WayneHuangPhoto

Joined on Dec 24, 2011

Comments

Total: 86, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

M Chambers: Big Brother is hiring.

I'd love to take a photo of the Ten Commandments on display in the Supreme Court so it can be shown the next time they ban the Ten Commandments from being displayed in or around other court houses.

What have you been smoking? Ten Commandments?

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 21:16 UTC
In reply to:

BobORama: Show me an artist for hire and I will show you someone who compromises their vision.

Show me someone who never compromises their vision and I will show you pretentiousness.

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2017 at 21:49 UTC

Cannon full format eh?

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 22:21 UTC as 262nd comment | 1 reply
On article Manfrotto launches stylish Windsor Collection bags (60 comments in total)
In reply to:

fairfaxian: SOS. Camera bag makers still don't seem to understand that carrying a bag full of lenses, bodies, and a tripod is far too great a load for a bag with no waist band (cummerbund). I can only imagine how my shoulders would feel after an hour of that. EVERY backpack manufacturer knows this. Why does it still elude the photo industry? BTW -you don't need heavy padded shoulder straps if the waist band properly supports the weight. And anyone who eschews waist band bags is probably only toting a light load. And ditto all those who don't want photo logos or other frills that only encourage thieves.

Manfrotto primarily makes tripods, monopods and the like, not camera bags, so yeah, this isn't exactly their area of expertise.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 21:49 UTC

Get a RAVPower Filehub and use any hard drive you want to backup. Costs you all of $40 plus cost of HD.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2016 at 23:53 UTC as 13th comment | 5 replies

He's confused bold risk with being totally ignorant of a clear market demand.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2016 at 21:13 UTC as 321st comment
In reply to:

Will B Milner: Here is a few of my entries that didn't make the cut, the UK is an amazing place to live :)

https://m.facebook.com/WBMilner/photos/?tab=album&album_id=940679459387503&ref=bookmarks

I'm amazed that you don't realize that, like, most photography websites are full of show-offs.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2016 at 00:26 UTC
In reply to:

Michael_13: Who will buy this lens?
... and who wants to look at these terribly distorted pictures?

Yup, some producers don't need to do full 360 VRs, but may want something more than 180 degrees. This lens would do that in one take and lessen production time.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2016 at 19:32 UTC
In reply to:

rjaywallace: Please estimate how many photo enthusiasts are going to shell out $3,750 in order to buy a 250° lens for their Olympus Pen F, Pen 8 or Panasonic GX8.

Not many, it's obvious this is for the professional market that would use the 4/3 format for producing 4k VR videos and stills.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 23:58 UTC
In reply to:

Michael_13: Who will buy this lens?
... and who wants to look at these terribly distorted pictures?

Since you missed the part where it says: "The company details the Entaniya Fisheye as being suitable for producing different types of VR content depending on which lens version is used."

Let me clue you in: People who produce VR content will buy this lens because this lens is made for producing VR content.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 23:56 UTC
In reply to:

majorpaul: This notion that smartphone is gonna kill professional photography is almost like thinking that restaurants and chefs are gonna disappear because you can cook at home

It's more like camera manufacturers making dSLRs more affordable to the larger consumer market diminished the perceived value of professional photography.

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2016 at 22:11 UTC
In reply to:

Pete_CSCS: Wow! $249! It would seem to me you could build one for a fraction of that price.

No finely crafted metal is worth $249, however fancy it is. For that amount I'd expect it to be motorized.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2016 at 21:30 UTC
On article Brooks Institute announces closure (132 comments in total)
In reply to:

HeyItsJoel: A degree in Photography is like a degree in French Literature. Both useless.

The purpose of having a degree is the credibility it provides you in entering a particular career field, so I wouldn't completely agree that it's useless, just less useful due to few opportunities. The only place I can think off the top of my head where a degree is useful is applying to be a photography instructor at a school/college, but even a lot of those job descriptions are loose nowadays and value professional experience over a degree.

Link | Posted on Aug 15, 2016 at 21:16 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: I don't understand it. I keep reading on these forums how inferior Canon kit is. How does he manage to take professional looking photos?

Is this a serious question?

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 19:36 UTC
In reply to:

Bernard Carns: So the Fuji doesn't make it to prime time....
And using a Canon to shoot the president?
What is going on?
This is a misprint.
DPR you're going to have to print a retraction!
:-)
(Hope everyone has a nice holiday weekend (for those of you in the US))
BC

Like Souza, I'm a pro Canon user and a casual Fuji X user. My reason? Although the IQ is mostly on par with Canon SLRs, no Fuji X camera has the reliability in performance (especially focusing) and the ease of use (e.g. quickly adjusting ISO, aperture, shutter speed) that a Canon has. That said, I find my X-E2 a very fun camera to shoot with, and it's my preferred travel camera (light and compact).

Link | Posted on Jul 1, 2016 at 19:35 UTC

Reading white text on dark has always been an eye sore/strainer. I understand from a design standpoint that what was trending in the development of the digital darkroom (gray/dark background), was a natural aesthetic for photography websites where photos are the primary showcase.

Link | Posted on Jun 24, 2016 at 17:57 UTC as 213th comment
In reply to:

electrophoto: I guess I will never understand why anyone would buy any of those smartphone add-on lenses, then shoot usually rather mediocre IQ images, with odd distortions to them, always carry the lenses, the specific cases etc...
I use a smartphone, I use it a lot... I take photos with it too ... but when I approach that kind of photography, where I need different lenses, I take any of the other cameras along, depending on my need...
It's about the right tool for the right job... and adding & carrying these mostly silly lenses for a smartphone kind of defies the purpose of the smartphone.

Also at 140$ I can buy something like a used Fuji X10 or so... or find a RX100MK1 for under 280$ (used)... easily enough.

Not everyone can afford nor wants an additional SLR, mirrorless camera, or point-and-shoot. Products like these have a market and that market has only shown growth.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 21:11 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: Is this the level of innovation Adobe thinks is acceptable to CC users?

It saves to click 4 corners with the mask tool and then use content-aware fill which was inroduced with CS5, I believe. Actually, it just makes a script a built-in feature.

Where is the real innovation? A new tool like content-aware fill as such?

You're premising Adobe's lack of innovation on a single new feature announcement. Okay.

Link | Posted on May 26, 2016 at 22:52 UTC

As cruddy as this software may be, the makers are brilliant entrepreneurs for recognizing there is a large market of 'guy-or-gal-with-a-camera', the weekend photographers, the old-timer photo hobbyists, who don't have the technical know-how to do this stuff in Photoshop, nor the aesthetic sensibilities to see how crude the effects are, and whose clientele (if they're doing hired gigs) also lack these sensibilities, and only care about having a pretty picture of themselves to hang on the wall or share on social media, and see $80 or $120 as a fair trade for something that promises content-enhancing features, rather than your typical surface adjustments.

Link | Posted on May 24, 2016 at 16:53 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Mister Roboto: That pathetic IQ though. I can't believe some people will invest on a crappy phone to do something it is not intender for.

Yet, there are plenty of people who use their smartphones as their "workhorse" camera for whatever purposes they use them for. Admittedly, these product developers are making a risky bet that could either go really well or crash/burn.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2016 at 00:11 UTC
Total: 86, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »