Biowizard

Biowizard

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Oct 21, 2011

Comments

Total: 447, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Swirly bokeh: Lensbaby announces Twist 60 lens (120 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biowizard: I find photographing through the bottom of a jam jar is somewhat cheaper.

Brian

How do I post images here?

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: After 40 years as a user of SLRs and then DSLRs, I am happy to have made the transition to mirrorless. My Olympus OM-D E-M1 is utterly superb, and one day I hope I might have a choice of decent larger-sensor cameras using similar technology.

Brian

Indeed my comments are about one of the obvious benefits of mirrorless vs SLR: the SAME sensor that judges focus, records the actual picture - so irrespective of which lens you use, there is NO scope for focus discrepancy. Camley, now you get it?

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 22:27 UTC

Well that's not bad. As an OM-D E-M1 owner, I decided to call that up for direct comparison. What can I say? My lovely Oly, with its micro-4/3rds format, is all but as good an image as this Nik. To all practical intents and purposes, every bit as good.

Ever since we passed the "Scanned Kodachrome 25" standard (about 12 years ago), I've figured cameras are plenty good enough in terms of image quality. What matters is ergonomics, design and features!

And thus, Olympus wins, for me.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 26, 2016 at 20:33 UTC as 81st comment | 5 replies

After 40 years as a user of SLRs and then DSLRs, I am happy to have made the transition to mirrorless. My Olympus OM-D E-M1 is utterly superb, and one day I hope I might have a choice of decent larger-sensor cameras using similar technology.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 12:26 UTC as 56th comment | 5 replies
On article Pelican lightens up with Air cases (53 comments in total)

I have several Pelis of the traditional type, protecting assorted audio gear and cameras. I love their cases, but yep, they are amazingly heavy. I'll definitely be giving these new cases a once-over.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 15, 2016 at 17:25 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

Biowizard: Hey - in the same amount of physical space, you could be holding something called a CAMERA. #nuts

Brian

To Peiasdf - I'd rather have a decent SENSOR, which is what ultimately takes the image for prosperity. However, FWIW, I have a 12-inch "calibrated" screen on my 4/3rds camera - OlyView running on my iPad Pro, connected via WiFi to my OM-D E-M1, sees to that!

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2016 at 22:04 UTC
On article Swirly bokeh: Lensbaby announces Twist 60 lens (120 comments in total)

I find photographing through the bottom of a jam jar is somewhat cheaper.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 23:30 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies

Hey - in the same amount of physical space, you could be holding something called a CAMERA. #nuts

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 12, 2016 at 23:29 UTC as 10th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Biowizard: All my photographic life (which takes in film from the mid-70s, up to about 12 years ago, when I switched to digital (mainly)), I have HATED the effects of badly position ND grads. Images look SO artificial, with a linear blurred darkening zone, and as others have noted, where tall objects poking above the gradation remain underexposed while reflections in foreground puddles are blown-out.

You can get SO much better results by squeezing off 5 bracketed exposures in quick succession, covering whichever range of EV you want to play with, and selectively combining them, with appropriate blurred masking, in Photoshop.

Not forgetting, there's probably a good spare 1.5-2EV at either end of your individual raw frames to play with, if you don't want to merge images but simply want to apply some selective exposure compensation masks.

Using Photoshop in this way is frankly no different than dodging and burning in the traditional darkroom - just less hit-and-miss, and a LOT less smelly.

Brian

True, but the answer is simple: expose shot 1 for the sea, shot 2 for the sky, and combine. NOT "HDR", just two exposures blurred together at the horizon - rather like using a Lee ND Grad, but with complete control

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 21:46 UTC

All my photographic life (which takes in film from the mid-70s, up to about 12 years ago, when I switched to digital (mainly)), I have HATED the effects of badly position ND grads. Images look SO artificial, with a linear blurred darkening zone, and as others have noted, where tall objects poking above the gradation remain underexposed while reflections in foreground puddles are blown-out.

You can get SO much better results by squeezing off 5 bracketed exposures in quick succession, covering whichever range of EV you want to play with, and selectively combining them, with appropriate blurred masking, in Photoshop.

Not forgetting, there's probably a good spare 1.5-2EV at either end of your individual raw frames to play with, if you don't want to merge images but simply want to apply some selective exposure compensation masks.

Using Photoshop in this way is frankly no different than dodging and burning in the traditional darkroom - just less hit-and-miss, and a LOT less smelly.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 11:13 UTC as 8th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Biowizard: Only two filters are necessary in this day and age: a polariser, and a multi-stop ND, because both let you create images that cannot be achieved in any other way. Arguably, an IR filter too, if you do IR photography.

