AlanG

Lives in United States Silver Spring, United States
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.goldsteinphoto.com
Joined on Mar 3, 2003

Comments

Total: 703, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

wb2trf: This thing could practically get mandated in lots of venues, fairly soon, due to the silent shutter. In any setting in which an event operator is hiring or permitting photography (wedding, other ceremony, presentation) why wouldn't photo companies pitch "our cameras are silent" and then people start to spec it. The dslr gets run out of town due to its inherent noise.

The White House press corps videographers certainly would benefit from silent still cameras being used in the same room with them.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2017 at 02:49 UTC

Let's take the Wharhol paintings and transform them into to a "new" piece of artwork and see if the foundation is OK with that.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 13:39 UTC as 10th comment

That looks great. Keep in mind when comparing to Niagara, that the water flow is much lower than it once was. Much is now diverted for power generation. This also reduces erosion of the falls.

Link | Posted on Mar 31, 2017 at 21:14 UTC as 8th comment

There is nothing in the article or linked story that says this UAS had a camera on it.

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2017 at 00:14 UTC as 38th comment
In reply to:

bokane: 17mm TSE - the first very wide angle shift lens on the market. Still superb.

I agree especially considering nobody else has made anything close to this. It makes superb images. I would describe it as the only ultra wide angle shift lens not the first wide angle shift lens. (35mm, 28mm and 24mm shift lenses existed for years before the 17 came out.)

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2017 at 14:18 UTC

"Photocrowd.com seeks no ownership of the Content submitted to the website and respects and supports the rights of the creator and/or owner."

Every time I see something like, "respects and supports the rights of the creator" I get suspicious. That generally means they know they can b.s. some photographers into not understanding the rest of the contract. They may respect and support the rights of photographers but are primarily protecting their own rights in this contract and trying to make money from the photographers' images.

It is sort of like saying, "I love, cherish and respect you and will take care of you forever. Also, please sign this pre-nuptual agreement that my team of lawyers worked on."

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 17:20 UTC as 4th comment

Please read and try to understand their terms. They seem unclear to me.

https://www.photocrowd.com/terms/

It is not clear to me how you "express consent" to others using your images or if you get financially compensated in any way. You do indemnify the user in case a model or property owner sues. If you consent to that usage, you certainly give up exclusive control of your images.

"• with your express consent, grant rights of use to third parties (each a “Customer”) in respect of the Content, including by way of licensing stock image electronic downloads and sales of physical articles, items and merchandise containing the Content including without limitation prints, posters and wall products (“Products”) ;
• if you have consented to rights of use to your Content being granted to Customers in accordance with the above, appoint third party distributors or agents to facilitate the same and sublicence the Content to such parties;"

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 17:13 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

AlanG: Sorry, I just borrowed them to test. I'll return them on Monday.

I was also the one who wiretapped Trump. It happened accidentally when my internet browser connected to the camera in his microwave oven.

All I learned from this was that Trump eats a lot Pop Tarts.

I've been friends with Obama since we were kids together in Kenya so I gave the material to him. He gets a kick out of watching Trump eating them.

Link | Posted on Mar 17, 2017 at 15:17 UTC

Sorry, I just borrowed them to test. I'll return them on Monday.

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2017 at 01:57 UTC as 20th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

AlanG: What may or may not be relevant is that Montgomery County MD is a very very wealthy county with a highly educated population that is quite liberal. It is generally considered to be a very well run county. (Minimal corruption,)

Of course the entire DC region is enriched by federal tax dollars. That supports an educated and involved citizenry.

Montgomery County has homestead credits that prevent homeowner's taxes from increasing too fast. The idea is to allow people to remain in their homes despite increases in the value of the homes. I've had my home for 30 years and have benefited from this. There is a system of Moderately Priced Dwelling Units that incorporates lower cost housing within luxury apartments, condos, and homes.

Taxes are not low here... you get what you pay for.

Back to the point, I think most people here feel the police do a very good job.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 14:41 UTC
In reply to:

AlanG: What may or may not be relevant is that Montgomery County MD is a very very wealthy county with a highly educated population that is quite liberal. It is generally considered to be a very well run county. (Minimal corruption,)

Well you can always move. I've been here since 1964 and love it. This is a major center for medical research and bio technology.

Bethesda, Silver Spring, Rockville, Gaithersburg, Potomac are prospering in every way. The school system is top notch (Blair's magnet program has led the country in science winners.) There is a high level of participation in local government which responds to their concerns. The farm areas are well protected from development via an "Agricultural Preserve."

And it is extremely multi-cultural... in 2015 4 of the 10 most diverse cities in the country were in Montgomery County MD.

Why do you think homes are so expensive here if people don't appreciate living here and enjoy a high quality of life?

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 21:00 UTC
In reply to:

stratman1976: I will and cannot ever understand this American "sue" culture. $500.000? Rediculous.

FWIW juries can award more than people sue for.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 16:32 UTC

What may or may not be relevant is that Montgomery County MD is a very very wealthy county with a highly educated population that is quite liberal. It is generally considered to be a very well run county. (Minimal corruption,)

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 16:16 UTC as 13th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

santamonica812: Minor quibble: She was not "awarded" anything, as the article makes clear that it was a settlement. She was given, she settled, she agreed upon . . . all of those could be accurate.

An award would be if a jury or judge found in her favor and ordered an amount of money (or equitable relief, etc).

(As I said, minor quibble.) :-)
Especially since this is a photography, and not a legal-interest, site.

You may be right that some pay more and others less. And those who pay less benefit disproportionately. But you still benefit because these people probably spent their whole lives working at low pay so that the rest of us can benefit by not paying so much for numerous services they perform.

We really are getting off cheap by subsidizing this. Of course our society would benefit a lot more if all got paid a living wage in the first place and we also prioritized universal health care and college education for all.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 16:14 UTC

Damn, I missed my chance back in 1969. I was assigned to shoot a high school basketball game by my school paper Silver Chips - Montgomery Blair HS in Montgomery County MD. I had a press pass. When I got to the game at Springbrook HS there was a big crowd trying to get in. They were told the place was full and were being turned away. The crowd was told to disperse. I was told I couldn't get in to shoot the game.

Since I was dropped off by my dad, I had nowhere to go. And neither did many others in the crowd. So they milled around. At the same time, the manager of the Blair basketball team wanted to get in and must have had an argument at the door. The police arrested him and dragged him off to a police car.

I took a photo of that and then the police arrested me. My friend Joe Neal got a shot of me being arrested and it ran in the paper. But he was not arrested. I had long hair and Joe didn't. I was charged with disorderly conduct and put in jail for a while.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 02:55 UTC as 29th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

AlanG: Rupert Murdock owns National Geographic and he's from Australia. Connection? ;-)

National Geographic is the company that encourages photographers to post photos on-line and then takes possession of them to use and market the ones they like without any compensation to photographers.

It has fallen so far that NG is now just another big business taking advantage of photographers. There is no way I would support the National Geographic brand.

Yes, that is my point. I would not support any company using the National Geographic brand name. The fact that NG has absolutely nothing to do with the product other than licensing their name is even more reason to not buy it.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 03:17 UTC

I'll really miss the Spiratone ads.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2017 at 03:43 UTC as 141st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

AlanG: DPreview should be condemning these contests and advising people not to give up their rights and undermine the profession.

By promoting these ripoffs, clearly DPReview is clearly not a friend to photographers.

Read the terms. If the Smithsonian does not have plans to make commercial use of the images, they would not be grabbing unlimited usage rights. Every one of those photographers has given up control of all of those photos for ever. They can never license exclusive use to anyone in the future.

The Smithsonian can always compete with them marketing their own photos without sharing the profits. This is nothing like a stock agency representation agreement. How you don't get this is beyond me.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2017 at 16:49 UTC
In reply to:

AlanG: DPreview should be condemning these contests and advising people not to give up their rights and undermine the profession.

By promoting these ripoffs, clearly DPReview is clearly not a friend to photographers.

You can have contests without the images being stolen to be commercially used forever without compensation to the photographers. Ideally, Smithsonian would enter into a licensing arrangement with the winners or owners of any images they want to market. Instead they grab them all and have a free library to do as they wish. Is it the job of photographers (amateur or not) to give away their work to help the Smithsonian make more money?

Of course if photographers are willing participants in giving their property to various companies, things won't change.

My point is that it should be the responsibility of photography sites to educate their readers, not support them being ripped off.

I also think it is the duty of informed people to explain this on this and other forums.

Vadims, I'm sorry to have to inform you, but you don't have a clue. I'm going to keep trying to educate you and others to understand that even photos made by amateurs have value and they should not be exploited.

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2017 at 12:05 UTC
In reply to:

JT26: That final image is stunning. I love it.

Yes few pros would be so stupid. Amateurs, wake up! Why should anyone give away their valuable creative content for others to profit from?

Link | Posted on Mar 6, 2017 at 01:52 UTC
Total: 703, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »