pdxtrojan

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Feb 22, 2011

Comments

Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12
On article Photoshop CC 2015.5.1 available (89 comments in total)
In reply to:

John Tannock: The bugs are included with your subscription whether you want them or not, or at least that's what a subscriber has told me. By that I assume that you're programs are upgraded automatically, correct? That being the case, I'll stick with my nice, stable CS6/LR6. Adobe seems to be using its customer base as their beta testers.

Updates are not automatic. Perhaps there's a setting to allow that, but I prefer to update manually anyways.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2016 at 18:51 UTC
On article 8 creative tips for shooting waterfalls (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

ShelNf: It nevers fails that every picture or article about waterfalls will bring out the silky vs frozen debate. Do it how you like and don't moan because someone did it how they like. Just look away and move on.

I went into a techno club last night and yelled at everyone to leave because techno isn't real music. Everyone just kind of looked at me funny. :/

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2016 at 21:30 UTC
On article 8 creative tips for shooting waterfalls (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

win39: The flowing snow appearance of water was created by large format photographers because of the limitations of their equipment. They could not shoot fast. It seems to me that to slavishly continue to copy that distortion with modern equipment is an assault on the eye. It is like taking a buggy whip to your automobile to make it go faster. It has reached such universal acceptance that I have begun to wonder nonsensically if most people have defective vision. Water does not look like that on this planet.

That's fine, mikeoregon, but I still wouldn't say I find that freezing of water to be any closer to reality than what a slower shutter would produce. I find 'freezing' water to be an effective conveyance of size and power in a larger cataract, but here I just find the garbled textures not as aesthetically pleasing, apart from whether or not it's a 'truer' portrayal of way the waterfall looks like.

The point I'm making isn't that one shutter speed range provides a more accurate rendering of waterfalls than another--indeed, I was making the case that NO static image could effectively do so. So let's reframe the question from one of visual literalism to one of artistry and aesthetics. If you want to make the case that the short shutter speed rendering as in your example is more visually pleasing to you, then who am I (or anyone) to legislate your taste? And who would you (or anyone) be to legislate my preference for more smoothly-textured water? You like your apples, I'll like my oranges. But all this silly talk of the apple or the orange being more 'fruit' than the other I think is a totally irrelevant point. Just as some shoot long-exposure clouds or star trails, so it is with moving water. No one's judging the end results on their purely journalistic merits--we already know stars don't look like streaks and clouds aren't featurelessly smeared across the sky in real life. Shoot waterfalls the way you want to shoot them. Your audience will always find their way to you...

(Typed on mobile device...please forgive any typos.)

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2016 at 07:36 UTC
On article 8 creative tips for shooting waterfalls (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

win39: The flowing snow appearance of water was created by large format photographers because of the limitations of their equipment. They could not shoot fast. It seems to me that to slavishly continue to copy that distortion with modern equipment is an assault on the eye. It is like taking a buggy whip to your automobile to make it go faster. It has reached such universal acceptance that I have begun to wonder nonsensically if most people have defective vision. Water does not look like that on this planet.

Apparently I can't edit my own messages, so here it is again without typos. That'll teach me for trying to reply on a mobile device... :/

So what shutter speed captures moving water as it appears to the naked eye? 1/250? 1/80? 1/4? 2 seconds? I've personally never seen nor made a photo that accomplishes that because, you know, water moves and photos don't. So I make *artistic* decisions with my stills camera and leave it up to the viewer to decide if they like it or not. I think if I really wanted to translate tit for tat what moving water looks like, I'd become a videographer instead...

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 20:42 UTC
On article 8 creative tips for shooting waterfalls (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

win39: The flowing snow appearance of water was created by large format photographers because of the limitations of their equipment. They could not shoot fast. It seems to me that to slavishly continue to copy that distortion with modern equipment is an assault on the eye. It is like taking a buggy whip to your automobile to make it go faster. It has reached such universal acceptance that I have begun to wonder nonsensically if most people have defective vision. Water does not look like that on this planet.

So way shutter speed captures moving water as it appears to the naked eye? 1/250? 1/80? 1/4? 2 seconds? I've personally never seen nor made a photo that accomplishes that because, you know, water moves and photos don't. So I make *artistic* decisions with my stills camera and leave it up to the viewer to decide if they like it or not. I think if I really wanted to translate tit for tat wash at moving water looks like, I'd become a videographer instead...

Link | Posted on Aug 1, 2016 at 20:24 UTC
On article Quick Look: Parallelism in Landscape Photography (112 comments in total)
In reply to:

CanonKen: Love it. Maybe we would all get along better if we spent more time talking about actually TAKING pictures!

Yeah, shame on DPReview. After reading the article, mywallet was missing $5! Don't know what I bought, but obviously I don't possess the free will or wherewithal to resist being targeted by an ad. Shady, shady, shady...

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2016 at 00:10 UTC
On article Readers' Showcase: Rob Kearney (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Akpinxit: ..and once again - works of another prodigy .
It is not like it is bad , it's just ordinary .
I think that any less then this : http://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/1562025276/BTP_PotN_0_-_final_image.jpeg , should not be posted on front page .

Thank you, O great arbiter of taste. Unless you're an editor, how about you let the rest of us in the audience decide if we like something or not?

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2015 at 17:07 UTC
In reply to:

d3xmeister: It's been a few years already since we keep seeing reviews and praises for newer and newer cameras, and not even one great photo that couldn't have been taken with much older or/and lesser cameras, like a D90 for example. Yes we are gearheads, most of us, I owned so many cameras in the past 10 years, from m4/3 to Nikon full frame and many in between, and I'll be damn if I can tell which ones of my photos are taken with which camera. I can see a big progress I made in observing great things to photograph over the years, but besides that all my photos are the same and could have been taken with any modern ILC camera given the right technique, lens and light (quality not quantity).

With a few exceptions, optimizing equipment these days is largely about how much more easily it allows you to realize your photographic vision, not necessarily that the end result is substantially of higher image quality. No one seriously believes a better camera (within an order of magnitude in quality) will make someone a better photographer, but it certainly could make the *experience* of photography easier and/or much more enjoyable. Something as simple as an articulating LCD screen cloud do that, for example.

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2015 at 16:36 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Canon should have shipped their 5DS cameras sooner. They don’t even come out till next week and this announcement can’t help their sales. This Sony camera would at least give potential Canon 5Ds customers pause. The features this camera offers over the Canon camera are undeniable(4K, high ISO, High speed video…etc).

"In real life nobody bats an eyelash."

Certainly not the Canon users who are use to exposure bracketing and hours of blending to overcome the p!ss-poor DR.

Link | Posted on Jun 10, 2015 at 22:55 UTC
On article Sony rides wave of US Mirrorless sales surge (733 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom Holly: Hmm, I dunno, they feel really gadgety to me, whereas DSLR feels like a reliable weapon.

I have A7R sony and some Canon DSLRS. They both have their place, but for going BANG BANG BANG mirrorless isn't there by a long shot.

You know, Thematic...like Ansel Adams' camera did.

Lol

Link | Posted on Jun 5, 2015 at 02:47 UTC
On photo Manhattan Bridge on clouds in the The Medium of Photography challenge (2 comments in total)

See subject. :)

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2011 at 21:36 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Log Boom Park_No Watermark in the Digital wallpaper: Open challenge (6 comments in total)

I don't think this was surprising at all. A digital wallpaper for the masses should be simple, muted, unobtrusive, evocative of something calming...I think this fits the bill perfectly. Congrats on a wonderful image that would stand alone very well on its own merits!

Link | Posted on Mar 16, 2011 at 00:42 UTC as 5th comment
Total: 12, showing: 1 – 12