jpeterg

Lives in Germany Germany
Joined on Aug 31, 2007

Comments

Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

En Trance: I really think that it is all a bunch of nonsense. I can not count the times that I have taken pictures directly of the sun (without the convenient block of the moon). Sunset and Sunrise are to die for. These people have obviously placed the camera on a tripod and kept it focused on the sun continuously. Have to wonder if their brains are fully functional. But to do that with a rental (Someone Else's Camera) is just irresponsible! Instead of trying to sell them a solar filter for a one in 70 year event, maybe tell them to not track the sun continuously.

The amount of energy (here in form of sunlight) that a lens collects is determined by its front diameter. The greater the focal length of the lens, the larger the image of the sun, the larger the area over which the energy is spread, the smaller the energy per unit area. A longer lens should therefore be safer for sun photography, no?

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2017 at 14:11 UTC
In reply to:

RED i: >One of those key differentiating factors has been the "pretty blurry background" effect that an interchangeable lens camera is capable of producing.

Says who? Not me...

Me.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2017 at 17:06 UTC

On a completely unrelated note, I regularly trip over the English phrase "all but" (as in "With the latest builds, upgrading is all but impossible"). To me (as a non-native speaker), this seems to suggest the exact opposite of its intended meaning, namely that upgrading is "anything but impossible" or "very much possible", while it seems to actually mean "practically impossible".

At the same time, "all but one" doesn't mean "almost one", but, on the contrary, "all of them, with the exception of one".

Seems like two opposite meanings of the same two words.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 23:05 UTC as 14th comment | 2 replies

Sounds like quite the challenge to "blindly rate" photographs. ;D

(Yeah, I figure that "blind" in this context means that the photographers didn't know the source of the images.)

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:48 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

whumber: It makes it significantly more difficult to distinguish alterations when the baseline images are such low resolution. Most of the images look like the main subject was out of focus which will hide things like blemish cleanup. The only ones that were obvious were the ones where something was obvious distorted or inserted into the image.

For the kind of alterations for which they test, resolution doesn't seem to play a major role. It would probably be easier to see some of the alterations if the resolution was higher, but that's not what they're testing for.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

jpeterg: I was wondering what "video" or "examples" some people were talking about in this comment section since I didn't get to see any. I then repeated the text and the second time, I got to see an instructional video, too. Looks like they present the test both with and without the video to discern what difference it makes whether or not the subject has been shown the possible alterations.

Also, while I got the same 10 images the second time, at least one of them had a different set of alterations.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

JT26: I will never get that ten minutes of my life back

Did you expect this to happen when you started the test? :)

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:20 UTC

I was wondering what "video" or "examples" some people were talking about in this comment section since I didn't get to see any. I then repeated the text and the second time, I got to see an instructional video, too. Looks like they present the test both with and without the video to discern what difference it makes whether or not the subject has been shown the possible alterations.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:18 UTC as 126th comment | 2 replies
On article Grab a free copy of DxO OpticsPro 9 while you can (187 comments in total)

Yeah, screw them for giving away for free perfectly capable software that is not the latest version! Now those who don't need or want or can't afford to constantly upgrade to the latest cameras and who still use sh*tty, pre-historic, now useless models like the A6000 don't even have to pay for the software! Who do they think they are, charging $0 for not forcing anyone to download? What an outrage. Boo, DXO, boo.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2017 at 11:31 UTC as 20th comment | 2 replies

Having a reputation to maintain as being the one who always gives tasteful and useful gifts, I'm ordering seven for friends and family as we speak.

Link | Posted on Jan 19, 2017 at 08:09 UTC as 11th comment
On article Fotodiox LED100WB-56 quick review (57 comments in total)
In reply to:

Battersea: A review with no mention of cost? Nice review except for leaving out just about everyone's main concern.

Also, the 2nd paragraph begins with: "The lights are sold as single units for $299, and as a 3-light kit for $999."

(Maybe they have updated the article because people complained about the lacking price info.)

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 17:15 UTC
On article Narrative will stop selling its life-logging cameras (49 comments in total)
In reply to:

bullfinchphoto: It's in high demand and they decided to shut it down. I'm the only person that think it's irrational? I would love to have it, during travels or other adventures.

It's in hight demand? I have no idea, but according to this article, it's not ("failed to appeal to consumers in any large way").

Link | Posted on Sep 29, 2016 at 19:21 UTC
On article Still solid: Fujifilm X-E2S Review (239 comments in total)
In reply to:

tommmee: Understand all comments about this unecessary upgrade but confused about the scoring. Does the older e2 really outperform the upgrade?

The E2's scoring is three years old and was relative to the market of the time.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2016 at 02:11 UTC
In reply to:

Valen305: People are so used to the perspective of camera phone photos, that when you take their photo with a telephoto, they either go "wow" or "hmmm".

True.

Link | Posted on Jul 30, 2016 at 21:03 UTC
On article Bentley creates a 53 billion pixel car commercial (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

Osa25: So, the best the Germans could come up with was:
"Bentley: Vorsprang durch FOTO-Teknikk"

VW, not BMW. BMW owns Rolls Royce.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2016 at 20:04 UTC
On article Bentley creates a 53 billion pixel car commercial (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

Osa25: So, the best the Germans could come up with was:
"Bentley: Vorsprang durch FOTO-Teknikk"

He's probably alluding to the fact that Bentley has been aquired by VW in 1998.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2016 at 20:03 UTC
On article Swirly bokeh: Lensbaby announces Twist 60 lens (121 comments in total)
In reply to:

tupelo: Wow !! just like my 2 dollars app from google store !

Really? There's an app that can differentiate between subject and background and add a swirl only to the latter? ^^

Link | Posted on May 13, 2016 at 12:55 UTC
On article Leica Q In-depth Review (1166 comments in total)
In reply to:

rugosa: I always put my cat in the fridge also, she checks to make sure the light goes off when I shut the door.

Like, literally.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2016 at 23:38 UTC
On article X-Factor: Canon's EOS-1D X Mark II examined in-depth (615 comments in total)
In reply to:

davids8560: Some people are saying a leading O/S manufacturer and maybe some government agencies are way ahead of Canon in subject tracking.

I don't think you got what he meant.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 18:02 UTC
On article Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV Review (1562 comments in total)
In reply to:

ummario: I want to buy this camera, but I'm afraid Sony can release an updated camera before summer, and I do't want to buy a almost outdated camera. Does anyone knows if this will happen?

Is people happy with it?

The RX100 I was announced in June 2012.
The RX100 II was announced in June 2013.
The RX100 III was announced in June 2014.
The RX100 IV was announced in June 2015.

Just looking at this, it doesn't seem too far fetched to expect an RX100 V to be announced around June 2016.

With product cycles like these, you're almost always buying a camera that's "outdated" in a couple months. Then again, you can still buy the RX100 I new.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2016 at 17:11 UTC
Total: 30, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »