Surefoot

Lives in France France
Joined on Aug 12, 2010

Comments

Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Mrrowe8: Been using Luminar & Nik software extensively already and Lightroom for only cataloging and making final tiny few adjustments ..so moving to this makes sense ..Best thing Adobe did was a stupid subscription.. created a space in the market place for the need for development of new and in many cases better software..

How is Nik software integration with Luminar ? Is Luminar also providing color correction upon importing with Colorchecker ?
To be clear does it provide the following:
- importing photos in a catalog, automatically applying a color profile i prepared before
- mass editing of series of photos in that catalog with just a few clicks / shortcuts (levels, curves, etc.)
- exporting these photos to a Nik plugin and adding the result automatically to the catalog
- uploading a catalog to Smugmug

That's a basic workflow but that's the one i use as an amateur photographer. I am also deeply annoyed by Adobe's licence policy so i want to find another solution, i'm also looking at Darktable.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2017 at 10:53 UTC
In reply to:

Lotus Cat: I will never know why so many people denigrate the m4/3 system and its followers. I have used 4/3 and m4/3 since 2004; I very much like the system. We have small lenses for small bodies and big lenses for the times when big lenses are necessary.

I never berate users of other formats, whether larger or smaller than m4/3. I have more class than that.

I also wont go in other crop format system forums to continuously spam equivalence bullcrap in order to bury any interesting post under nonsense. Whenever a new m4/3 lens appears it's the same hundreds of idiotic posts all over again, which i dont care about. Do we go into 135 format camera forums and spam equivalence posts about how they are cropped from medium format ??
There seems to be a lot of hate from other system camera owners aimed towards m4/3, for no valid reason other than they are unsecure about themselves or "their" system.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 18:36 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Butler: At this point, I'm genuinely perplexed.

The story doesn't say that there's no red. Instead it explicitly says there is red information and then explains what it means by 'red pixels.'

Yet lots of a significant number of comments are contesting that there's red in the image (which the text already tells you).

Is it that the common usage of the word 'pixel' has become so vague (encompassing both the individual elements of an image, and the single-color dots used by screens to display these elements)?

And, irrespective of this, most of the text is about the challenge your camera faces when confronted with something that the brain does easily (and hence we risk taking for granted).

Can anyone explain?

To be honest the way the title is worded sounds like a classic click bait. Which triggered all the "but there's red information" answers around here. Especially on a photographer centric website where the audience will immediately see past the white balance issue and mentally remove the cyan cast, and "see" that the strawberries are still pretty much red.

Link | Posted on Mar 4, 2017 at 14:43 UTC
In reply to:

The Davinator: Hmmm...for that price, I'd take the Fuji X-Pro2 and 18-55 and see little size difference...and a big image quality difference.

Let's be practical here: how many of these travel photography shots were taken at these famed iso 3200 or 6400 ? Please count them and post the reply. Then please analyze the real world usefulness of your recommendations.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2017 at 10:04 UTC
In reply to:

Waipingqi: These new Laowa lens have extremely cool water repelling coating on the front element:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvcajWh4nwQ

The only thing I wish it had was Electric contact for EXIT data, and IBIS auto-calibration, lens distortion auto-correction.

Well 7mm is 7mm. A defished image is more than 10mm and rectilinear too so it's comparable and not close to the same.. Also they make these UWA's quite perfectly these days, have you ever tried that Oly 7-14mm f/2.8 ?

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 14:03 UTC
In reply to:

Waipingqi: These new Laowa lens have extremely cool water repelling coating on the front element:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvcajWh4nwQ

The only thing I wish it had was Electric contact for EXIT data, and IBIS auto-calibration, lens distortion auto-correction.

De-fishing reduces the frame width somewhat, it becomes quite narrower than what a 8mm rectilinear lens would give, if i recall correctly it would give the equivalent of about 10mm. It also impacts the image quality (center or corners depending on the algorithm, pick your losses).
So no they are definitely not comparable. I'd use the fisheye as a true fisheye and make use of its distortion in the composition, and leave the rectilinear stuff to a proper UWA like the 7-14's or that new Laowa 7.5mm.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 06:04 UTC

Apo-Lanthar macros are sublime. Check the mflenses forums for many examples... E-mount users will be delighted.
I whish they made another 90mm apo macro ,this time for the m4/3 mount...

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2016 at 08:59 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

Waipingqi: These new Laowa lens have extremely cool water repelling coating on the front element:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvcajWh4nwQ

The only thing I wish it had was Electric contact for EXIT data, and IBIS auto-calibration, lens distortion auto-correction.

Olympus 8mm/f1.8 is a fisheye, not a rectilinear ultra wide. Different species...

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 17:24 UTC
On article Petzval 58mm real-world samples (59 comments in total)
In reply to:

Karroly: Not for me too...
IMHO, the purpose of blurring the background thanks to a shallow DOF is to isolate the subject from the background by :
1) creating a sense of depth
2) making the background less distractive.
Unfortunately, the swirling bokeh destroys 2)...

The background *is* part of the overall design, aint it, if we are talking photography as a graphics art.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:23 UTC
On article Otherworldly? Lomography introduces Jupiter 3+ lens (158 comments in total)

Bought a good/rare J-3 like 6 years ago, for about $50. While i understand the price inflation on good models, since it's a nice lens, it's just about worth its current price which is between $150 and $200 max. So yes the bokeh is good with smooth transition and it captures light like old lenses do, giving a nice touch to these B&W shots, but that's it. And there are plenty to be had on internet auctions...
Why would they produce these instead of rare/hard to find models, that's beyond me.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2016 at 18:21 UTC as 44th comment
In reply to:

fmian: When shooting through a window, you could just use a flexible hood/bellows pressed up against the glass so light from around the room doesn't enter the shot. This product already exists.
.
When shooting through a wire fence, you could just place the lens right up to the fence so that you're shooting through it, or you should use shallower dof which would make the fence in the foreground almost invisible.
.
Complex software/computational solutions when simple practical solutions already exist.

>Keep relying on technology then. For reflections off glass it's a simple matter of blocking light.
No it's not. Ever shot through double glazed panes when the outside one is dirty ? Ever shot through fences that you cannot get anywhere near for obvious physical reasons ?

Link | Posted on Aug 8, 2015 at 15:06 UTC
In reply to:

BadScience: Mont Blanc/Monte Bianco, 15,780 feet, is NOT Europe's highest mountain.

It is highest mountain in the European Alps.

The highest mountain in Europe is Elbrus, 18,510 feet; followed by Shkhara, 17,040 feet.

Both the in2white website and DP review make the same mistake.

Could you sound even a bit more concescendant ? Thought you were already on a pretty high horse but i was wrong :)
PS: i'm having a lot of fun watching your reactions.
PPS: it's not in Georgia :P

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 15:08 UTC
In reply to:

BadScience: Mont Blanc/Monte Bianco, 15,780 feet, is NOT Europe's highest mountain.

It is highest mountain in the European Alps.

The highest mountain in Europe is Elbrus, 18,510 feet; followed by Shkhara, 17,040 feet.

Both the in2white website and DP review make the same mistake.

Someone here is going great lengths to argue against dpreview's article...
Let's phone Putin and tell him his coutry is now in Europe he'll be delighted :)

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2015 at 10:45 UTC
In reply to:

BadScience: Mont Blanc/Monte Bianco, 15,780 feet, is NOT Europe's highest mountain.

It is highest mountain in the European Alps.

The highest mountain in Europe is Elbrus, 18,510 feet; followed by Shkhara, 17,040 feet.

Both the in2white website and DP review make the same mistake.

Mt Elbrus is near Georgia, which is not in Europe, it's east of Turkey which is already debated wether or not it's part of Europe. When i was a kid geography books defined this area as Western Asia. Not sure it changed much since then.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2015 at 23:26 UTC
In reply to:

babart: Strange offering in a well-filled camera niche. However, could we wait for some reviews before jumping all over Samyang with both feet? Never know, this piece of glass could be the APO-Lanthar or Zeiss Distagon of macro lenses.

Exactly, waiting for another APO-Lanthar here, since Voigtlander only made a limited run of those and the prices are now beyond sanity. The extra weight and bulk of that Samyang may reveal something else... to be tested !

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2015 at 12:16 UTC
In reply to:

califleftyb: Does this mean I can copy and use all the National Geo photos created when an animal tripped a remote shutter?

No. Read the article or see more recent posts: where do you see any mention of a trigger ? The monkey framed and took the shot.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2014 at 09:12 UTC
In reply to:

ipribadi: So if I setup a mechanism to remotely capture an elusive animal out in the wild by using a motion sensor to trigger the shot then does it mean the animal is the author?

So how does it work for those auto "smiley" gimmicks they add to p&s cameras that take the shot once every human face in the frame smiles? The last guy that smiles and triggers the shot has ownership?

@ipribadi: No one said anything relative to usage of triggers set up by the photographer here. Read the article again. There was no trigger. The monkey used the camera, not the photographer.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2014 at 09:10 UTC
On article Readers' showcase: Landscape photography (90 comments in total)

These landscape photos are amazing.
To naysayers: show your own stuff. Otherwise your comments are void and null.

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2014 at 09:42 UTC as 46th comment

Posting photos on public websites is akin to publicity. By definition you are ready for your material to be reused, criticized, etc. Keep your commercial stuff private. Use publicity to spread your name around, once you have got a name you can land better private contracts. All this is pretty common knowledge today, but i understand some older people are still illiterate when it comes to the nature of the Internet...

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2014 at 10:46 UTC as 68th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

BRPWS: Too bad he could not enjoy the accolades while alive. He has some great works.

He was a well known photographer already, i remember seeing a lot of his photos of co-stars in various places a few years ago. He had that documentary style usually found in Magnum photographers.. very keen sense of composition indeed.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 21:35 UTC
Total: 48, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »