spitfire31

Lives in Sweden Nykoping, Sweden
Works as a Photographer and videographer, editor, producer
Joined on Jul 14, 2010

Comments

Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »

I expect this will work/not work similarly to the other 'content (somewhat) aware' tools – perfectly sometimes (with images that you could easily fix yourself), and just a bizarre disaster at other times, so you still have to fix it yourself. Not too impressed. ;-)

Link | Posted on May 27, 2016 at 12:48 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply

I downloaded the demo, briefly tried it out on a couple of pics and then erased it from my HD.

At its heart is some glorified but less tweakable version of the Selection Brush in Photoshop. I had to do a LOT of fiddling with moderately complex photos in order to get reasonable maskings with a tool that feels much clumsier and difficult to control in use than the PS SB.

The simple zebra still above probably represents a suitable complexity for LandscapePro.

In fact, there's nothing "Pro" in LandscapePro that I can find, at least not in its current 1.0 guise and certainly nothing that can't be done quicker and more contrallably in PS, perhaps aided by a masking plug-in such as Topaz ReMask 5.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2016 at 05:31 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply
On article Hands-on with the Sony RX10 III (308 comments in total)
In reply to:

spitfire31: I just can't understand that Sony didn't give the III, with its respectable video features and premium price, a touch screen for focus point positioning.

I hope they'll see the light when it's time for the RX10IV…

Thanks for the heads up, Chris! Appreciate it.

While I'm also considering using the RX10 mainly for 'journalistic video' purposes, I'd have liked the option, for instance when interviewing several persons, of cueing focus on the screen.

Since you're using the II, could you say if it's possible to have the moveable focus frame visible during actual shooting and set focus with a programmable button, for instance?

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 16:58 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Sony RX10 III (308 comments in total)

I just can't understand that Sony didn't give the III, with its respectable video features and premium price, a touch screen for focus point positioning.

I hope they'll see the light when it's time for the RX10IV…

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2016 at 15:46 UTC as 25th comment | 5 replies

Still no touch screen. :-( So useful for controlling AF when shooting video on a tripod.

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:46 UTC as 84th comment
In reply to:

princecody: New sensor?

From the first paragraph on the page:

"The camera uses the same 1"-type stacked CMOS sensor which produces 20MP stills as well as 4K/UHD video, and does not replace the RX10 II…"

Link | Posted on Mar 29, 2016 at 16:45 UTC
On photo DownloadOriginal.aspx 0115 March 28, 2009-Edit in the Post Processing Challenge - Look challenge (13 comments in total)

To my eyes, her face looks like it's been covered in some thin silica rubber mask with cutouts for the eyes.

Also, the motif on the scarf, or whatever it is over her shoulders, is distractingly attention-grabbing in the lower left corner. It could usefully have been held back and perhaps defocused in order not to compete so obviously with her face.

Nice handiwork, though!

Link | Posted on Feb 16, 2016 at 04:19 UTC as 2nd comment
On photo Shante in the Fashion shoot challenge (4 comments in total)

Is Shante about to fall asleep or is she just plain bored?

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2016 at 04:08 UTC as 4th comment
On photo Shoot... in the Fashion shoot challenge (1 comment in total)

The first photo (going from Place #1) where the model doesn't look like a digital rendering or a bored victim of an inept director.

This one I really like, with its immediacy, clever pose and, above all, portrayal of a real, living and obviously charming person.

Fashion pic? Maybe. More like a full body portrait, to my eyes, but again – it's ALIVE!

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2016 at 04:05 UTC as 1st comment
On photo Fashionista in the Fashion shoot challenge (1 comment in total)

– Did I lock the car, or didn't I?

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2016 at 03:57 UTC as 1st comment
On article Kodak revives Super 8 with part-digital cine camera (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

draschan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nh9BTMWj9M

If you want the film look, there's any number of Premiere/Final Cut/Avid plug ins to give you every artifact you could wish for. ;-)

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 23:50 UTC
On article Kodak revives Super 8 with part-digital cine camera (367 comments in total)
In reply to:

Barry1234: Not sure why there is so much negativity surrounding this product. Seems like every time you mention the words 'film' or 'analog' the digital loyalists get a bee in their bonnet, as if they have to defend their decision to shoot digitally. I take my hat off to Kodak for sticking to their guns and keeping the medium alive. There are many here who say the look of film can be recreated digitally. This may be so, but here's an idea; why not just shoot film to get the look of film!

The answer to the last question is (hold your breath now):

COST

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2016 at 23:48 UTC
On photo Iceland Tour (3 of 28) in the Something beautiful (no people portraits) challenge (7 comments in total)

Iceland was created for photographers. This is a beautiful example of why.

Kind regards,

Joachim

Link | Posted on Dec 29, 2015 at 09:42 UTC as 1st comment
On photo C17 AT WORK in the December Flying challenge (11 comments in total)

Very nice C-17 portrait!

Maybe crop out a bit of that empty blue sky?

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2015 at 15:22 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
On photo Fourteen jointed limbs in the Nature's Macro Marvels challenge (25 comments in total)

Fascinating insight in this little fella!

Nice technique as well! Would've been perfect if that closest antenna (?) had been in focus, too, but that would have called for focus stacking, I imagine. Not easy if that little critter was alive when you shot it. ;-)

A great photo!

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2015 at 15:20 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On photo PC171750 in the Tools for planning and building - measurement challenge (5 comments in total)

Nice idea and composition, flat and boring lighting. All in MHO, of course.

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2015 at 15:07 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

spitfire31: As an owner of (a license for) Exposure 7, I was surprised and disappointed to discover that, when I entered my license code for Exposure 7 (I had the automatic upgrade from Exposure 6 to 7, btw), there was no free download at all but a 99 bucks price tag.

I don't see much difference between Exposure 7 and Exposure X, except for the RAW developing, and my preferred RAW editors are CR and LR anyway, so I'll pass on this one.

You've got a point there… ;-)

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2015 at 17:19 UTC
On photo Cali in the Artistic Pregnancy challenge (7 comments in total)

OK technically but such a banal and boring pose. There are hundreds, if not thousands, around just like it.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2015 at 23:15 UTC as 3rd comment

As an owner of (a license for) Exposure 7, I was surprised and disappointed to discover that, when I entered my license code for Exposure 7 (I had the automatic upgrade from Exposure 6 to 7, btw), there was no free download at all but a 99 bucks price tag.

I don't see much difference between Exposure 7 and Exposure X, except for the RAW developing, and my preferred RAW editors are CR and LR anyway, so I'll pass on this one.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2015 at 23:09 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
On article 4K video: What you need to know (286 comments in total)

Was this produced in 24 point font and L-O-T-S of S--P--A--C--E for reading challenged kiddies?

One glance, and I'll never bother with any of your "sponsored" material again. It deprecates the whole image of DPReview.

Bad move.

/Joachim

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2015 at 04:28 UTC as 96th comment | 6 replies
Total: 75, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »