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:
Sony NEX-6
16-50PZ
50mm 1.8 OSS

Nikon 1 J1, 10-30VR

Comments

Total: 547, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »

I'm not for the permit requirement yet still, whatever happened to shoots in a studio? Why does seemingly EVERY photo now HAVE to be taken outside?

Link | Posted on Jun 23, 2017 at 04:38 UTC as 12th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Tical: TBH I'm a bit worried by this convergence: from a linguisical point of view there's nothing in common between still images (photography, that's it, where the whole communicative intention is expressed into a single frame by means of a single action triggered by one's will) and video, even though the tool is (could be) the same (I'm not inferring video is "inferior" BTW, but utterly diiferent, yes). The day one can simply unconditionally "record" reality and then extract a single frame from it, in a different time and place, photography will die, as an autonomous linguistic exercise, at least. Until now, the "quality divide" has somewhat set the two disiplines apart... but then?

I couldn't agree with you more. I despite "convergence" & if I had the means I'd put a stop to it, even if it meant MAKING other people who want it accept the traditionalist premise. It is ridiculous to me that clients expect still shooters to record video, I don't care what anybody says to me they're as separate as spaghetti and rocks. As I posted myself above you see this in other places too, in basketball they expect 7 footers to shoot the 3 and be able to handle the ball like a guard, whereas in the past guards did that while 7 footers posted up. They're trying to make Swiss Army Knives out of all of us. No, thank you.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 19:20 UTC

I'm with Tical 100%. As a hobbyist and traditionalist, this just makes me feel nauseous. Previously you were told to concentrate on what you were really good at as opposed to "spreading yourself too thin" or being a "jack of all trades, master of none." It's why Shaq was derided for acting, Don Johnson for trying to be a singer, and photography and video were as separate as soccer and ballet dancing. In basketball guards shot the 3 pointer while 7 footers posted up. Life made sense.

Now you have all of this "convergence" nonsense. If Shaq was young now he'd likely not made an NBA roster since he doesn't shoot 3-pointers even though he's an all-time great. Clients are being RIDICULOUS to expect photographers to be videographers. I don't expect my electrician to be my plumber.

If "times are changing," well I'd love nothing more than for them to be MADE not to change. The Nikon DF shouldn't be the only stills model which doesn't record video, it should be ALL stills models, by LAW.

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 19:12 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies
On article Flickr gives profile pages a makeover (5 comments in total)
In reply to:

RedFox88: People still use photo websites in the age of apps and instagram?! LOL!

I do. Frankly, I don't see what is so great about Instagram anyway. Your photos are square and you can't post from a PC. Why would I edit my RAW files in Lightroom only to not be able to post from the PC and the photos would be turned square even if I could?

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2017 at 05:13 UTC
In reply to:

ybizzle: The first step of the tutorial should be to ditch the iPhone and get a proper camera. ;)

Yes, and if you can't be bothered to have something as tiny as an RX100 with you, then you're lazy.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 19:37 UTC
On article Nikon reshuffles management structure (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

wakaba: My phone killed my Nikons. It's networked, does 4k, raw and lasts 1day and costs 500$. I will not buy a Nikon FF anymore. I however would buy a networked, 4k, raw MF body running Android with mirror or mirrorless with glaslrism and as usable as a BlacKmagic cinema. That is worth to me 1000$. Restructuring is just a shuffle and means squat to me as a consumer. Change your product now or die.

Like the one guy said, the poster lost me when he compared a toy to a camera. I'm sure Beethoven could do more on a Fisher Price piano than almost anyone else, I'm also sure he wouldn't cheapen himself and his excellence by doing so and would instead use a quality piano for composing and displaying his work. "A full-frame is MARGINALLY better than a phone?" Um, ok, I suppose Chef-Boyardee is only marginally better than spaghetti made at an Italian cuisine as well.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 19:35 UTC
On article Nikon reshuffles management structure (244 comments in total)
In reply to:

wakaba: My phone killed my Nikons. It's networked, does 4k, raw and lasts 1day and costs 500$. I will not buy a Nikon FF anymore. I however would buy a networked, 4k, raw MF body running Android with mirror or mirrorless with glaslrism and as usable as a BlacKmagic cinema. That is worth to me 1000$. Restructuring is just a shuffle and means squat to me as a consumer. Change your product now or die.

If a phone killed your Nikon, that says more to me about your photography skills or lack of seriousness in your pursuit than it does anything about Nikon.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 14:00 UTC
In reply to:

ybizzle: The first step of the tutorial should be to ditch the iPhone and get a proper camera. ;)

Most definitely get a real camera. "The best camera is the one with you" well if the Sony RX100 is too "bulky" I'd question your dedication to the hobby. "Good enough" is different for photographers than it is for a teen snapping selfies in poor lighting.

Link | Posted on May 20, 2017 at 13:56 UTC

I agere with the pushback against train tracks photos, but not because of safety or legal reasons, but because it's a way overdone fad that is part of this recent "another mom with a camera" type of "style." Others: thinking that a crooked photo is some cool effect (to me it's a sign you're drunk), having 32 "props" in the photo, jacking up the colors to cartoonish levels, plastering your logo all over the bottom, those photos of the family "walking away" from the camera. Bluh.

Whatever happened to posing in a studio or underneath a shade tree in the park and having ONLY the subject displayed without all of the extraneous nonsense and getting the colors basically right other than maybe adding just the slightest bit of "warmth" to it? As "boring" as they are, heck I'd even take a Sears Portrait studio shot over most of the nonsense I see these days.

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 13:51 UTC as 104th comment
In reply to:

Najinsky: On a dirt path in a remote village in Thailand there was an opening in the bushes that lined the track. Once I was driving past on my motorbike I glimpsed through the opening and saw a body of water lined with beautiful silver bark trees with golden yellow leaves. I made a mental note to return when I had my camera with me. And I I did, but the leaves were now more green. I got some nice shots but decided I had to return when the leaves were yellow again.

Next time I returned, there was a concrete road in place of the track, the bushes had gone, as had the silver bark trees and with them the leaves they used to carry.

This is why I take so many more photos with my iPhone these days, not only does it provide a visual and GPS record of what I saw and where, it may be the only record.

I know some people have a reflex vomit reaction at seeing the words photography and iPhone in the same postcode, but really, that's their problem. A tool is a tool, whatever it's name.

What, a Canon Powershot G9x or Sony RX100 isn't small enough for you? I'm sorry but using a phone when such alternatives exist is lazy. And at the risk of being called a "grammar Nazi," when are people going to get it through their thick skull that it is NOT "it's" when it's a possessive pronoun? It's is a substitute for "it is," not for statements such as "The Nikon D3400 and its kit lens are a great starter DSLR package," you DO NOT use an apostrophe in those instances. Gee whiz, my 9 year old knows better than that.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 05:44 UTC

I hate towels, I really REALLY hate towels.

I used to read Modern Photography a lot in the early 80s. I loved the camera reviews, the catalog in the back, and "Keppler's SLR Notebook." He did an article where he advocated going through your slides and throwing away those out-of-focus shots as part of culling your collection but also as part of striving for excellence and not settling for mediocrity. I use that idea a lot when my wife gets mad if I delete a photo of our kids which is blurry (doesn't happen with me me but it happens to her ALL the time).

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 14:48 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
On article Women Photograph is a directory of female photographers (218 comments in total)

Around here it's the exact opposite, ALL of the photographers are females, and I mean ALL of them, every last one. They "only do available light," they jack up the colors to cartoonish levels, and they use that ridiculous "Dutch Angle" and they have probably 937 props in the photos and they ESPECIALLY absolutely LOVE to take all of their photos on the train tracks.

Men who have cameras in this area seem to be seen as strange, most of them are into guns, hunting, fishing, 4-wheeling etc, so if you're a guy who's into photography around here well frankly that's almost unheard of. Men OR women who don't do that "Faddish" type of train-tracks photography and instead aim for accurate colos and a minimum of "props" and faddish train tracks poses are all but nonexistent here as well.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 06:01 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

dmanthree: Could've been worse. The 'author' might have published a few examples and said "that could have been shot with an iPhone."

Amen, I could not agree with you more (dmanthree). If I had my way, in fact, pro photography such as wedding photography would be a licensed endeavor and it would be REQUIRED that you HAD to use a real camera vs a smartphone and if you used a smartphone for any professional work your license to practice photography would be revoked. I actually LIKE it that a magazine is suggesting some sort of standards of caliber of gear if you're going to be shooting something as special as a wedding.

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2016 at 07:03 UTC

Well, given that well too many people think that an iPhone is perfectly suitable for such an occasion (one couple with 95% of their brain cells apparently missing even specifically ASKED for that), it's nice to see that SOMEONE has some sense of standards, even if they're off (something like a Sony A6000 and a 35mm or 50mm prime is also a high-caliber machine, and quieter).

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 20:42 UTC as 301st comment

It's a long lost battle which I'm now OK with, but in years past I often times thought the "mad rush" to SD cards vs Compact Flash wasn't really needed. My first-ever digital was a point shoot Nikon Coolpix 775, it was TINY yet used Compact Flash. The Digital Rebel XT/350D was a very small d-SLR and it used Compact Flash. I never experienced bent pins either.

That was long ago, though, once the cards became cheap and PCs had SD readers built-in I was cool with them. (But microSD in a camera? Come on, that's TOO small.)

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 16:04 UTC as 7th comment
On article Throwback Thursday: Casio QV-4000 (61 comments in total)
In reply to:

zodiacfml: Wow, camera in 2001 beats smartphone image quality. I mean, the resolution is poor in this old camera but at this web image size, it packs a punch. The shadows can do some noise reduction but the 2nd and portrait photo looks great.

It could have been easier for us if the images were rotated.

Yes indeed, and to think so many people nowadays think "lugging" even something like this or a Sony RX100 or a Panasonic LX10 is just SO back-breaking. Man we sure have become lazy.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2016 at 16:13 UTC
In reply to:

larrytusaz: Why in the WORLD would you do this? If someone gave me the funds to travel to another country, or I had the funds in whatever way, I sure wouldn't use a phone for such a special occasion, I'd use the best. If lugging a full frame DSLR was too much, I'd at least use something like a Panasonic LX10 or Sony RX100 series, if not a Sony A6000-series.

Sure the photographer is the main thing, but what sense does it make to use inferior equipment with superior (yet compact) equipment well at the ready? When you want to be the best, you use a tool commensurate with the aspiration. You never hear of LeBron James playing basketball with a cheap dollar store ball or with Payless shoes, or a world glass golfer using garage sale clubs, or a cyclist using a Roadmaster they got from Walmart instead of a GOOD bike. If I were a culinary expert and given the chance to serve my cuisine to a high society crowd like British royalty, I wouldn't show up with Hot Pockets.

Well that's good to know. I have a Sony A6000 (previously a Sony NEX6, NEX-3n and NEX-C3) after having used Nikon d-SLRs so I certainly understand the appeal of portability, which explains the Sony RX100 and models like the Panasonic LX10, but I could never use a Kodak Instamatic-type of camera after having gotten used to quality tools. For the everyday bunch who will never do more than take photos of Junior hugging Fido with the built-in flash and with horriblly-off white balance, sure a phone is enough, but even a mere enthusiast like me wants to use something commensurate with the aspiration, even if I'll never be a bona fida professional.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 19:49 UTC
In reply to:

Nick Brundle - Photography: Anyone serious about photography and the end result will not use a mobil phone to take decent pictures.
Need I say more.

You are correct. Anyone who calls themselves a "photographer" wouldn't use something also used by the teens snapping selfies with their BFFs. Yes so it's "always with you," yes, so? Is a Panasonic LX10 or Sony RX100 too large for you? If so, I dare suggest that you're lazy.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2016 at 00:02 UTC

Why in the WORLD would you do this? If someone gave me the funds to travel to another country, or I had the funds in whatever way, I sure wouldn't use a phone for such a special occasion, I'd use the best. If lugging a full frame DSLR was too much, I'd at least use something like a Panasonic LX10 or Sony RX100 series, if not a Sony A6000-series.

Sure the photographer is the main thing, but what sense does it make to use inferior equipment with superior (yet compact) equipment well at the ready? When you want to be the best, you use a tool commensurate with the aspiration. You never hear of LeBron James playing basketball with a cheap dollar store ball or with Payless shoes, or a world glass golfer using garage sale clubs, or a cyclist using a Roadmaster they got from Walmart instead of a GOOD bike. If I were a culinary expert and given the chance to serve my cuisine to a high society crowd like British royalty, I wouldn't show up with Hot Pockets.

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2016 at 23:55 UTC as 29th comment | 2 replies
On article Flickr Marketplace image licensing program shuttered (87 comments in total)

Maybe I'm weird, but to me Facebook (which is where a lot of people seem to post photos nowadays) is about the sorriest place to post a photo. They are so much more limited than a real photo-hosting site, and with the "tagging" feature people nowadays freak out sometimes when you take their photo at a party enjoying themselves, scared that their boss or such will see it. The 'tagging" of people with their real names, such has made photography so much more awkward in such social situations than it used to be. However, people use them because in fact many times they think it's IMPOSSIBLE to share a photo with someone unless it's in Facebook. Have they never heard of Flickr, PBase, Smugmug, and heck--email?

Again, maybe I'm weird, but I APPRECIATE how in Flickr I don't know those people I appreciate that I'm seeing something from someone far away who's not in my life in any meaningful way. I don't want to only see photos just from my "friends."

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2016 at 07:00 UTC as 20th comment | 4 replies
Total: 547, showing: 81 – 100
« First‹ Previous34567Next ›Last »