Philip Corlis

Lives in United States United States
Works as a Retired
Joined on Feb 9, 2003


Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) (316 comments in total)

No Sony cameras in the mix - hardly a credible review.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2014 at 02:20 UTC as 28th comment | 6 replies

I will be selling red dots for $50 plus shipping...

Kidding Leica, just kidding...

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2014 at 19:06 UTC as 99th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Philip Corlis: To Peevee1
#12 looks like Kodachrome to me. Good luck finding a digital preset to mimick it. Many have tried to simulate it but very few get very close.

IMO - this is one of the best approaches...

BTW - I think this exhibit is worth a trip from the states. Where else will you see all these great masterworks?

I read good things about RPP but I have never been able to get past the user interface which is - well let's just say primitive and leave it at that.

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 15:41 UTC

To Peevee1
#12 looks like Kodachrome to me. Good luck finding a digital preset to mimick it. Many have tried to simulate it but very few get very close.

IMO - this is one of the best approaches...

BTW - I think this exhibit is worth a trip from the states. Where else will you see all these great masterworks?

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2014 at 13:58 UTC as 20th comment | 3 replies
On article 1939: England in Color (part 1) (222 comments in total)

What a treasure! Who ever took these photos had a solid understanding of the craft of photography as well as a very good eye for composition. The fact that the scenes are more "ordinary" in nature rather than grander sights just makes them that much more special in my mind.

I can't wait to see more!

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2014 at 16:07 UTC as 107th comment
On article Adobe launches Lightroom for iPad (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

saralecaire: Just when I thought Adobe could not stoop any lower, there they go blackmailing their customer to using CC, even though Lightroom itself is still sold as a standalone application apparently "to meet photographers needs".


Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2014 at 20:48 UTC
On article Adobe leaks 'Lightroom Mobile' app (209 comments in total)

Adobe isn't a software company anymore, they are organized crime running a protection racket... "Nice little business you got here - be a shame if anything happened to all those pretty little pictures of yours. For $50 a month we can make sure your software doesn't disappear..."

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2014 at 17:23 UTC as 21st comment | 10 replies
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-QX100 First-impressions Review (154 comments in total)

Sony has an uncanny ability to underestimate the target markets for their products. This camera is a bold and daring idea - perfect for all sorts of applications including travel and street photography. Heck - pair it up with an iPad Mini and you've go a good starting place for a digital field camera.

Unfortunately Sony has crippled this little dude so badly it will probably become a footnote in history. Heck - anyone willing too settle for a glorified point and shoot will be happy enough with the camera that's already on their smartphone.

I understand market segmentation, I just don't understand Sony's take on it.

Link | Posted on Sep 4, 2013 at 15:32 UTC as 91st comment | 1 reply
On article Samsung Galaxy NX Hands-on (195 comments in total)

As cameras go I think this will make an excellent doorstop.

Link | Posted on Aug 29, 2013 at 20:27 UTC as 13th comment

One thing about Kim, give him a month or two and he will enthusiastically support the other side of the argument. This guy is all over the map.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2013 at 04:46 UTC as 42nd comment
In reply to:

Dédéjr: Whatever man,

I have lr 4.4 i like it and am keeping it.

How many chaps have overpriced showpony macs or iphones hmm??? Lots i bet.

Three years. You're good for three years.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 04:09 UTC

I hear that if you watch the video full screen you can actually see their noses growing while they speak.

Adobe "We don't care. - We don't have to."

Link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 22:52 UTC as 150th comment
In reply to:

Cailean Gallimore: I wouldn't trust them at any price now - they've shown themselves for what they are.

Purveyors of Hostageware.

May I quote you on that? Hostageware - that perfectly describes it and I hope Adobe chokes on it.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 22:43 UTC
In reply to:

Cameron R Hood: I don't care. I WAS about to buy the new version when it came out (I have the Beta), but now I won't buy ANYTHING from the till they repeal their CC decision. Simple as that. **** them. Aperture here I come.


This is only half right. Yes, you must download the software - that eliminates overhead costs - one reason Aperture was able to cut its price. After installing there isn't NO NEED to ever be connected to the Internet. NONE. Additionally, should Adobe decide to change their mind about Lightroom (remember last year's assurance that CC and CS versions would always be available) you will pay until the day you die just to be able to look at your library of images.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 22:37 UTC
In reply to:

Lea5: You must see this as a bigger thing. I fear this will be the future model of everything. Apple is doing the same with their software. I tried to get Final Cut Pro X, Motion and Logic Pro in the traditional boxed version. Negative! You can only download them at the Apple App Store. Similar to Adobe. My new iMac has no DVD/CD drive anymore. So Apple expect you to buy (rent) and download everything. PC manufacturers develop the same system and predict, that in the near future this system runs all computers. That means you don't own workstations/notebooks anymore you have to rent them. And if you are not "connected" you don't have access to your computer, to your softare, emails, cellphone etc. They (who are they?) want you to be connected all the time and must subscribe and pay for it.

In the future there are two sorts of people: connected and unconnected.
The unconnected won't have access to the society anymore. Even Stanley Kubrik wouldn't have thought of that.

This is a nightmare!

There is a mighty big difference between cutting overhead costs by eliminating boxed software discs that need shipping and handling and requiring your customers to perpetually pay to access their images optimized in proprietary software.

Adobe, on the other hand, is squirming like a toad trying to find a bright spot in a disastrous week of bad publicity. Personally, I hope anyone who can move to Aperture does. Its time to teach Adobe a painfully expensive lesson.

Link | Posted on May 15, 2013 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

Mickslick: Long time reader / lurker but not an active poster, this compelled me to register and post.

Bottom line, arrogance before the fall. Time after time companies get to a point where their lack of competition gives them a false sense of worth, value and brilliance. Then they overreach and, due to their arrogance, don't correct course until irreparable damage is done, often times to the point of no return.

Now what's really amazing is that it's not like Adobe is making jetliners, complex processors, heavy construction equipment etc..., it's photo software. Once the competitive vacuum opens up this thing will be replicated by competing products with like quality, if not better once Adobe starts losing all their engineers to the competitors, in probably months, not even years.

How many of these posts do you have to write to get a better parking spot at Adobe HQ?

Just wondering...

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 20:49 UTC
In reply to:

Marvin Bartley: any suggestion for alternate software to photoshop

I'll bet there are a bunch of venture capitalists asking that exact same question right about now. Brace yourself for a very exciting new era in image processing.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 04:38 UTC
In reply to:

benmlee: And to think the innovators that ushered in the computer age pretty much gave away their software and invention to help others innovate and change the world.

The professor who invented Visicalc (Excel) gave it away to help the budding computer industry grow. We need the spirit of innovation like that put America in the forefront not this profit squeezing.

CEO is there to squeeze some profit even if it tanks the company down the road. He is only interested in his bonus knowing fully well he will be gone in five years leaving the mess to the next guy.

Adobe made 1B in profits on 4B in sales last year, how much more do you think they need to make?

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 04:30 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): Suggest to DPReview what I suggested and let's answer the real question: Of all the users who currently own a legal license to Adobe CS or PS software, will you ever purchase an Adobe product using the CC pricing scheme? Instead of hiding the true results of this decisions in some vague expressions of unhappiness let's see how our feelings are going to hit Adobe's pocket book. A simple yes or no and we'll see how people really feel about this nonsense. If our pocketbooks are going to do the talking, let's give Adobe a little preview. My bet is everyone who dislikes the move is a "no" (95% as of now) and everyone else is the 5% saying "cool with me." Go eat a bag of human male reproductive organs, Adobe (the word I was going for there was what one might use as shorthand for Richard).

Since DPReview is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Amazon I doubt they would ever do anything that honest. For better or for worse they are now part of larger marketing scheme.

Remember - slick media outlets like DPR are not there to bring a service to you, they exist to bring you to companies that pay them for that service. Companies like Adobe.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 04:27 UTC
Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »