshop.

@Lassoni, what you say is common misconception. Mirex adapter and P67, hasselblad or Mamiya lenses are very inexpensive combo. Focus stacking if you really tried it takes loads of time in postprocessing if you really care about quality of the result. Usage of tilt will take about the same time as setting up multiple shots for stacking (especially if you use precalculated tilt tables for your lens/camera combo - see Merklinger books for details) and 0 time in postprocessibg to blend the result.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 15:05 UTC
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (224 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlexeyD: A much simpler approach would be to use tilt lens. No fuffing about in photoshop.

@b0k3h, and this matters how for the shots like in this article? Or you just post for the sake of it and never really shot with tilts before...

Link | Posted on May 30, 2016 at 14:56 UTC
On article Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial (224 comments in total)

A much simpler approach would be to use tilt lens. No fuffing about in photoshop.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2016 at 20:15 UTC as 51st comment | 10 replies
On article Photo prodigy: The images of 17-year-old Taylor Gray (161 comments in total)

Some are very good composition wise but a lot are way too overprocessed. The post processing is not just about bringing shadows out and bumping saturation so there is still a lot to learn. Perhaps embarking on a workshop with one of the landscape photographers will nudge Taylor in a right direction?

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2015 at 08:37 UTC as 41st comment
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

> You can discover that there are a number of capable image editors besides photoshop

You are really laughable in your ignorance ...

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 08:04 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

Keep drawing your conclusions then, judging by your replies you have not even bothered to understand how to profile properly let alone judge software output with mediocre profiles.

This discussion is exhausted its usefulness so I think I'll stop here.

PS: you still have not bothered to understand that I am far from nikon hater and not even using LR/ACR as raw converter - LR and C1 are equally crap at raw conversion and being the editor as well. Photoshop at least succeeds at being a decent enough editor which is why you can do there much more than in your beloved C1 (if you actually bothered to learn it).

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 19:17 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

@I'm sure that bad Nikon's reputation about color quality is based on very big popularity of ACR/LR, which does not work with Nikon.

If you drawing that conclusion from my posts in Kodak forum, you could not be more wrong.

Re: profile building with passport - you should have tried QPcard in a similar price range. The CC SG is a better one but requires careful shooting.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 14:07 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

I don't tend to belive someone I don't know and I do my own research. I suggest you do the same.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 13:27 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

Marcin

Read it again then. And demonstrate what specifically you can achieve in C1 alone that CC subscription does not offer.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 12:59 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

Marcin,

Again that was not what was discussed so off the point again.

Personally I use LR as cataloguing tool with simple postprocessing features. I develop raws in RPP, PP in LR/PS. From that prospective C1 offers me 0 advantage.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 09:23 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

@MarenGr and @Marcin 3M

What is that got to do with Reilly and my post? Or are you not reading it? The first three posts were about subscription based costs comparison between C1 and CC - the fact that you don't use it is irrelevant in that context.

But since you have brought it up - LR standalone still costs less than C1 even though it is less feature rich. Adding something like Affinity Photo to it to replace photoshop (or Photoline if you are on windows) will remove that gap though.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 08:04 UTC
On article Capture One Pro 8 software review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reilly Diefenbach: 50% more per month than CC for far less capability and a clunky interface? No thanks!

@JNR
I am afraid Reilly is correct - CC photo bundle includes Photoshop (not just LR) that has lots more to offer than C1 8.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2015 at 09:08 UTC

Sometimes I do wonder what part of their body was used to think of these new proposals... Definitely no head or brain was involved in the process.

Whatever will follow next - copyrighting nature sites and parks and charging for taking photos there? Charging for the air to breathe?

There are far more important things for EU parliament to discuss imo rather than coming up with new innovative ways to screw people.

Link | Posted on Jul 4, 2015 at 10:43 UTC as 229th comment | 4 replies
On photo Morning sky over Curemonte, Dordogne in the May Sky challenge (15 comments in total)

Superb photo

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2015 at 07:40 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

AksCT: I have been using my version of averaging to get rid of ND filter and avoid its problems. Description here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55507249

It is good to see Adobe has included it as built-in function, which is a time-saver.

The equivalent Photoshop feature is not HDR merge - it is using one of the stacks (median stack for example). And it's been in PS for quite a while.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 10:50 UTC
Total: 32, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »