Lives in United States United States
Joined on Apr 12, 2008


Total: 206, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Richard-on-Thames: Well I shot about 200 weddings over 12 or 13 years; such a buzz, and such a challenge. I had two complaints: One wedding I failed to attend due to a freak snowstorm (apparently I should be driving a 4X4), and one couple just took against me. Not sure why, but they just kept on until their grievance was dismissed.

Lessons I learnt:
1) Qualify through a professional body, such as the MPA (in the UK), the quality control and the professional standards are sorted.
2) Make sure that your professional indemnity insurance includes legal advise - it will add a few quid to the bill, but it's really worth it.

My take on this is that the couple hired an inexperienced photographer to save money; and proceeded to try to take his fee back. There will always be the sh*t clients, photographers just need to protect themselves.

If the snow wasn't bad enough to stop the wedding, then it seems reasonable to expect the photographer to show up. Most snow does not require a 4x4 to navigate, but without more information, it's really impossible to say.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 07:09 UTC
In reply to:

chaos215bar2: Nice marketing blurb. Now, why would I buy this when I could have an *actual* 5k, 16:9 monitor, with greater than 4k resolution both horizontally *and* vertically?

Seems like it would be nice to have room for things like, I don't know, the menu bar and/or taskbar next to the 4k footage I'm supposedly going to be editing at native resolution.

Not interested. I'd go back to 16:10 if anyone still sold monitors at that aspect ratio. I find myself wanting extra vertical space far more often than horizontal, and f I'm limited to the bandwidth needed to drive 5120x2880 with the current generation of computers and monitors, why would I want to chop off vertical resolution with no corresponding gain in horizontal? If nothing else, that's just not an efficient use of desk space.

This *might* be an interesting product at, say, 6826x2160. 5760x2560 could also be useful (and would leave room for menu bar, task bar, timelines, etc. next to native 4k video). But again, I find 16:9 is already a bit on the wide side for most non-video work (which is primarily what I do).

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 18:19 UTC

Nice marketing blurb. Now, why would I buy this when I could have an *actual* 5k, 16:9 monitor, with greater than 4k resolution both horizontally *and* vertically?

Seems like it would be nice to have room for things like, I don't know, the menu bar and/or taskbar next to the 4k footage I'm supposedly going to be editing at native resolution.

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 17:20 UTC as 26th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

mxx: I'd have loved the backpack to also have a solar panel for charging stuff, but I must say I like that white handles on the back.

You mean the DJI Phantom strapped to the back?

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2017 at 00:25 UTC

And the reason Kickstarter isn't mentioned until the last paragraph is? I'm waiting, DPReview…

It's not that this isn't an interesting (if somewhat impractically difficult to use) *looking* product, but that's all it is at this point. It's disingenuous at best not to lead with the fact that this is an unreleased, crowdfunded product with no real track record.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2017 at 00:07 UTC as 42nd comment

Next time, please lead with the fact that this is on Kickstarter rather than hiding that below a title, series of pictures, and three paragraphs all seemingly describing a finished product we can go out and buy today. Then, briefly explain why the project won't go up in smoke with all the contributors' money. Then, get on with the descriptions.

This actually looks pretty cool (despite not really being a photo backpack), but considering its on Kickstarter, the single most important feature is who's running the project and what their track record is. I see no mention of that here, and without that, it's really hard to justify putting down any money.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 20:40 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

yoms: I don't get it... Why haven't they decided to go with Thunderbolt 3 in the future instead of creating a new HDMI version? Thunderbolt 3 carries video and sound is 40Gbit/s.
A 1-cable-for-all time has not come yet.

Thunderbolt 3 would be complete overkill. USB-C could definitely work *if* standards were developed for ARC- and CEC-equivalent functionality. That actually could be great, but industry momentum makes it pretty unlikely any time soon.

Link | Posted on Nov 30, 2017 at 01:08 UTC
In reply to:

EskeRahn: That graphics is REALLY misleading...
By making the figures 3D-like they trick the viewer to believe the leaps between the versions are MUCH bigger than they are!

The real ratio is between the diameters, but the eye catches it as the 'areas' - very clever conning...

Wait. I thought the graphic meant we were going back to the old days of gigantic video cables.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 22:01 UTC
In reply to:

ozturert: Don't want to defend a large company but it'd be nice to hear their story as well.

Of course DJI would want any of their data deleted. That's really not the story here.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 16:05 UTC
In reply to:

Alantkh: Did he download sensitive information from Dji servers? If he did, it’s illegal and I think Dji has a case

From my reading here and on Ars Technica, Finisterre never actually stored any of DJI's data locally. Yes, he "gained access" and obviously did enough poking around to verify what he'd found, but if DJI felt they had a case here (there were already, evidently, emails confirming the services in question fell under the bug bounty program), I'm sure Finisterre would be in court right about now.

DJI's demands to delete any data sound pretty standard and normal for this sort of situation. I don't see anything interesting or unusual in this part of the story.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 16:03 UTC
In reply to:

balios: I fail to see what DJI did wrong. If the contract that DJI offered contained an unacceptable clause(s), Mr. Finisterre has failed to divulge them. The actions of DJI, as described by Mr. Finisterre, are entirely consistent with a company concerned with protecting the private data of its workers and customers.

Mr. Finisterre says he accessed "highly sensitive user data, including: identification cards and passports, flight logs, and drivers licenses." DJI must absolutely ensure that any information is destroyed and not shared nor divulged. The $30K must therefore include some form of non-disclosure agreement.

After failing to reach such an agreement, it was also appropriate for DJI to send a legal demand that all information be destroyed. Regardless of whether an agreement is reached, Mr. Finisterre is not entitled to the "highly sensitive user data" he accessed.

Based on Finisterre's comments, DJI's demands went well beyond protecting customer data, likely containing both some kind of gag order, preventing him from disclosing his findings (not private data itself, but the fact that DJI had stored it data such an insecure manner) and, from what I've read elsewhere at least, some sort of non-compete clause. It would absolutely be great to see an explanation of just what the problematic language was, but there may have already been an agreement in place protecting that.

I'm not sure where you get the impression that Finisterre ever tried to hold on to DJI's data. Rather than honor the previously agreed upon terms of their bug bounty program, DJI tried to backpedal and likely silence Finisterre. This is not how bug bounties work (usually there's a timed disclosure agreement), and is a pretty good indication DJI was more interested in keeping things quiet than actually fixing the issue. Finisterre did the right thing in going public.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 15:56 UTC
In reply to:

King Penguin: The simple answer to this is for some enthusiast drone users to form and create the Bristish Drone Flying Association (as a charity) and set up a training & testing programme, basically a self-certification scheme similar to the very well established RYA in the yachting world.

Drone users would be encouraged to join for a small fee and the money raised would help offset the cost of running it.

Private companies and individuals, affiliated and regulated by the Drone Association could then offer courses and tests and make a few bob as well.

The system works very well in the yachting/sailing and powerboat world and it stops the Gov needing to create new laws as the area is self-regulating.....

Ps - a bit of Royal patronage in the Drone Association would help too....

The difference here is, you can go out, buy a drone, and fly it all by yourself for an amount of money most people would reasonable be able to afford to spend. Certainly there are plenty of good things an RDA (or perhaps even a BMFA or similar) could do, but I don't see meaningful regulation of drone use as one of them.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 07:00 UTC
In reply to:

dash2k8: If the story is as told, DJI is dumb to threaten him. Should have paid him to stay quiet and worked with him to plug the hole(s). In today's social-media-crazed age, threatening one person just means he will tweet about it or put it on Facebook, and suddenly tons of ppl will know about the incident. Dumb dumb dumb. Or is it "free publicity is good publicity"?

If DJI didn't want holes plugged, it was kind of an odd move trying to institute a bug bounty program (even if said program seems to have crashed and burned in about as spectacular a manner as these things can go).

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 06:40 UTC
In reply to:

Davidveld: Sorry i too love a "one guy beats large firm" story but a company has product A, B and C that connect into server X and then asks people to find bugs on software A. Isnt it a bit tiny bit logic that they dont like it if somebody goes hacking into the server X? If I ask you to hit me in the stomach because ive been training my abs then i woudnt like it if you kick me in the face... They wanted a limited scope of bugfinding on one area. However DJI completely missed a great marketing opportunity here. They just should have paid and learned that inviting hackers to test their products is not a good idea. And the lone hacker should learn his boundaries first... So now everybody looses. Bit i feel not sorry for any of them involved

"According to a long report on the matter published by Finisterre, he spent many weeks communicating with DJI through email about the scope of its bug bounty program, which hadn't yet been publicly defined. After receiving confirmation that it included the company's servers, Finisterre went to work in writing up a report disclosing his discoveries."

And, according to his account, when Finisterre tried to actually report what he found?

"I won’t go into too much detail, but the agreement that was put in front of me by DJI in essence did not offer researchers any sort of protection. For me personally the wording put my right to work at risk, and posed a direct conflicts of interest to many things including my freedom of speech. It almost seemed like a joke. It was pretty clear the entire ‘Bug Bounty’ program was rushed based on this alone."

I'm really not sure where your accounting of the story comes from.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2017 at 22:24 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (471 comments in total)
In reply to:

Karroly: What kind of photographer has enough time to count the stars in his/her pictures ?
What is sure, is that this camera can see much more stars than my naked eyes. I really do not care if some are eaten in the process...

Indeed. Thinking this has anything whatsoever to do with counting stars is entirely missing the point.

This is about knowing, when you press the shutter button with the camera set to record RAW, that *all* of the detail of the scene you've taken the time and effort to find and frame for the world to see is captured. Sony, instead, has decided to simply throw some of this detail out the window the moment the exposure hits 4 seconds.

Certainly some photography has little to lose here, but we're talking about a camera specifically designed to capture a high level of detail. If you're shooting with this camera, you expect to find that detail preserved and available to use in achieving whatever vision you, as a photographer, had for the image, not Sony's vision of pretending that hot pixels or whatever they're trying to hide here doesn't exist. That should be done after the fact (automatically, in most cases, using a more sophisticated technique) when processing the image.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 05:53 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (471 comments in total)
In reply to:

tgchan: No matter how much money you have... you will never get all-in-one thing, unless someone specially build one for you.

What does that have to do with anything?

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 05:39 UTC
On article UPDATED: Sony a7R III is still a star eater (471 comments in total)
In reply to:

UllerellU: With all my respect, photography is not about this, it borders on the absurd now.

Part of Photography is understanding how equipment works and what its shortcomings are and using this knowledge to either get the best possible result out of equipment you own or choose equipment that will allow you to best achieve your desired result. This, being a blatant shortcoming of Sony's flagship high-resultion camera vs. the competition — not to mention a technically odd design choice, enabling a strong flittering algorithm applied even to RAW photos the moment the exposure hits 4 seconds — is absolutely part of this technical side of photography.

Or do you just look at all the pretty pictures and imagine they were made from pixies and fairy dust? (Think of the pixies!)

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 05:28 UTC

Let me answer your question for you: Almost certainly, no.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2017 at 14:29 UTC as 111th comment
In reply to:

Bobthearch: The bigger story is how the TSA and airport responded to such a minor non-incident.
Stampeding crowds, agents abandoning their posts, recalling and de-loading planes ready for takeoff, flights canceled...
What a cluster.... of incompetence and hysteria.

Just imagine what could have happened if someone got their hands on a sheet of bubble wrap… 😱

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 17:02 UTC
In reply to:

D logH: If you want to see an artifact from movement, look at the building on the right, second row from the top, and third window from the right. A person standing in front of the window moved during the exposure.

Oh my! That's pretty terrible.

Surely it couldn't be too hard to detect motion like that and just smooth the area, losing any boost in resolution but avoiding the terrible checkerboard artifacts.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 07:10 UTC
Total: 206, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »