citizenlouie

Joined on Jan 25, 2012

Comments

Total: 160, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article TIME releases 100 most influential images of all time (173 comments in total)
In reply to:

Bruce Crossan: No Moonrise, Hernandez?

@funkag If that's the case, why no pictures of Adams's Japanese-American Internment Camp photos?

This is just a list of the Times's limited view, an opinion piece. Keep in mind Times is not exactly the authority for arts. Popular culture maybe, but not arts.

For example, the Cindy Sherman photo they picked is a popular one, but not necessarily I believe to be her most influential one.... Demi Moore photo... controversial maybe....

Keep in mind they picked these photos as influential to the society, not necessarily major contribution to the art world. Some of Adams's photos are very influential in term of how later landscape photographers shoot their photos. Adams's Yosemite shots are however, influential that they later demonstrated how important National Park System is (he was a major advocate, along with John Muir, for the NPS).

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 07:11 UTC
On photo ir1 in the Infrared challenge (2 comments in total)

Very cool image. One of my favs of this competition. The color pops. The fact it's a long exposure says a lot about your technique. The left side of the frame where the branches popped out should be cropped or photoshopped out. Just a little attention to detail issue, but it's very well-done technically. Should deserve a higher place.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 00:22 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Long Pier in the Infrared challenge (2 comments in total)

This color is fun! And I agree with you, the people added interests to your shot.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 00:17 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Corn Fields in the Infrared challenge (3 comments in total)

It has a little bit of attention to detail issue, but that's nitpicking. I would still pick this one as my favorite of this competition. Very well-perceived and executed.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 00:16 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Spring Pond in the Infrared challenge (4 comments in total)

This is very well-shot. I gave you a high score. Don't feel despair. This is DPreview challenges..., people gave me one or two stars while some obviously P&S shots and photos that don't follow the official rules got higher scores.... See why I don't enter very often to get my best photos insulted by amateurs.

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2016 at 00:10 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (762 comments in total)
In reply to:

citizenlouie: A 35mm film "tunnel" viewfinder P&S camera, probably a Konica... (can't remember the brand exactly, since I was only in Kindergarten). Second camera was a Kodak disposable camera. Both were fun. Parents bought them for me.

First camera I personally bought was a Canon PowerShot A40... (jump all the way to my college year). Uses 4 AA batteries, which was a big selling point to me personally (didn't like to bring a charger when travel). Then I moved onto a Canon S1 super zoom. Next one was a Panasonic LX3.

First serious camera was an Olympus E-620 DSLR. Still have it and love it even to this day. Probably the most fun to shoot camera I have to date. Its rendering is marvelous and its limitation actually trained me to be a better photographer.

I like S1 with its slow EVF and tiny swivel LCD screen, but the photos came out of it were good. It died on me because it had a drizzle on Christmas Eve in Disneyland. I care about weather sealing quite a bit because of that.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 21:42 UTC
On article DPReview Asks: What was your first camera? (762 comments in total)

A 35mm film "tunnel" viewfinder P&S camera, probably a Konica... (can't remember the brand exactly, since I was only in Kindergarten). Second camera was a Kodak disposable camera. Both were fun. Parents bought them for me.

First camera I personally bought was a Canon PowerShot A40... (jump all the way to my college year). Uses 4 AA batteries, which was a big selling point to me personally (didn't like to bring a charger when travel). Then I moved onto a Canon S1 super zoom. Next one was a Panasonic LX3.

First serious camera was an Olympus E-620 DSLR. Still have it and love it even to this day. Probably the most fun to shoot camera I have to date. Its rendering is marvelous and its limitation actually trained me to be a better photographer.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2016 at 21:32 UTC as 336th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

LWanTeD: Easy. Depression % = (# of selfies) / (# of photos).

I just finished reading the study. The conclusion and their study do not correlate (meaning the study is rubbish). Their statistics says one thing and their conclusion says another, and standard deviation is too wide spread (for those who doesn't know statistics, it means the study shows no strong correlation). The interpretation of reading is incorrect (go to Page 17 of study and see if you can come up with the same conclusion as the authors. BTW, 50% accuracy in statistics means "flip of a coin." That is, the study is no more accurate than pure chance). Sample size is extremely small (166 individual total, 71 of which are depressed), despite the number of photos sampled is large. The inconsistency of terms used (some uses lower case sigma to mean standard deviation, while another part of the article uses SD, gives clue the study is quickly patched by two separate researchers and maybe lack of peer review).

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 02:44 UTC
In reply to:

citizenlouie: This is potentially a dangerous study. Most of the psychology has to do with self-reporting, and we need to question the methodology. A properly trained psychiatrist with extensive medical study usually avoids making quick judgment on someone's mental state based on one or two factors and usually takes one year of study to prove the person is in fact depressed. A lot of times people tend to "think" they are depressed, when they are not. Sometimes they just enjoy getting attention (which is not the same as depression). There are a lot of factors involved to accurately identify issues rather than stigmatize a person and scar them for life.

If you learned some medical sciences about how a person perceive color, you'd know it's actually "negatively correlated" with your mood. When your mood is tense, in sympathetic mode (aka, fight or flight), your rods and cones in your retina actually relax, allow keener light and colors. That is the reason why depressed individuals prefer darker colors, because normal color can be too eye-blinding. Knowing this as background, drawing a quick conclusion based on Instagram Hue, Saturation, and Value data is a big jump, don't you think?

Please do read the study and we can discuss it if you would like. This is not the right place for such in depth discussion of a subject most people might not understand.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 01:00 UTC
In reply to:

citizenlouie: This is potentially a dangerous study. Most of the psychology has to do with self-reporting, and we need to question the methodology. A properly trained psychiatrist with extensive medical study usually avoids making quick judgment on someone's mental state based on one or two factors and usually takes one year of study to prove the person is in fact depressed. A lot of times people tend to "think" they are depressed, when they are not. Sometimes they just enjoy getting attention (which is not the same as depression). There are a lot of factors involved to accurately identify issues rather than stigmatize a person and scar them for life.

I do not understand why you assume I am "going insane" or being a "layman." Have you read the study itself? I am reading it now, and find the study to be somewhat troubling. I went on to see the credential of the authors. They're mathematicians and statisticians.

They draw the conclusion based on popular believes. I am listing them some I find logically "oversimplified." (possibly because they do no have medical background)

1. Colorful = cheerful = happy
2. Cold spectrum of color = gloomy
3. Darker color = sad
4. Unhappy individual = depressed individuals

Some of these have positive correlation, but using these popular beliefs as premises of study, if not understood in its contextual sense, can result strange results, as we see in the study's methodology.

DSM (IV-TR or V, take your pick) specifically requires a specific numbers of criteria must be met, and authors picked only "sadness" to identify depression. And link it "questionably" to color perception.

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2016 at 00:54 UTC
In reply to:

LWanTeD: Easy. Depression % = (# of selfies) / (# of photos).

I wasn't belittling anyone. The guy misinterpreted my words (of course..., this is the Internet). I was just saying everyone cope differently. Some depressed people post tons of selfies to boost them up, and some you couldn't get them to post just one selfie. Some depressed watch comedy to cheer them up, and some watch sad movies to make them feel they're not alone in this. World is very diverse, is what I am saying. You don't merely use one factor to identify depression. Even DSM requires the psychiatrist to identify 5 out of 9 major symptoms before he could say the person is depressed.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 23:59 UTC
In reply to:

citizenlouie: This is potentially a dangerous study. Most of the psychology has to do with self-reporting, and we need to question the methodology. A properly trained psychiatrist with extensive medical study usually avoids making quick judgment on someone's mental state based on one or two factors and usually takes one year of study to prove the person is in fact depressed. A lot of times people tend to "think" they are depressed, when they are not. Sometimes they just enjoy getting attention (which is not the same as depression). There are a lot of factors involved to accurately identify issues rather than stigmatize a person and scar them for life.

I was thinking about "Brown Eyes, Blue Eyes Experiment." The study has 70% success rate to identify depressed people, which means 30% failure rate. This is considered unacceptable for a potentially life-altering prognosis (notice I didn't say diagnosis). If 30% of people, who don't have depression, was told to have depression and receive the treatment for it, you with PhD degree, should know best how this would affect the life the individual (and their families). A lot of people who post photos on Instagram merely think it's cool and copy what other people's are doing. Should such innocuous behavior (aka "growing up") be stigmatized, and eventually become a self-fulfilling prophecy? Look, we don't need more people to identify themselves as depressed when they are just angsty coming-of-age. And we certainly don't want more pull a Pulse-like shooting. That's the lesson from Blue Eyes, Brown Eyes Experiment (or Stanford Prison Experiment).

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 23:52 UTC
In reply to:

LWanTeD: Easy. Depression % = (# of selfies) / (# of photos).

@FLruckas, that's not true. There is no correlation. It depends on how people cope with the issues. I know people tend to project, but the issue is more complex than this "study" tries to make it to be.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 19:35 UTC

This is potentially a dangerous study. Most of the psychology has to do with self-reporting, and we need to question the methodology. A properly trained psychiatrist with extensive medical study usually avoids making quick judgment on someone's mental state based on one or two factors and usually takes one year of study to prove the person is in fact depressed. A lot of times people tend to "think" they are depressed, when they are not. Sometimes they just enjoy getting attention (which is not the same as depression). There are a lot of factors involved to accurately identify issues rather than stigmatize a person and scar them for life.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 19:30 UTC as 36th comment | 6 replies

Not surprise there. I rented my gears from them before. The renting behavior is very different from buying behavior. When you rent, you go for stuff you can't afford to own for the special occasion. You don't see as many portrait oriented lenses because wedding professionals can write the cost off on their tax return.

You also see a lot of Medium Format cameras, because let's face it..., they're expensive and you don't use them that often. It requires careful planning to shoot with one. Even as serious as a landscape photographer myself, only once a while I'd say, "I wish I had a medium format with me." Only one photo per trip requires a MF and MF landscape shots almost always require a tripod. So it's not a travel cam. Just rent the gears after you carefully planned your scout shots with a smaller format.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2016 at 19:18 UTC as 18th comment
On article Accusations fly over Fukushima photos (88 comments in total)

Is entering red zone without permit allowed? Can that be prosecuted?

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2016 at 16:24 UTC as 5th comment
In reply to:

gianstam: I' m pretty amazed that people discuss about DOF equivalence in these focal lengths

@NAwlins Contrarian

Yes, almost all Olympus lenses (since 4/3 days) are performing their best at or near wide open. I don't think this one will be an exception. With m4/3 lenses, they tend to perform their best at f/4 (f/8 equivalent), rather than 4/3 lenses's f/5.6-6.3 range, so yeah, m4/3 lenses are at their best wide open. Don't know what's the reason. Maybe it's the sensor size format reason, or because those m4/3 lenses I used have max aperture of f/1.8.

I agree with you. Yes, samples are nice, but real world experience will be better, especially when people's shooting style tend to differ a little. Not everyone likes to shoot wide open.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 04:40 UTC
In reply to:

BarnET: Sharpest in the line-up?
Well i don't see it not compared to samples of the 75mm F1.8 at least

It'll be unfair to compare with 75mm since 75mm is easier to design.

The bokeh is pretty good for such sharp lens. And I'd say it finally is up the quality of 4/3 lenses (4/3 lens' bokeh tend to be much more sublime compared to m4/3). Sharpness usually comes with a busy bokeh, unfortunately. If you have a lens that's both sharp and has smooth bokeh, that's extraordinary, not the norm. You should appreciate such lens more, rather than put down other lenses as lesser.

BTW, if you think this bokeh is "common" 3rd grade consumer... then many of Canon L lenses would qualify as such.... Just go see some sample photos. And of course, the ability of the photographer matters too, when it comes to isolation decision.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 20:37 UTC
In reply to:

gianstam: I' m pretty amazed that people discuss about DOF equivalence in these focal lengths

Yes. Most of those people are theorists, not practitioners. The first useful aperture at such long focal length is f/8 for depth of field purpose (@35mm equivalent). The extra light at f/4 aperture is nice for handheld. But DoF wise, f/8 is extremely shallow already (and at closer subject-to-focal plane, it might be too shallow).

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 20:25 UTC

In the specs it says Extending Zoom.... This is a fixed focal lens.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2016 at 19:53 UTC as 16th comment
Total: 160, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »