Scott Everett

Scott Everett

DPReview Administrator
Lives in United States Seattle, United States
Works as a Product Manager, dpreview.com
Has a website at www.dpreview.com
Joined on Aug 10, 2004

Comments

Total: 223, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Paul Auclair: should a photograph/photographer really be the principle focus of what transpires at these tragic events.
do we need to see these images in order to believe what takes place?

Obviously there are broader issues to discuss with regards to the situation at hand, as well as countless other situations that photography helps shed a light on. However, we do not think it is our role, at DPR, to provide political analysis or commentary other than as it pertains to the role/craft/purpose of photography.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 22:50 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Auclair: should a photograph/photographer really be the principle focus of what transpires at these tragic events.
do we need to see these images in order to believe what takes place?

This is the whole point. In an age of fake news and short attention spans, a photo is sometimes one of the only ways to properly convey the truth.

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2016 at 20:19 UTC
On article Field Test: Wedding Photography with the Fujifilm X-T2 (233 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roger Monroe: In a hurry, I clicked and watched the video. I did not notice that it was "sponsored content" until afterwards. However, the lack of any criticism in the film became quickly conspicuous. I like Fuji, and my next system may well be Fuji. However, what purpose does sponsored content serve? Precious little.

Contrary to the intent of these pieces, the lack of any criticism or negative feedback about this or (any piece of gear) does not do Fuji or DPreview any favors IMO. I want to know the "warts and all" version, not just a white wash.

Hey Alex, we actually follow FCC guidelines on the disclosure, so the sponsorship is the first thing on the video, and also it is called out on this (article) page, as well as in the Youtube description.

Roger, we actually try to make them as information packed as we can whilst not attempting to provide a product review. I'm sure we nail it on some videos a bit more than others though, so we are definitely listening to your feedback, and appreciate you taking the time to comment.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2016 at 02:00 UTC
On article Field Test: Wedding Photography with the Fujifilm X-T2 (233 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roger Monroe: In a hurry, I clicked and watched the video. I did not notice that it was "sponsored content" until afterwards. However, the lack of any criticism in the film became quickly conspicuous. I like Fuji, and my next system may well be Fuji. However, what purpose does sponsored content serve? Precious little.

Contrary to the intent of these pieces, the lack of any criticism or negative feedback about this or (any piece of gear) does not do Fuji or DPreview any favors IMO. I want to know the "warts and all" version, not just a white wash.

(...cont'd) It was a concept that we thought interesting, editorially, and thus a good fit for a sponsored video. If you simply want to know the results of our tests and need to make a purchasing decision, I recommend checking out our review. But for some entertainment and curiosity about the results of the XT2 in an unlikely scenario, we think this video is a great fit.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 23:09 UTC
On article Field Test: Wedding Photography with the Fujifilm X-T2 (233 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roger Monroe: In a hurry, I clicked and watched the video. I did not notice that it was "sponsored content" until afterwards. However, the lack of any criticism in the film became quickly conspicuous. I like Fuji, and my next system may well be Fuji. However, what purpose does sponsored content serve? Precious little.

Contrary to the intent of these pieces, the lack of any criticism or negative feedback about this or (any piece of gear) does not do Fuji or DPreview any favors IMO. I want to know the "warts and all" version, not just a white wash.

Hey Roger, I think your critique makes total sense. However, since we are the most exhaustive review site on the web, constantly evolving our scientific tests to ensure we are providing the most detailed assessment of cameras to our visitors, we decided to tackle a different goal with these sponsored videos. Sponsorship inherently makes this content the wrong place to provide a product review, and legally FCC standards do not allow us to do so anyways, so we focus instead providing real world examples of the product in use. At the end of the day, a lot of the cameras being made in 2016 are very capable, and these videos allow us to show to our readers what happens when you, for example, shoot a wedding with a non "wedding camera".

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2016 at 23:08 UTC
In reply to:

raindance: Honestly, these pictures look awful, but hey everyone has a different concept of art. On the other hand he used Sony, to get anything good out of a Sony you do need to do some heavy PP.

wrong, the second part. :)

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2016 at 12:08 UTC
On article Google publishes gallery from upcoming Pixel smartphone (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

EskeRahn: Uh, there is something wrong with the import to the DPreview gallery....

e.g. look at the tomato-picture. The colour of the table is obviously wrong. If you use the loupe it is correct though!?!?

Compare with originals from the google link above

Interesting, I am not able to reproduce the color cast you are seeing in any browser, let me check around the office and see if anyone else can get it.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2016 at 23:42 UTC
On article Google publishes gallery from upcoming Pixel smartphone (158 comments in total)
In reply to:

EskeRahn: Uh, there is something wrong with the import to the DPreview gallery....

e.g. look at the tomato-picture. The colour of the table is obviously wrong. If you use the loupe it is correct though!?!?

Compare with originals from the google link above

Not seeing the issue, do you have a screenshot of what you are seeing? Here is a side by side, DPR on the left, Google Photos on the right, Chrome browser:

http://i.imgur.com/A3BdUNU.png

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2016 at 22:47 UTC
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (699 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shiranai: You got the same thing wrong like a lot of news sites due to bad research.

The camera manufacturer is NOT Yi. Yi is a brand name like EOS or Instax.
The manufacturer is the well-known company Xiaomi, also responsible for smartphones, drones and robot vacuums.

I also doubt that Yi stands for "young innovators", that might also be some false information.

Hey Mike, I am familiar with the reality that words have meanings, and that there are other languages that exist in addition to English, specifically in that other part of the world that includes China and Japan. My comment above was to clarify that, quite simply, YI came to our office and said "YI stands for Young Innovators". There is no mystery around it, just a simple fact. But please feel free to continue to discussion of translation if you would like. :)

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:03 UTC
On article New kid on the block: YI M1 review (699 comments in total)
In reply to:

Shiranai: You got the same thing wrong like a lot of news sites due to bad research.

The camera manufacturer is NOT Yi. Yi is a brand name like EOS or Instax.
The manufacturer is the well-known company Xiaomi, also responsible for smartphones, drones and robot vacuums.

I also doubt that Yi stands for "young innovators", that might also be some false information.

Maybe the YI guys that came to our office and told us that YI stands for "Young Innovators" many times were lying to us. Only time will tell.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 08:17 UTC
In reply to:

evilmagicnut: No new information. Can't anyone tell me how much of the sensor the 4k video uses?

I think the problem here boils down to what seems to be your disagreement with Barney's opinion. It bothers you that our Editor wrote an opinion and/or you do not agree with his opinion. That's totally OK, and you should be vocal about what specifically you disagree with, why you think the technology he's excited about is not exciting, why you think the iPhone is not influential in the world of photography, why you think another phone or another camera is more influential, etc.... But if we wrote content with the intention of having everyone agree we'd be living in an alternate universe. :)

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

evilmagicnut: No new information. Can't anyone tell me how much of the sensor the 4k video uses?

Additionally, we still publish all of our technical testing and in-depth review content. None of that changes, or is affected by us functioning as a publisher. We provide our readers with a ton of objective information to form their own conclusions based on their use cases. The iPhone is a "digital camera", that's not up for debate, and we are covering it in the same way we cover any other digital camera. Look at any product whether it be a DSLR, point and shoot, or Galaxy Note, we publish the specs, the press release from the brand, technical testing results, review scores, opinion articles, the whole gambit.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

evilmagicnut: No new information. Can't anyone tell me how much of the sensor the 4k video uses?

I think you are still failing to grasp the basic premise of what the article is. It's not a fluff piece, it's an opinion piece. That's just journalism, its been a part of how publishing works since well before the internet. You will not find a tech blog online that only publishes product reviews, as there would be about 1-2 articles a week. All publishers, print or online, are by their very nature in the business of writing content in different forms. In the case of DPReview, we have a wide variety of content forms, of which an opinion article like this by Barney is just one example.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 18:38 UTC
In reply to:

evilmagicnut: No new information. Can't anyone tell me how much of the sensor the 4k video uses?

I hear where you are coming from, but I think from a context standpoint, "marketing" is not the right word here. Marketing is in fact a strategic, paid for effort by a brand to promote their product, so DPR could not be enaging in marketing unless we were working with Apple, thats just the definition of what it means. Additionally, Journalists do more than report the news, and our site would be a complete bore if our editors didn't express their opinions on new products, so Barney writing a piece about why he genuinely find the product interesting is pretty par for the course in tech blogging/writing. Barney shoots amazing photos with really expensive gear all year long, so when he writes a piece like this it truly is just him expressing his thoughts.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 17:25 UTC
On article ESPN publishes iPhone 7 Plus photos from US Open (341 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If Apple isn't paying Dpreview, then they should.

At the very least Simon should get a free iPhone 7 and a nice thank you card.

Hey Marty, I actually was moreso referring to NoMirror's comment that seemed to be suggesting you should be suspecting that we are somehow being paid by Apple. :)

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 21:44 UTC
On article ESPN publishes iPhone 7 Plus photos from US Open (341 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: If Apple isn't paying Dpreview, then they should.

At the very least Simon should get a free iPhone 7 and a nice thank you card.

Hey guys, use your brain cells and put away the tinfoil hats. It's illegal for DPR to post content that is paid for without disclosing we've been paid, we simply cannot do it (not that we would want to). The more rational theory (and fact, if you trust me), is that cellphone cameras are news, we cover them no matter what, a little research will show you this. But if you do like conspiracies, I highly recommend Serpico with Al Pacino, great movie!

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 18:29 UTC
On article ESPN publishes iPhone 7 Plus photos from US Open (341 comments in total)
In reply to:

naturetech: Is there a way to filter out all these crapple ads?

It's called scrolling.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2016 at 06:37 UTC
In reply to:

evilmagicnut: No new information. Can't anyone tell me how much of the sensor the 4k video uses?

I think you don't understand how the FTC functions in the U.S., publishers cannot post "advertorial" or paid content without disclosing that it is paid for. Being owned by Amazon, I can assure you we are strongly encouraged not to break the law, just a good habit to be in generally.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 22:28 UTC
In reply to:

Tactical Falcon: Hey DPreview, don't get in the tool business. You'll try to convince me that a needle is all I need to drill into 1/4 inch steel. Smartphones are getting good as many will tell you. But simple physics aren't going to change the fact that size does matter. The Bokeh is nothing to write home about anyway here.

I am the first to admit change is good, if it is profound, and improves the image process. However, Convenience is not an improvement. It is just convenience for the social. Yeah, get that, and know that. I use all of my image devices relative to what I want to share. But I am not giving up my camera for some so so smartphone only.

By the way, really DPreview, stay out of the tool business because your staff is iPhone 7 jaded, and think it will probably cut through steel too. Geez.

Rishi is working on a new test to see which phones and camera cut through steel the quickest. We'll keep you posted.

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 22:12 UTC
In reply to:

Lee Jay: This article is about why the apple faithful should care, or about why smartphone photographers should care, not why we should.

"We"?

Link | Posted on Sep 10, 2016 at 22:05 UTC
Total: 223, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »