Lives in france
Works as a teacher
Has a website at
Joined on Nov 7, 2010


Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10
In reply to:

toni2: Yes, an optical viewer is beautiful, if you have a good optical viewer. If you have a bad optical viewer and you haven't microAF adjustment, there's no doubt, go for mirrorless. There's no discusion, here. And all "entry level" DSLR have a bad optical viewer and haven't microAF. So... It's very clear.

Mirrorless have a lot of advantages, beginning with the no need to microAF adjustment. But It will have more and more advantages over mirror cameras.
Mirrorless cameras are a no way return. It's like change from analog to digital. Some people shot with analog film, but 99.9% shots in digital.

Some people shoot with cameras, but 99,9% shoot with phones.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 18:30 UTC

If mirrorless cameras become as bulky as DSLR (NX1?), "convergence" is the right word. ;-)
Moreover, I do not know what tomorrow will be photography, and to be honest, I don't care. I'm busy enough by today's technology.

Link | Posted on Jun 19, 2015 at 15:02 UTC as 187th comment
On article Photokina 2014 Video: The Canon G7 X (143 comments in total)

Nice tie.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2014 at 10:27 UTC as 13th comment
In reply to:

Nello: Aaah yes I forgot, it's 2014 so it's ok to take photos of your half naked kids and sell them over the internet. I wonder what the naked kid with the muddy feet will say when grown-up knowing that dad made money out of this "art".

These kids are not "half naked". They wear decent clothes, as every kid wears at the beach. If you think it's indecent, it's your personal moral that overrides your photographic judgment. You can think what you want, but you can't impose your moral to others people, as long they respect the common laws.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2014 at 17:00 UTC

I hope Dad leaves sometimes his camera and play with his children. I think Mr. Laboile is a good photographer, I feel humanity and life in these shots, even some of them look "too much" composed. I prefer simple photographies with no effect, and I'm not interested in his family topic. But he shows us that we can make good photography just around us.
I also read his biography: he tells he's a "father of 6". Bravo! I have 2 daughters, I don't know how could I bring up 6 kids. That said, I notice he don't quote the other human being who helps him and make born and educate his kids: so, where is Mum?;-)

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2014 at 12:08 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

grock: I used to think the comments on indie music blogs were the worst, but photography websites are really catching up. So much freaking jealousy and pettiness. So many people here can't stand it if someone is successful if they have what are deemed to be less than perfect technical skills with a camera, or if their composition seems amateurish or non-groundbreaking. Photography exists so that people can look at and enjoy photographs. Guess what? If someone enjoys looking at a photo you took, you succeeded. Nothing else--the brand and cost of your camera, the artistic merit, the people paying for the photo, the post-processing, the lack of preparation, etc-- matters.

Being successfull has no direct link with quality of your photographies. Being a professional doesn't mean you are an artist: it means you earn money from your job because you answer to a market. It's a big difference between art and business. It's a fact that communicating your work has became often more important than the quality of your work itself. That said, everyone, amateur or professional, can criticize any work.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2014 at 07:14 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Stanton has brought a new element to the equation, something much more powerful than better gear or photographic skill.

He brings empathy, personality, and a genuine affection for his subjects that make his portraits so meaningful.

This is so much better than those stealth street photographers who take photos of homeless people with telephoto lenses. Stanton walks right up to them, engages them, and listens to their stories.

This man is a real artist.

Nothing new. He's on the same way than many photographers before him. I' m not sure the results are really original or amazing from a strictly photographic point of view. No creation, no tranposition. I agree with reginaldwald: his use of social medias makes the difference.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2014 at 15:56 UTC
In reply to:

reginalddwight: Stanton is able to connect emotionally with passersby and befriend them before snapping their photo. His success as a street photographer to have his subjects at ease is no different than what thousands of other photographers do on a daily basis in the studio.

What makes him name-worthy is his use of social media's largest platform and addition of quotes from his subjects in America's most populous city to enhance their portraits to give them a human interest angle.

Success needs 25% of skills and 75% of communication.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2014 at 11:34 UTC

When I look at a photography, I can immediatly know if it has been "stolen" from the subject, or "shared" with the subject. That's a huge difference. My preferences always go to the second "school" of street photography.That said, I am not sufficiently educated to know whether Mr Stanton's works have "something more" than thousands of others.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2014 at 08:58 UTC as 26th comment | 5 replies
On photo Softestad Mine 2013_02 in the Water Falls challenge (2 comments in total)

good idea!

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2013 at 16:55 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10