But graduated NDs are not necessary, Indeed, they nearly always produce unnatural results. For any landscape photo where you want to darken part of the image relative to others, you can simply take a bracketed exposure sequence, and merge as desired in Photoshop.

This approach lets you follow irregularities in the skyline (like mountains, buildings, trees) that an ND grad would artificially darken.

Brian

All my photographic life (which takes in film from the mid-70s, up to about 12 years ago, when I switched to digital (mainly)), I have HATED the effects of badly position ND grads. Images look SO artificial, and as others have noted, tall objects poking above the gradation just look silly. You can get SO much better results by squeezing off 5 bracketed exposures in quick succession, covering whichever range of EV you want to play with - not forgetting, there's probably a good spare 1.5-2EV at either end of your individual raw frames to play with, if you don't want to merge images.

Untill Lee find a way to make ND Grads that exactly match the skyline I am photographing, I will stick to modern methods.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 8, 2016 at 11:06 UTC

Only two filters are necessary in this day and age: a polariser, and a multi-stop ND, because both let you create images that cannot be achieved in any other way. Arguably, an IR filter too, if you do IR photography.

But graduated NDs are not necessary, Indeed, they nearly always produce unnatural results. For any landscape photo where you want to darken part of the image relative to others, you can simply take a bracketed exposure sequence, and merge as desired in Photoshop.

This approach lets you follow irregularities in the skyline (like mountains, buildings, trees) that an ND grad would artificially darken.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 7, 2016 at 22:49 UTC as 20th comment | 13 replies
On article Power Zoom: Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100/TZ100 Review (323 comments in total)
In reply to:

Biowizard: Can someone please remind me - how big IS a 1" sensor? Even 35mm "full frame" is less than 1" in the shorter dimension ...

Brian

Thanks both - I was being intentionally sardonic here - I frequently post on this forum about the stupidity of using old videcon tube sizes to refer to (some) digital sensors. Or, indeed, obsolete film formats like APS-C, which never received professional interest.

Why can't everyone JUST use the actual sensor size, or, if really necessary, choose some random format (eg, 135/35mm, at 24x36mm) as "1" or "100", and relate all other sensors relative to that, preferably with respect to the 135 diagonal, with an indication of aspect ratio too? I'd love "4/3rds" (my current cameras' format) to be known not in relation to a 1.333" videcon tube, but instead as "0.5/4:3" showing it's about half the diagonal of the 135 format, with 4:3 aspect ratio. And 135 itself would be known as 1.0/2:3 ...

From descriptions like this, you can figure out lens "crop factors" and "focal length" mulitpliers, without having to dig back into Wikipedia every time!

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 19:16 UTC

Surprised? NO.

Other than, that is, that Lytro even still exists as a name.

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 6, 2016 at 17:12 UTC as 13th comment
On article Power Zoom: Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100/TZ100 Review (323 comments in total)

Can someone please remind me - how big IS a 1" sensor? Even 35mm "full frame" is less than 1" in the shorter dimension ...

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 4, 2016 at 21:54 UTC as 91st comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

mgm2: Drones, quadcopters or what ever you call them are becoming a real problem in natural areas. Wildlife are being harassed to the point where some game agencies are considering banning them from state game lands.

I'd rather be "bothered" by a man with a drone, than a man with a GUN. And in America, the latter is everywhere, yet no-one seems to give a shot!

Ooops - i

Brian

Link | Posted on Apr 1, 2016 at 13:33 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: And for those of us who don't spend our entire lives bungee jumping, skateboarding while being chased by a VW camper, kite surfing or going on harem scarem speedboat rides down rapids, I think the GoPro will continue to suffice when I want photos in places I would never dream of taking one of my real cameras!

Brian

Apparently not, as at least it garnered a response (yours), unlike most the other comments on this pointless product! ;-)

Brian

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 23:39 UTC
On article Instagram is changing its feed to use algorithm (45 comments in total)

This was Facebook's BIGGEST screw-up ever. Ruined the service for me, as I no longer see things from people I actually care about, but see loads of rubbish that means little or nothing to me. Facebook doesn't know who I actually KNOW in real life, whose input I would find far more interesting than "friends" I've garnered from random groups.

Brian

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 11:05 UTC as 8th comment
In reply to:

Lars V: The question on my mind is, does the True Tone technology solve an actual problem, or does it create more problems (comparing two displays next to each other with different automatic whitepoint etc)?
Looking forward to hearing about actual experiences, here and elsewhere.

White bezels look pretty on the shelf at John Lewis. But it's black every time that comes home, and currently that's 3 iPads, 2 iPhones and 1 iPod Touch.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2016 at 11:02 UTC
Total: 447, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »