larrytusaz

Lives in United States Tucson, United States
Works as a Database Design
Has a website at http://bit.ly/1DT7VSN
Joined on Aug 20, 2005
About me:

Equipment:
Nikon D3300
18-55mm VR II
50mm 1.8 AF-S G
Sony NEX-3n
16-50PZ
Canon 450D
18-55 EF-S
Nikon 1 J1, 10-30VR

Comments

Total: 605, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

minababe: These articles would be like if in the 1970s and 80s, there were a plethora of articles touting how world class oil painters were switching to magic marker to paint their landscapes and portraits.

Yes, but most NASCAR-tailored cars aren't street legal, and I'm quite positive that a NASCAR driver would never show up for an actual race in a stock Toyota Camry.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 01:36 UTC
In reply to:

photo_rb: I think there is a distinct advantage or difference when photographing people with a phone in that you don't come across as a "photographer" which can be threatening and/or intimidating.

(quiquae) The point is this, if you're so paranoid about being "ridiculed on Instagram," a totally overblown fear if there ever was one, regardless what difference does it make if the tool is a phone or an SLR? Image quality is one thing, but in terms of exposure, a camera is a camera. Why should one feel OK around a phone but not an SLR? That just makes no sense.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 01:31 UTC
In reply to:

tko: Why do they keep pushing cell phones? Obviously, big advertising bucks.

Do you ever see an article that illustrates the short comings? What you missed? Noooo, you get dozens of portraits with the background artificially blurred.

Do you ever hear about the shots the photographer missed? Nooooooooo, you only hear about how light and convenient it is, and how much trouble it is to change lenses.

HINT! The iphone doesn't zoom and you can't change lenses. Why not compare oranges to oranges? You don't have to change lenses with a dSLR if you don't want to.

"I suppose that wasn't a real camera because it was a tool for the masses and not the pros."

BINGO!! DING DING!!

My 1st camera was a Kodak 110 when I was 13. As I read about photography in-depth, I realized that a needed a real tool to "rate," and rightly so. Without Internet, no friends, and nothing but idle time & a library, I LEARNED what f-stops, depth-of-field, rule of 3rds and such were, and I even knew what the chemicals were which were used in a black & white darkroom.

And it took me a year, but I saved my money and got a Nikon EM (my other choice was a Pentax K1000). It opened up all sorts of potential, some of it not realized, but at least I had a REAL tool and the only limitation was now me. I was all of 14 years old.

And yes, at that point, no Kodak was good enough, not once I had a real tool in my hands.

THAT is how you do it. No other way.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 20:04 UTC
In reply to:

photo_rb: I think there is a distinct advantage or difference when photographing people with a phone in that you don't come across as a "photographer" which can be threatening and/or intimidating.

Why should someone being a photographer be "threatening?" I'm not arguing with you about whether or not the perception exists, but why should it--and moreover, why should it be respected?

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 19:28 UTC
In reply to:

minababe: These articles would be like if in the 1970s and 80s, there were a plethora of articles touting how world class oil painters were switching to magic marker to paint their landscapes and portraits.

Does a car driven by NASCAR drivers also have a cup holder & a luggage rack?

You call yourself a professional, ACT like one.

You take the best you can take without breaking your back (Sony RX100 or Panasonic m/43rds etc) or you don't rate and you're a phony two-bit Schyster and I would even fully support it being REQUIRED BY THE LAW (yes I'm totally serious) that you are ORDERED to use a real camera on any pro venture or your pro credentials are revoked, your studio is torn down with a wrecking ball & your license to practice photography is permanently revoked. We don't want you LOSERS in our club, you have no place here. If you can't run with the big dogs, you stay on the porch.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 19:18 UTC
In reply to:

minababe: These articles would be like if in the 1970s and 80s, there were a plethora of articles touting how world class oil painters were switching to magic marker to paint their landscapes and portraits.

There's a Sony RX100. If that's too big and too much of a bother, you're lazy. Period.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 19:01 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (380 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedWattlebird: Why do I have keep coming across articles on mobile phones on photography websites?

Yeah they take pretty snapshots on their pin head sized sensors, but it’s like reading about skateboards on car websites because they also take you from a to b.

A superiority complex is a GOOD thing, it means one has actual STANDARDS. I'm getting to where more and more I think "snobbery" and "elitism" is a GOOD thing at such times. It means you don't accept, say, that a microwaved Hot Pocket is something in the realm of the culinary arts, and that real golfers don't use broomsticks, and that tacos from Taco Bell are not the same thing as something made by someone who is from Mexico & makes it the right way.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 14:41 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (380 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedWattlebird: Why do I have keep coming across articles on mobile phones on photography websites?

Yeah they take pretty snapshots on their pin head sized sensors, but it’s like reading about skateboards on car websites because they also take you from a to b.

{tbcass} Is absolutely correct. I'll go one farther. It is appalling and ridiculous that anyone who calls themselves a professional would DARE use a snapshot-grade camera in their work. Are you kidding me? They're fine for the soccer moms taking snaps of Jr hugging Fido or college sorority girls taking duck-lipped selfies, but serious photographers? Oh please.

Back in the 1980s--and I know it's the year 2018 but in my opinion what was true in the 1980s is still true now--if you wanted to advance in your craft and be taken seriously, then you got at least a 35mm SLR. You would not DARE be caught dead using a Kodak 110 or Polaroid camera, EVER. It was beneath the dignity of a real photographer to be caught dead doing such a thing, using the camera that the everyday snapshooters used. You got something like a Pentax K1000, Nikon FM or Canon AE-1 and you learned how to use it. The same is still true today.

Good grief, we have models like the Sony RX100, if you need something small.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 06:29 UTC
On article Apple iPhone X review (380 comments in total)
In reply to:

msstudio: I had a couple of tester phones end of last year and the X stands out as a well rounded and quality photo phone. And yes, I’m one of the very few suckers who bought one but I have clients who ask for iPhone pictures and I tend to deliver the best available at the Time of assignment, as do most of the pros who actually shoot this for publication.
Maybe we’re at a crossroad where the real high end stuff does not appeal to the broader market, I heard Soderbergh is shooting his next movie on an iPhone. I’m sure they won’t be using iPhone 4 and 5s...

freediverx is right. An iPhone is a "real camera?" Please. I'm tired of the lines being blurred & traditions not being respected. Next thing you know we're going to argue that it's "narrow minded" and "elitist" to say that a man should only use the men's room. Oh wait...

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 06:22 UTC
In reply to:

Photato: Where is the iPhone superior to the M100?
1. Wider Color Gamut P3 vs sRGB
2. 4K video vs 1080P
3. Panorama function vs Nothing
4. Time Lapse uses all the iPhone sensor, M100 uses a mushi 1080P video.
5. Faster setup of custom WB
6. Live Photos are 12MP worth, M100 Live Photos are 720P video.
7. Video can be controlled and monitored from other iPhone or iPad, M100 doesn't has that functionality.
8. Longer battery life.
9. No need of separate charger, great for travel.
10. Bigger, brighter and higher resolution screen.
11. Next generation more efficient codecs fro Image and Video such HEIC and HEVC.
12. Built-in GPS
The list is longer but gonna leave it up to here.

I loved your response. The post you were responding to is proof positive that the adage "everyone is a photographer" should be translated "a lot of people want the accreditation and respect accorded to a REAL photographer while being too lazy to get off their {donkey} and learn some techniques and principles and bother using a real camera in the process."

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2018 at 16:31 UTC

As a hobbyist photographer why should I care what the point & shoot crowd likes? I'm pretty sure those into the culinary arts don't care what people who eat at McDonald's think. No, everyone is not a "photographer" anymore than everyone is a chef because they know how to zap a Hot Pocket.

Link | Posted on Jan 22, 2018 at 14:48 UTC as 185th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Gesture: Batteries should be user replaceable.

Yes and in fact if it were up to me it would be REQUIRED BY THE LAW for batteries to be user replaceable.

"Water resistance?" It should still be water resistant ANYWAY. Figure out how. "Size." Again, figure out how. "Style?" It's a device not a woman in a bikini WHO CARES what it looks like. Besides it will wind up in a case anyway most times.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2018 at 14:15 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I approve of the reversal, yet I can't help but ask, what's wrong with a studio? They've worked great for years & it doesn't matter how hot cold or rainy or icy it is.

That sounds cool. Understand, I have no problem with outdoor shooting in & of itself at all, in fact I do it, just that lately it seems as though many dismiss it altogether when in fact it has many advantages and has been practiced for a long time owing to those advantages (lighting control, weather elements etc). I shoot outdoors myself, but I'm a mere hobbyist and I also realize the advantages of studios for those who can afford them and I would take one in a minute if one were offered to me.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2017 at 01:09 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I approve of the reversal, yet I can't help but ask, what's wrong with a studio? They've worked great for years & it doesn't matter how hot cold or rainy or icy it is.

{techjedi} I wish you were right, and maybe you are, but it sure SEEMS like EVERYONE and their grandmother is "natural light ONLY," typically the young 20-something mons who just got a DSLR but don't know white balance from a hole in the ground. At the same time, a lot of people seem big on wanting to do shots at a location. Who wants to do shots outside when it's 43'F & the wind is blowing or it's 95'F and you're being roasted like a lobster?

Well if it were up to me--it's not--but they would MADE and FORCED to not change. Weather outside is still cold or hot, lighting inside is still better except for quality shade or cloud cover. People are just stupid anymore, apparently, I guess THAT'S what's changed.

Link | Posted on Dec 25, 2017 at 22:09 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: I approve of the reversal, yet I can't help but ask, what's wrong with a studio? They've worked great for years & it doesn't matter how hot cold or rainy or icy it is.

Then why did people use studios so often up until recently, and sometimes still do? Outdoor occasionally is fine, but this thing of it ALL being outdoors is silly when studios worked fine for many years. The ability to control the light and not be hot, cold or wet are especially noteworthy. If studios were so bland, why would they only figure this out now, they never noticed all of this time?

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2017 at 01:40 UTC
In reply to:

Edymagno: As the world plunges into "ban" mode, we will have to go back into the studio and use green screens. Seriously folks.

So? Since when is using a studio such an awful thing? You get more control over the lightning and you're never sweaty from humidity or cold from the ice etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 18:41 UTC
In reply to:

Autriche78: I've never understood location shoots for engagements or weddings, unless it's a place that's somehow meaningful to the couple, and I'd wager that the vast majority of location photo shoots don't fall into that category.

"Oh look honey, these are the wedding pictures when we were in a neighborhood that we couldn't afford to live in but that looks nice as a backdrop " said no bride ever.

I agree with the first post. What's wrong with a studio? They've worked great for years.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 18:39 UTC

I approve of the reversal, yet I can't help but ask, what's wrong with a studio? They've worked great for years & it doesn't matter how hot cold or rainy or icy it is.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 18:38 UTC as 21st comment | 8 replies
On article Have your say: Best smartphone of 2017 (58 comments in total)
In reply to:

qunamax: There are so many new models and companies that I don't see a point in following it all while their features remain pretty much the same, just more and more gimmicks and useless stuff, There's so much to be done on PC and with proper camera and in life in general that I don't know where people find time to fiddle with their phones.

I agree with the 1st post. My smartphone is very important but there is no replacing a PC for serious content-creation. Try typing your resume, a long email or memo, creating a Powerpoint etc on a phone or even a tablet. Unless you have a GOOD cloud connection, where are all of those photo files stored? (I am ALWAYS seeing posts from people who've lost their phone & are in a panic because "my photos of my kids are all gone now!!" and I'm like "have you never heard of a PC & an external hard drive?")

There is a reason my phone is always on me but there's ALSO a reason I also have a smallish laptop in the car, there are plenty of times that there is no replacing a full-blown PC with Windows or macOS etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 14:09 UTC
On article Have your say: Best smartphone of 2017 (58 comments in total)

Other than the occasional video the camera is irrelevant to me, I have a Nikon D3300. I like budget phones that don't suck. I find 5.5" to be the sweet spot, 5" seems too small whereas 6" feels like I'm carrying a TV tray in my pocket. I need for it to not "lag" but then I don't game either.

I like my ZTE Grand X4, and the ZTE Blade Max which superseded it (on AT&T, I use Cricket, their SIM cards work in AT&T phones) is my likely next phone as it's basically the same phone updated from Android 6 to 7. For only $70 (the new one) you get a 5.5" LCD, 2G RAM 16G storage, very "stock" Android, microSD slot, doesn't stutter, GPS locks on well, has a USB-C port (so much better than microUSB, the cord isn't one way, I can't STAND anything that only goes in one-way and it isn't obvious which way) and it has my new must-have feature--fingerprint sensor. It's SO much easier unlocking your phone that way vs hunting down that TINY Chiclets-sized power button & swiping the pattern.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 13:59 UTC as 13th comment
Total: 605, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »