Cameron R Hood

Cameron R Hood

Lives in Canada Vancouver, Canada
Works as a bassist and instructor
Joined on Mar 26, 2005
About me:

Total world domination...I will stop at nothing else!

Comments

Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Mokutaru: In my opinion what made lots of old photos special back in their days is the fact that photography was not very common. And now that photography is very common its hard to find pure untouched digital photos that look good from the camera without photoshop alterations and then calling it "style".

What i find fancinating these days is when lighting is utilized for photography.

...as is the amount of manipulation they would do in the darkroom. Pretty much everything available in Photoshop was doable in the darkroom, right back to the early days of photography, it just involved nasty, polluting chemicals, and a lot of things being 'thrown out' (used paper, masks, chemicals, washes, bottles, etc.). These images did NOT come magically out of the camera absolutely 'perfect'; Ansel was still doing prints in his last few years of his life on negatives he had taken decades earlier, masking, dodging, burning, trying to make the perfect print. This comment above shows how ignorant you are on the subject of photography.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 17:39 UTC
In reply to:

Cameracist: OK, but you could have written very similar article about Microsoft Lumia :D

Yes, that would satisfy the dozens of users of that phone worldwide who are clamouring for a review...clamouring...

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

Cameron R Hood: Uh, er, ah...Pentax...forgotten AGAIN? You guys ALWAYS leave them out.

It's a well known fact in the Pentax community that they have ignored Pentax for years, only now starting to come around.

Link | Posted on Jun 15, 2016 at 18:19 UTC
In reply to:

Cameron R Hood: Uh, er, ah...Pentax...forgotten AGAIN? You guys ALWAYS leave them out.

And thanks for the lovely, personalized comments, Terkwoiz; you're a charming bloke.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2016 at 16:10 UTC
In reply to:

Cameron R Hood: Uh, er, ah...Pentax...forgotten AGAIN? You guys ALWAYS leave them out.

Inexpensive, perhaps. Cheap, definitely not. Go try one. And I definitely think it should be included, in spite of it's low price.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2016 at 15:52 UTC

Uh, er, ah...Pentax...forgotten AGAIN? You guys ALWAYS leave them out.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2016 at 21:05 UTC as 109th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Daft Punk: Slow. But small. Makes a nice sunny weather lens. This is a good thing, not a criticism.

Dear PUNK;

YOU'RE DAFT.
Modern cameras go to iso 204,000. You can shoot bats in dark closets with this thing.

Love,
Cameron

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 16:56 UTC

God Bless the man for developing a wonderful site for all of us interested in the truth in photography. My heart goes out to his family an friends. May he rest in peace, and thank you, Michael.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2016 at 15:07 UTC as 13th comment
On article Samsung launches enormous 18.4-inch Galaxy View tablet (87 comments in total)

Ridiculous. 'My tablet's bigger than your tablet.' Bigger isn't always better, except in the case of chocolate cake and Apple Pie.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2015 at 16:35 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

shnikus: I want one in sunset-orange with lime-green grip.

...and a battery grip in black only...

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2015 at 04:21 UTC
In reply to:

technocamper: This camera with the 43mm Limited. I'm done.

...or the FA* 85 F1.4...the 77 limited...the 31...the 50 or 100mm macro...yikes...

Go, Pentax...even though they're DOOMED!!!

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2015 at 15:34 UTC

The North Korean Government tourist camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2015 at 19:59 UTC as 200th comment
In reply to:

dmanthree: Possibly the most worthless idea I've ever seen. Utter stupidity.

The North Korean Government tourist camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2015 at 19:57 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

murkkor: I have been with Adobe since Illustrator '88 and Photoshop 2.5. I gleefully dumped QuarkXPress 3.3 (and its stupid registration floppy) for InDesign. The Creative Suite concept was great-- it didn't really save any money, but it simplified upgrading. Over the last decade or so, I figure my sporadic upgrades have cost a pretty consistent $200-250 per year. That is entirely reasonable for my three workhorse programs.

CC's $600 a year-- take-it or leave-it --might be doable, but I am getting that old QuarkXpress feeling again. I might consider the cost if I felt I was getting new capabilities, but my most recent upgrades have simply been to stay reasonably current with my associates.

So, Adobe has finally priced themselves to the point where I am actively considering other software. I am downloading Affinity Design right now. If that goes well, Affinity Photo won't be far behind. If a particular project required Adobe, I could always rent it for a month.

I don't think you CAN rent it for a month. I think you have to take out a subscription. This is SO totally wrong.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 14:13 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (470 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alan Williams ZA: Its time for the once-leaders in the field, Corel, to close the gap. I think subscription software is a greedy method of sales. If Adobe reduced subscriptions by x10, I'd probably use it -its way, way, way too expensive.

...and what if you occasionally need Illustrator and inDesign, like I do, two or three times a year? Are you into paying $50.00 a month? I'll be looking elsewhere.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 16:27 UTC
On article Adobe announces final Camera Raw update for CS6 owners (470 comments in total)

I'll no longer be supporting Adobe in every way I possibly can. Bye bye. And I paid for the full version of the software, Riveredge. What if you occasionally need Illustrator and inDesign, like I do, two or three times a year? Are you into paying $50.00 a month for software you use rarely? Unless they let us rent by the month, I'll be looking elsewhere.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 16:25 UTC as 53rd comment | 3 replies
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review (494 comments in total)

WOW! Space for a NOSE! Yahoo!!!! It CAN be done! Thank you Thank you THANK YOU!!! Now if the OTHER camera makers would just do this.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 17:31 UTC as 92nd comment
In reply to:

Androole: I am very curious to see if this actually pans out.

We might find that for the first time in many years, an iPhone camera actually does have the best technical image quality. This could be a tough act to follow if it actually works.

Then again, who knows if it will even end up being competitive with the LG G4, let alone the Lumia 1020 or Panasonic CM1...

If all you do is count pixels. There's a LOT more to camera performance than that, and the iPhone cameras are ALWAYS at or near the top of the heap, and usually come out best overall. Some of the others (Android) cameras have garish colours, high contrast, overly-saturated and overly-sharpened images, which isn't always what you want. Having been a photographer for about 30 years, the camera in my iPhone 5S never ceases to AMAZE me, and I own some of the finest lenses ever produced. Some people are too easily impressed with bells and whistles.

Link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 21:58 UTC
Total: 97, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »