Lives in United States United States
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at www.markkatz.net
Joined on Aug 23, 2017


Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5
On article DJI Air 2S vs Mavic 2 Pro: which should you choose? (84 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ed_C: One thing that isn't covered is how files are saved on the Air 2S. What I mean is more of a comparison to the Air 2 which only saves jpg in a lot of the photo modes. e.g. bracketing. Does the Air 2S save all the bracketed shots in dng as well as jpg?

Yes, at least when doing a hyper lapse. You can set to save in both jpeg and dng. I haven't tested out bracketing but I would assume so.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2021 at 15:51 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.

Local photographers don't use this spot to show large homes. They use it because it's a very pretty green area.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2017 at 00:23 UTC
In reply to:

Team Yeti: This isn't over yet -- not by a long shot. One of those letter of the law vs. spirit of the law deals. It's all going to boil down to lawyers and judges figuring out who has various easements, what the law says about public access, what defines "public", if the photographers are commercial in nature and need a permit, etc.

The wealthy HOA is telling photographers they can return, hoping to save face. And the city is saying stay off the public sidewalks for your photo shoots.

That leaves what, exactly? Trampling uninvited on some resident's front lawn with your equipment, clients, assistants, etc. That's called trespassing. Guaranteed the cops will be called before this is all over with.

This is just the HOA and city trying to CYA.

For the most part, each of the homes here have large fences to keep people off their property.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2017 at 00:16 UTC
In reply to:

Imager of: Well I for one agree with the ban. You pay that kind of money to live in a nice neighbourhood and then have to deal with a bunch of pro photographers constantly outside your house. I bet most of you would change your tune if you lived there. Take your clients somewhere else.

Respectfully disagree. It is a public street and esplanade, paid with city taxes. This is not a private drive. I live in Houston and have photographed a number of family and senior portraits in this spot, including my own. It's a beautiful spot.
I happen to live on a street with more than normal traffic. Can I put up signs that say we restrict the amount of cars that drive by. Not possible. That being said, unfortunately there are unprofessional photographers that do not abide by proper decorum when taking photographs in the area. But we should not be penalized for a few bad apples.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2017 at 00:09 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): the micro contrast and color of the trees looks absolutely f'king horrid.

was this supposed to be an example of good technique? or just another half baked article showing a technique that is best served used sparingly and when you absolutely really need to use it.

there's no reason in the world why this should not be blended or using a grad filter to look far more reasonable of an image.

You ask "was this supposed to be an example of good technique?", whereby the title specifically says "crazy dynamic range of today's image sensors". To me, this wasn't intended to show technique, just that you could get incredible dynamic range out of todays sensors.
As for it being a raw capture, of course the range would not be there in a jpeg.

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 18:22 UTC
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5