Lives in United States Tualatin, OR, United States
Works as a Electrical Engineer (retired)
Has a website at www.almy.us
Joined on Sep 7, 2004
About me:

My wife has a D7000 with the 18-200 VR. I bought my (adult) daughter a D60
with the 18-55 VR and 55-200 VR, and my (adult) son has my old D70, 18-70,
a Sigma 10-20, and my old Sigma 70-300 APO.

Film - Used to shoot with Minolta SRT102 with three prime lenses and a
teleconverter (and had a garbage K-Mart telephoto zoom). 20 year old Pentax
P&S when weight was a concern.

Computer Gear -- All Apple: iMacs, MacBooks, Minis (including one server)


Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8

I've seen plenty of TV shows where you can hear the film advancing in a DSLR. Don't expect any accuracy here in a horror flick! And possessed Polaroid film has shelf life measured in hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2017 at 13:53 UTC as 37th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Sirandar: You have to wonder what this article has to do with photography.
There is some implication that a photographer did this.

It is incredibly unlikely that this van was left there by anybody who would call themselves a photographer.

If we had real news instead of fake news we would know if the van even had plates (probably not) and if the VIN number was traced, or even if the van was reported stolen. In Canada, out of province people routinely buy old junker vans to travel the west coast to save $$. When they no longer work they are abandoned.

Because being an actual reporter is no longer a viable occupation, there is nobody to "report" these little details.

Well it is destroying public property that is photogenic. And look at the photo of the van -- it does have plates: California 7VRY079. They have found the driver, and according to reports the driver has not yet been charged.

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2017 at 15:50 UTC

I had a Mavica FD-83 and went to DIsney World with 100 floppies in my suitcase! I used it longest for EBAY photos for which it was really fast and convenient. I didn't fully give up on film until I got a D70.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 14:14 UTC as 89th comment | 1 reply
On article Beta: try out our new 'light' color scheme (722 comments in total)

Blinded by the light. Back to dark theme for me.

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2016 at 22:39 UTC as 506th comment

No application should ever be deleting any file in the root directory. This is outrageous. What else might Adobe be doing to your computer's file system in places it should not be touching?

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 22:25 UTC as 13th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

sans culotte: As in mentioned equivalence article here are some important details omitted.
"the full frame camera will see four times as much light as a camera with a Four Thirds sensor"
The camera itself doesn't deal with light. Light is recorded by sensor pixels. So pixel density & efficiency is the key.
FF sensor area is 864 mm^2 & APS-C sensor area is 329 mm^2. That means Fuji 16MP sensor has lower pixel density (16000000/329 = 48632 px/mm^2) than new Canon (or Sony, who knows?) 50MP sensor (50000000/864 = 57870 px/mm^2). So in this example with FF you get more detail with relatively same noise, it's still nice, but easily shows that bigger sensor doesn't automatically means more light.
Also there is sensor efficiency which has an impact on final result.
All that means that the only reasonable way is comparing specific sensors noise rate.

Yes, the article should be talking about the pixel density. It really the light per pixel that determines the noise and not the sensor size. In the analogy given in the article, making the test tubes bigger will reduce the variations in water among the tubes.

Downsampling (downsizing) an image has the same effect as making the pixels bigger, so reduces the noise. Now if you just cropped the 50MP image to one that was 16MP, the noise would be the same, naturally, because the pixels are untouched.

Of course it is safe to assume that preparing an image for presentation, they would be resampled to the same size, making FX a "win" for noise over smaller formats. This is obvious in practice, at least from my experience.

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2015 at 16:34 UTC

If it isn't *amazingly* good it won't stand a chance at that price. I'd call this one a disappointment after some of the other Samyang lenses.

Link | Posted on Apr 2, 2015 at 21:27 UTC as 42nd comment | 6 replies
On article HDR for the Rest of Us (199 comments in total)

I can sure feel the HDR hate in many of these comments. I think Rick Sammon did a great job in this article and kept tone mapping under control. My only complaint about the images is they are over-saturated. I've spent many years taking picture on the Oregon coast and have never seen things quite so vibrant!

I'd also have liked to see HDR and Tone Mapping differentiated. The sins are almost always with the latter.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2012 at 15:05 UTC as 25th comment
Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8