Suave

Lives in United States Chicago, United States
Joined on Aug 5, 2002

Comments

Total: 476, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Based on what I see in the gallery it should be called "US History's Most Exciting Images Transformed Into Living Color"

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2017 at 03:13 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
On article How to predict when your camera is going to die (17 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sammy Yousef: The shutter is just one component that can fail. A common failure yes, but not the only way the camera can die. For instance, the internal clock battery dying may leave you with a camera that wipes date/time or even settings each time you change batteries. Speaking of batteries, have fun finding a battery for an older camera - there is no market for them. LCD panels and rear panels also die. Then there's buttons and switches. The electronics themselves have a limited life span. It only takes one component dying to kill a camera.

For many cameras that's not a huge deal - most Canon bodies, for example, are highly modular and can be stripped down and rebuilt with relative ease.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 03:17 UTC
On article How to predict when your camera is going to die (17 comments in total)
In reply to:

GCam: Why not just use sequential file numbering?

Because typically it resets at 10k and tends to get screwed when you use multiple cards.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 03:13 UTC
In reply to:

PaulSnowcat: I bet SOME of these D5 cameras will serve as personal cameras for some NASA big guys who like to take photos :)

This is NASA, not Roscosmos.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 15:15 UTC
In reply to:

net1994: For gear heads, this is cool. For US taxpayers, not so sure. Why is the govt spending $65k for new cameras? Whats wrong with the ones they have now? Seems like a bit of a waste here. Sorry to throw a wet blanket here. Carry on....

The price of the cameras is probably just a footnote in the shipping bill.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 15:13 UTC

More portable than mini tripods of old? You now, the kind that folded into cigar-case sized tube.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 16:53 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

The Squire: WHY should I pay this much for modern engineering that works with cutting edge photo/video tech when I can strap a 15 year old design Canon L to my old skool DSLR at half the price?

Realistically speaking, getting a more or less recent FF Canon DSLR + 200/2.8 L for $1500 is somewhat difficult, unless you go 6D and used.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 19:33 UTC

I was under the impression that airports and such are programmed into the drone firmware as exclusion zones.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 05:26 UTC as 32nd comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Debankur Mukherjee: Uncontrolled Drone sales should be stopped immediately , the day is very near when a well planned terrorist attack may take place and take away lives of few thousands........

Who pays you?

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 05:24 UTC
On article Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM sample gallery (319 comments in total)
In reply to:

LessMirrored19: What happened to canon colors lol ?

This is 2017. Your colors are what you want them to be.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 16:03 UTC
In reply to:

MRWEC: I don't get the point of leica. Who would pay 6.5k for a 90mm f2.2?

I know, in passing, a person who would buy it without giving it a second thought.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 18:13 UTC
In reply to:

Autriche78: What has baffled me personally is the fact that even with sophisticated automotive around view cameras, my 2017.5 Nissan still requires me to use a Rube Goldberg-ish suction cup dashcam to record my daily commute. Can someone explain to me why some engineering genius hasn't combined the dashcam functionality into the existing automotive camera architecture?

Remember, the dashcam is aimed on the road, not at your crotch.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2017 at 03:48 UTC
On article Sony a7R III sample gallery (261 comments in total)

I wish your gallery spent less time exploiting the bodies of young women and more - showcasing the limits of camera abilities.

Link | Posted on Oct 27, 2017 at 04:49 UTC as 44th comment | 11 replies

Looks like Google got POLED.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2017 at 08:06 UTC as 25th comment
In reply to:

Daviddmf: Read a few, I can't believe how a freedom & liberty argument can be made around this issue. Callous, there are some pretty sick people around. The victims, they died horribly & needlessly but at least their liberty was intact when they hit the ground or water. With freedoms come responsibilities. Do the right thing, in the main airlines treat you like a guest, act like one.

You are certainly kidding? I am not a guest, I am a customer, paying through the nose too.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 14:43 UTC

I was considering buying into the Samsung system. Thank god I decided not to.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 15:33 UTC as 87th comment | 1 reply
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

Suave: Yes, it's "just $10 per month" except that Adobe is not the only company who wants its $10.

I am talking not so much about utilities, but web-based subscription stuff. So yes, Netflix, but also Hulu, Microsoft (double-dipping with Office and Xbox), HBO, Youtube, Spotify, Pandora, MLB, NHL, HBO, Google, Photobucket, Ebay, Wordpress and so on and so forth, they all want you to subscribe.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 23:55 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)

Yes, it's "just $10 per month" except that Adobe is not the only company who wants its $10.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 22:56 UTC as 522nd comment | 5 replies
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

String: Well I look at it as it's far far more affordable for the "average Joe" to pay $10/month for LR/PS than it ever was to buy the stand alone versions of both products and then pay for upgrades every year. One of the main reasons Adobe went to a subscription model was due to PS being one of the most pirated pieces of software ever made. And it worked, Adobes profits are higher than they ever have been.

People in these forums complain about paying $10/month for software yet have no issue with dropping thousands of dollars annually for each iteration of new body that comes out

Wherever does this "every year" notion come from? My image editing software hails from 2010, and it does not lack anything that would make me think of upgrading.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 22:46 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: More 70s' vintage look that's bad for your eyes. Why were cameras so bad in the 70s' anyway?

Had to match the getups and hairstyles.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 15:57 UTC
Total: 476, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »