Lives in United States United States
Joined on Sep 22, 2011


Total: 207, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »
In reply to:

balios: Sneaky. They've split the images into a checker-board pattern. A right-click save-as only gets you a tiny portion of the image. Adding to my Monet desktop backgrounds is going to take some work...

No, if you click what looks like a download icon at the bottom of the image on its descriptive page, you'll get the whole image at full size. On a Mac, you then just Control-click and select "Save image as". Dunno what the equivalent command is on a pc.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2014 at 17:56 UTC
In reply to:

EssexAsh: "photographer Art Wolfe has built perhaps one of the strongest brands in his field."

Who? Guess his brand could be better. Whoever he is.

And who are you? Ignorant and proud of it!

Link | Posted on May 13, 2014 at 16:25 UTC
On article Little beauty: Nordin Seruyan's macro images (352 comments in total)
In reply to:

Prairie Pal: Mostly muddled and distracted even if you reclassify it as surrealism. I always enjoy creative endeavors, but even the better of these lack enough polish to reach "meh" status. 1,3,7,11&12 are disasters.

It's your loss if you are too jaded to appreciate beauty when you see it.

Link | Posted on May 10, 2014 at 16:09 UTC
In reply to:

Volkan Ersoy: Question: How many of you have visited the award site and looked at all of the photos (i.e. to see the whole story) before making a negative comment here?

Some of the photos on the award website are better than the winning photos, and some are a load of crap. Personally, I'm shocked by how many totally ordinary photos received awards.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2014 at 18:32 UTC
On article MIT algorithm predicts photo popularity (89 comments in total)

Just what we always wanted to know: What types of photos are most popular with people who have NO TASTE!

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2014 at 18:28 UTC as 25th comment
On article 900MP portraits show human face in extreme detail (279 comments in total)

As many others have said in so many words, I totally fail to see the point unless one is obsessed with closeups of nose hair or something like that. It is very easy to capture a pin-sharp image of any face by mounting almost any DSLR on a tripod and attaching a garden variety portrait lens.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2014 at 19:12 UTC as 65th comment
On article Miggo Strap and Grip review (86 comments in total)

For starters, this camera strap is ugly as sin!

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2014 at 23:36 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply

Ugly as sin! Otherwise... Hey look, it's a camera!

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2014 at 18:43 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

louisjaffe: As owner of the Sony-badged E-mount Tamron 18-200 used on a NEX-7, I have to echo the previous comment: How lousy will this new super-zoom be? The 18-200 is only passable at wide-to-mid angle settings, and unusable at tele for any serious work.

I don't know why it's so hard for some people to understand that lenses like these are not meant for people who think super zooms are an incarnation of the Devil himself. For many, many amateur photographers, a lens like this will be a dream come true. Must everyone in this forum always trash everything that doesn't meet their exalted standards?!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 18:28 UTC
On article Enthusiast compact camera roundup (2013) (233 comments in total)
In reply to:

oldman1234: Have several of the Sony camera including rx100....Migrated from Minolta to Sony. About 3000 in cameras 3000 in lenses..Guess what the $95 point and shoot does 95 percent of any of the highend camera. The present day digital camera has 20 more years to catch up with film......if ever

"The present day digital camera has 20 more years to catch up with film......if ever"

Baloney! Even pros struggled to capture low-noise photos in low light in the days of film. In a head-to-head test of low-light capability, even the best film camera would fail miserably because of the limits of film.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2014 at 18:17 UTC
On article DxOMark tests Nokia Lumia 1020's Raw image quality (96 comments in total)

Most people who think a smart phone is a camera don't even know what RAW capability is. To each his own, but carrying a small, high-quality pocket camera at all times is the easiest thing in the world. Who needs a phone that deludes itself that it's a real camera?

Link | Posted on Jan 25, 2014 at 19:20 UTC as 22nd comment | 5 replies
On article 10 essential time-saving Photoshop tips (87 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joachim Gerstl: Anyone still using Photoshop?

Dumbest question of the year by a wide margin.

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2014 at 20:12 UTC

I want a virtual toaster and I refuse to sign up for Adobe CC until they include one!

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2014 at 20:49 UTC as 33rd comment
On article Integrating the Apple MacBook Air into a pro workflow (346 comments in total)

I think it's hysterical that some people insist that a MacBook Air doesn't have enough power for photo editing. I was editing photos in Photoshop on a 12" powerbook G4 for months on end more than ten years ago with no trouble whatsoever. By modern standards, that computer was a dinosaur.

But consider this: No laptop is ideal for critical photo editing because the brightness and contrast of the image change as the viewing angle of the screen changes. Because it is very difficult to position the screen at exactly the same angle every time you use the machine, it is almost impossible to edit consistently from one session to the next.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2014 at 18:33 UTC as 55th comment | 4 replies
On article Entry-Level Mirrorless Camera Roundup (2013) (94 comments in total)

Do you all think Fuji is likely to add wireless remote control to the X-M1's capabilities in the future? And if so, could they do it with a software upgrade? To me, this is one of the most interesting new features now appearing on some of the newest cameras.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2014 at 08:39 UTC as 10th comment | 1 reply
On article Want to remember something? Don't take a photo (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jim: That study sounds like complete nonsense to me. I've never heard of anyone expressing ANY lack of memory of an event due to having a photograph present. If anything, the complete reverse is true. Nonsensical studies like this are a waste of time and money. I just hope it wasn't funded by taxpayers.

As an aside, why is this even posted on this website? Helloooooo.


When you photograph an event, you also HAVE THE PHOTO—which allows you to retrieve far more information about the event on demand than anyone could ever remember.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2013 at 18:58 UTC
On article DPReview Gear of the Year - Part 1: Fujifilm X100S (303 comments in total)
In reply to:

rdscibilia: This is better than the EOS M I bought for $299 how exactly?

The Fuji X100S is NOT better than your EOS M I. The M I is the BEST camera in the world and you are a GENIUS for buying one!

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2013 at 19:59 UTC

Cute... but a year's work?! I dunno...

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2013 at 19:41 UTC as 29th comment
On article Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM' (551 comments in total)

$3,000 for such a camera is just plain nuts!

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2013 at 21:58 UTC as 162nd comment | 1 reply
Total: 207, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »