redseer

Lives in Canada BC, Canada
Has a website at http://www.hat.net/album/
Joined on Aug 18, 2002

Comments

Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9
In reply to:

OlyPent: "Everything we have is Chinese made, it's a little bit cheezy, but it's...it's...well it's REALLY cheezy!"

The Note 7 was made in Korea. But this problem has nothing to do where it was made. It's bad battery design.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2017 at 08:09 UTC

If he saved the Russian ambassador, I will call him a hero. But I will agreed he's a good photographer and a good journalist. It's an iconic photo, but heroic is not the appropriate word.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2016 at 19:30 UTC as 59th comment

I know pasting news release is cheap and easy, but you guys should really avoid pasting news release from kick-starter or indigo-go. A lot of them are scams, like the Shiftwear e-ink sneaker (but some would argue that the entertaining update is well worth the backer's dollars, the scam is still ongoing and supported by many media). Some failed like the famous kick-starter zano drones. It really undermined the reputation of Dpreview if they failed. It makes you guy look like those teenager bloggers. Please stick to the mainstream news release like Nikon, Sony or Cannon. If you want to venture into kick-starters, make sure it's a well vetted campaign like the pebble watches.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2016 at 00:57 UTC as 45th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Trued1: Time to clear things out....
I am swede having worked with military UAV/UGV/UUV systems for many years.
The court ruling comes with no surprise to anyone in the drone business. Only very stupid countryman/woman would have bought a camera drone. The ruling can NOT be taken to a higher court. It stands.
You are allowed to fly drones over your own property but you are not allowed to eavesdrop on your neighbors. But it also needs to be in a no-restricted zone. Most of Stockholm is for example already contolled airspace.
The rights for citizens NOT to come under surveillance of a droneoperator has been ruled of being of a higher value then the possibility to make aerial photowork.
The ruling means that you must be in "manual" control and physically present near your camear. It comes down to 50 cm or an armlength. 10m bluetooth might be illegal. This law has come parallell with the ruling for use of cameras mounted inside cars and on bicycles. You must be with your camera when You operate it.
It will be in principal impossible to obtain permits. The only drone flying will be by governmental agencies. A firemarshal or police who is in charge of the scene of an "operation" can grant a private drone operator to fly or even theoretically order a drone owner to fly if he/she is present. Just like he can order the demolition of a house at a fire.
I hope more countries follow the Swedish example strengthening the public freedom not to be Surveiled, reduced chances of catastrophic airplane incidents, less chance of junk falling on people.

I am sure Sweden is a liberal country and I am sure the intention is not to limit the freedom. But people have seriously underestimate the complexity of modern technology. With good intention they make stupid mistake.
Someone with good knowledge of mainframe may not know how to use a PC effectively. Someone know a lots of military UAV may not know anything about commercial drones. It's not that people are totally stupid, but all of us are stupid in certain ways.

The law about aerial photography makes a lot of sense in the past, but with Google satellite map and similar technology, it's becoming quite irrelevant. Building walls made a lot of sense in medieval Europe, but you can't expect a wall to protect your city anymore.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2016 at 07:57 UTC
In reply to:

Clyde Thomas: I'd like to see a poll that weighs the concern for privacy against those who've actually had their privacy violated by a drone. This thread makes it sound like many here have been violated. How could anyone know if their privacy has been violated? Do people find videos of themselves randomly on YouTube?

Type in your address to Google maps. You will confirm that your home privacy has been violated.

I'm not convinced the world is better when government and corporations can see things that the general public cannot. I'm in favor of greater transparency.

Many people overestimate the level of interest that others have in them. Could this law evolve into preventing all photos in my neighborhood? Yes, your house might be in the background. Does that violate your privacy?

Ok photograph me and my life surroundings all you want. Catch me doing whatever you think I'm doing. It will be an internet sensation for about 0.27 seconds. You soon move on to something else. I am forgotten.

Google map blurring face is a big paranoia, if they don't want their face to be seen in public, they should wear a burka.
I will worry more of a drone falling on my head than a drone invading my privacy...

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2016 at 07:43 UTC
In reply to:

Trued1: Time to clear things out....
I am swede having worked with military UAV/UGV/UUV systems for many years.
The court ruling comes with no surprise to anyone in the drone business. Only very stupid countryman/woman would have bought a camera drone. The ruling can NOT be taken to a higher court. It stands.
You are allowed to fly drones over your own property but you are not allowed to eavesdrop on your neighbors. But it also needs to be in a no-restricted zone. Most of Stockholm is for example already contolled airspace.
The rights for citizens NOT to come under surveillance of a droneoperator has been ruled of being of a higher value then the possibility to make aerial photowork.
The ruling means that you must be in "manual" control and physically present near your camear. It comes down to 50 cm or an armlength. 10m bluetooth might be illegal. This law has come parallell with the ruling for use of cameras mounted inside cars and on bicycles. You must be with your camera when You operate it.
It will be in principal impossible to obtain permits. The only drone flying will be by governmental agencies. A firemarshal or police who is in charge of the scene of an "operation" can grant a private drone operator to fly or even theoretically order a drone owner to fly if he/she is present. Just like he can order the demolition of a house at a fire.
I hope more countries follow the Swedish example strengthening the public freedom not to be Surveiled, reduced chances of catastrophic airplane incidents, less chance of junk falling on people.

Yes the military drones can invade your privacy, but are you aware that none of the commercially available drones are practical in surveillance? Most have wide angle lens. If you are worry about protecting privacy, then limit the zoom range of the lens (e.g. >600mm require a license) is a better idea. If someone try to follow you with a wide angle lens, you can shoot it down with a rock... It's easier to sneak up on you on foot then to follow you with a loud buzzing drone.

Anyone think they can be surveyed by a high flying drone with a wide angle lens have watched too much stupid TV. You can't enhance indefinitely with a limited pixels.

This law is ridiculous. It's like we can't ensure everyone will drive without drinking, so we ban all cars. You should definitely punish the DUI driver or those who use drones to invade privacy, but banning drones like this is stupid.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2016 at 06:07 UTC
On article The travel photography of HDR guru Trey Ratcliff (235 comments in total)

Picasso, van Gogh, Salvador Dali.... none of their arts look "real". HDR is an art, not a court document.... it doesn't need to look real. Some people never realize photography is about art, it's not about buying the most expensive equipment....

Trey's work is excellent.

Link | Posted on Aug 9, 2015 at 19:48 UTC as 65th comment | 3 replies
On article More pictures leak of purported Olympus PEN 'E-P5' (237 comments in total)

mobile01 is a Chinese site and also a Taiwanese site, both is correct. Chinese is not equal to China. Just like English is not equal to England. E.g. most English speaker do not live in England or never have been in England.

Link | Posted on May 4, 2013 at 03:08 UTC as 30th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Lea5: Ah come on. This thingy is drivin' somewhere in a desert of Nevada and the folks at NASA laughin their a**es off. It has something from the movie "Short Circuit" from 1986 :)

I can assure you the Nevada Desert is more inhospitable than Mars. It's easier to film the rover on Mars than there (I know because I've camped there for a whole week at the end of August).

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2012 at 05:26 UTC
Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9