Tape5

Tape5

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Sep 12, 2011

Comments

Total: 412, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jake2046: I really don't get the parking lot photo...can someone please explains?

They are celebrating a shared life of environment-thrashing material consumerism by symbolising two car mortgages.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2018 at 17:07 UTC

Be careful when a naked man offers you a shirt.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2018 at 22:18 UTC as 51st comment

Only a silly wedding photographer can make a wedding look cheesier than it actually is, if that's possible.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2018 at 22:04 UTC as 49th comment

Well done Morten.
It takes immense courage to document a marginal creature's living.
Thank you.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2018 at 19:07 UTC as 38th comment
In reply to:

Tape5: Firstly nothing is plunging.
Manufacturers are only experiencing a correction from the insanely high sales of the last two decades.
Secondly, most photographic itches can now be scratched with top of the line mobiles.
Kids who have taken 10000 photos on their mobiles by the time they're 10 are unlikely to want a camera for their 11th birthdays.
The millennial snowflakes are not interested in bulky things, or PCs, or printers, or PS, and they have the concentration span of ants. They don't care about the physics of larger sensors or lenses and have no commercial interest in photography.
My guess is that the shrinkage in the market will continue until it has reached the Yashika days level again.
By then, most mobiles or miniaturised camera-phones will take better pictures than most cameras sold today.

@Miksto

Calm down Miksto.
I have bad news for you.
Your existence IS fake if that's how you like to put it.
You are indeed an accident.
But we were talking about cameras weren't we?
Discussing existential angst was really not my intention.
You would be very foolish to assume that your parents really pined to have YOU.
They just wanted a child.
YOU, were the byproduct of the desire they were forced to deal with.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2018 at 18:59 UTC
In reply to:

Tape5: Firstly nothing is plunging.
Manufacturers are only experiencing a correction from the insanely high sales of the last two decades.
Secondly, most photographic itches can now be scratched with top of the line mobiles.
Kids who have taken 10000 photos on their mobiles by the time they're 10 are unlikely to want a camera for their 11th birthdays.
The millennial snowflakes are not interested in bulky things, or PCs, or printers, or PS, and they have the concentration span of ants. They don't care about the physics of larger sensors or lenses and have no commercial interest in photography.
My guess is that the shrinkage in the market will continue until it has reached the Yashika days level again.
By then, most mobiles or miniaturised camera-phones will take better pictures than most cameras sold today.

@ Miksto
Camera manufacturers like to call it a plunge for sure but it's a fake plunge because the increase in sales was due to false economy to begin with.
If the Dow index goes for a fake run upwards and gains 2000 points or more in a few weeks for no sound economical reasons, riding on market manipulation and greed, and then returns to sane numbers again after a sellout, the banks and the traders will call it a plunge, regardless of how unsustainable the gains were.
The economists will call it a correction.
What the camera manufacturers successfully sold to the public was the click of the shutter and the psychological gratification that comes with it.
This represents a false rise in production, because cameras are not primarily sold for this reason.
Mobile phones give the masses their "press the shutter gratification " at a hugely discounted price, ie free.
So the camera market is finally deflated.
Plunging in your book, and correction in mine.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2018 at 13:47 UTC

Firstly nothing is plunging.
Manufacturers are only experiencing a correction from the insanely high sales of the last two decades.
Secondly, most photographic itches can now be scratched with top of the line mobiles.
Kids who have taken 10000 photos on their mobiles by the time they're 10 are unlikely to want a camera for their 11th birthdays.
The millennial snowflakes are not interested in bulky things, or PCs, or printers, or PS, and they have the concentration span of ants. They don't care about the physics of larger sensors or lenses and have no commercial interest in photography.
My guess is that the shrinkage in the market will continue until it has reached the Yashika days level again.
By then, most mobiles or miniaturised camera-phones will take better pictures than most cameras sold today.

Link | Posted on Mar 3, 2018 at 07:12 UTC as 44th comment | 8 replies
On article 2018 Sony World Photography Awards shortlist revealed (47 comments in total)

I like number 13, but if you really need to take a dump in the bathtub, you should at least put the cigarette out.
And ideally remove your tights first.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 22:49 UTC as 10th comment | 2 replies

My IKEA frying pan has outperformed my Le Creuset saucepan too.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 22:41 UTC as 89th comment

This looks like one of those slider gizmos you drag from side to side to see how your cheesy filter is playing with your hues. Except the operator fell asleep and left it in the middle.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 22:32 UTC as 27th comment

Here comes Canon again
A late entry to the party with shaking knees and vertigo
Hey Canon, we are all sorry that you're selling higher end video in the room next door but here Sony is holding the karaoke mic.
Get used to it and start competing .

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2018 at 18:51 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Tape5: Now we have a timely KGB product competing with Huawei for world domination.
The chiefs of US intelligence need a second meeting.

@Arastoo

Were did you learn all of that? In primary school 30 years ago? It's very cute. Like all children who learn a thing or two about a subject matter and think they know it all, you still sound very excited by your limited knowledge. You need to read some more about the history of the country and what Russia has been doing in Croatia since 1990.
I would send you a few links if I had any interest in educating you.

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2018 at 08:00 UTC
In reply to:

Tape5: Now we have a timely KGB product competing with Huawei for world domination.
The chiefs of US intelligence need a second meeting.

@ Rosember
Funny because I just finished reading an essay about the Croatian Russian connection over the last three decades.
But thanks for the info re the fact that Croatia was once a part of Yugoslavia.
All my life I had assumed it was a small village between Stalingrad and Leningrad, in Spain.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2018 at 23:14 UTC

Now we have a timely KGB product competing with Huawei for world domination.
The chiefs of US intelligence need a second meeting.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2018 at 17:33 UTC as 20th comment | 10 replies

After decades of generally consenting to lifestyles that have welcome millions of technological innovations thrown at us without any questions or concerns, no one is really in a position to suddenly revisit the notion of "trust".

And even if you consider "trusting" a tech product or not, nearly always you've been duped into a commercial or political conflict, because you do not own the knowledge or the resources to examine the facts yourself.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2018 at 09:18 UTC as 44th comment
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: I love the photograph of the woman lying on the floor. The story it tells is amazing.

The woman's eyes are telling us: "my head's cracked open and losing blood and I see you only want to win world press photo of the year".

@CaPi
Indeed, because the photographer is seeking credit for having captured a voluntary gaze.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 18:19 UTC
In reply to:

ovengloves: In photo 4 you name the b@st@rd that killed 5 people but not the victims?

Plus all the photographer could do is take a photo rather than help comfort her.

Nice!

Adjusting the white balance and ISO, easy.
Showing empathy when there is a call? That is a lot rarer than any press photo finalists.
The photo is more a vivid picture of the nerd who took it than what the camera was facing.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 18:16 UTC
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: I love the photograph of the woman lying on the floor. The story it tells is amazing.

The woman's eyes are telling us: "my head's cracked open and losing blood and I see you only want to win world press photo of the year".

It is very likely that she is not looking at the cameraman. Deviation of the gaze to the sides in this extreme form is a sign of neurological injury.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 18:09 UTC
In reply to:

Arastoo Vaziri: Ivor Prickett (#5) is a name I'll be fllowing closely. What a prodigious compostion!

What is it about the photo that makes it prodigious?
Hey, look ! There is a fair skinned pretty blonde girl in a sea of desperate men and women in black? Maybe we should go and save her.
It all started with the Afghan girl with the green eyes. Novice photographers get a kick out of portraying European traits in their shots of "foreign" people in distress.
A bit Jarlsberg if you ask me.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 17:55 UTC
In reply to:

Tape5: To call something visible one has to appreciate what "visibility" means. For something to be visible, the human eye must be capable of seeing "reflected" light from a thing, and not "emitted" light.
Since the human eye can only see the visible spectrum of electromagnetic radiation and the size of an atom is way too small to interact with the visible photons, only the following conclusion can be reached :
An atom is not visible, ever, under any circumstances with any tech trickery.

It is like claiming that a torchlight is visible five miles away with naked eye. The claim would be true if you could see the torchlight when turned off by the visible light reflected from its surface and not when turned on and emitting light. In the latter case you cannot claim to have seen the torchlight.

The whole claim then is that a single atom has been trapped, and stimulated with photons. The atom then throws its own photons back at us.

But this has been done before.

@John Bean (UK)
It may surprise you but you are right saying you cannot see the sun. The sun is mostly made of hydrogen and helium which you cannot see. What you see is the photons emitted by nuclear fusion between invisible particles.

Buy hay, we're only talking about atoms and photons, no need to get technical here right? Just refer to your commonsense. And if that's lacking you have the old common nonsense, both very popular with people who do not really understand physics but wish to amuse anyway.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2018 at 15:29 UTC
Total: 412, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »