landscaper1

landscaper1

Lives in United States Alexandria, VA, United States
Works as a Retired
Joined on Oct 8, 2004

Comments

Total: 588, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

MirrorLessHater: hollywood studios are screwed.

I used to think that, but now I realize the masses are driven by their fascination with personalities and that requires real live humans that the paparazzi can torment for the masses' enjoyment.

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2019 at 20:49 UTC

The car. Where can I get the car? And how much?

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2019 at 20:44 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

gaul: A local club of Photo amateurs where I live is launching a challenge with one condition: ZERO POST-PROCESSING

Maybe they are right after all..

Entoman ... please take note of your own words, "virtually zero darkroom work." In other words, SOME darkroom work (post processing in other words).

Link | Posted on Mar 22, 2019 at 02:21 UTC
In reply to:

gaul: A local club of Photo amateurs where I live is launching a challenge with one condition: ZERO POST-PROCESSING

Maybe they are right after all..

"The whole idea is to force the photographer to work within limitations, and to get as much as possible "right" in the camera, rather than to rely heavily on post processing."

Which, Entoman, ignores the reality of how virtually ALL great photographs were made. Given that fact, what is the point?

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2019 at 21:59 UTC
In reply to:

SASand: Selfies and Instagram are a curse. Was recently in Death Valley on a photography workshop. At Badwater, where salt crystals form large polygons, most of the people out there were doing selfies, turning cartwheels on the polygons, and generally being pretty obnoxious. In so doing, they were also ruining the delicate polygons for anyone who might drop by in the future.

@h2k ... Yes, a photography workshop IS different, as you would surely know if you've ever attended a respectable one.

Said to say, but our society is being overrun by legions of people who seem to act as if there couldn't possibly be another human being who might also wish to enjoy the same scenery before some inconsiderate oaf (like themselves) proceeds to make a mess of it.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2019 at 13:17 UTC
In reply to:

gaul: A local club of Photo amateurs where I live is launching a challenge with one condition: ZERO POST-PROCESSING

Maybe they are right after all..

@entoman ... "Landscaper you obviously doesn't understand the concept of deliberately working within self-imposed constraints, as a method of improving one's ability."

Oh, I "understand" it; I just don't see the point. Photography is not about the how you get to the image, but rather the image itself. The entire evolution of photography has been all about getting beyond the limitations of the OOC image.

I realize this may be controversial, but too many photographers (IMO) merely attempt to rationalize their dislike (for whatever reasons) of post-processing in any form by coming up with these sorts of contrived self-imposed limitations. The fact is, virtually all great photography has involved some degree of post processing of the OOC image.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2019 at 21:44 UTC
In reply to:

landscaper1: Interesting, but what I'd like to see is a program that would convert photo images to corresponding areas of solid color or shades of grey.

@ prairie pal ... Well, that could be an interesting "test" of the AI ... how close could the re-constructed photo image come to the original from which the solid color interpretation was made.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2019 at 21:24 UTC

Interesting, but what I'd like to see is a program that would convert photo images to corresponding areas of solid color or shades of grey.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2019 at 20:05 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

gaul: A local club of Photo amateurs where I live is launching a challenge with one condition: ZERO POST-PROCESSING

Maybe they are right after all..

If that's what they want, then why don't they all go out and buy a dirt-cheap film camera and load it with slide film. And while they're at it, maybe they could somehow get access to Ansel Adams' contact prints and compare those to his "post processed" enlargements. How utterly ridiculous.

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2019 at 20:02 UTC
In reply to:

landscaper1: Here's an interesting question.

When it comes to buildings, "air rights" only extend vertically from the outside vertical surfaces of the buildings themselves. However, property boundaries are not so clearly marked. Who decides the extent of the air space around a Nascar (or any other) event wherein this anti-drone technology may be used without violating the freedom of drone owner/operators flying outside, rather than above, restricted events? If anti-drone tech is illegally employed outside property boundaries, how can the drone operators prove this?

@ goblin ... Here's my thought. There's often a lot of official property outside the vertical parameters of the viewing stands and other structures around the track. Why can't a drone be safely operated over those areas? Besides, this isn't only about race tracks. Whatever legal precedent Nascar is using (or establishing) would also apply to restricting drone activity over ANY kind of commercial activity.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2019 at 15:37 UTC
In reply to:

landscaper1: Here's an interesting question.

When it comes to buildings, "air rights" only extend vertically from the outside vertical surfaces of the buildings themselves. However, property boundaries are not so clearly marked. Who decides the extent of the air space around a Nascar (or any other) event wherein this anti-drone technology may be used without violating the freedom of drone owner/operators flying outside, rather than above, restricted events? If anti-drone tech is illegally employed outside property boundaries, how can the drone operators prove this?

The original question still stands: Who decides the air boundaries within which drones can be legally disabled?

Here's another question: No one questions the propriety of disabling drones to prevent safety risks (airports, etc.), security violations, or even to protect personal privacy, but what about the right to interfere with drone operations for purely commercial reasons? And how high up does a commercial activity have the right to interfere with drone operations?

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2019 at 14:18 UTC

Here's an interesting question.

When it comes to buildings, "air rights" only extend vertically from the outside vertical surfaces of the buildings themselves. However, property boundaries are not so clearly marked. Who decides the extent of the air space around a Nascar (or any other) event wherein this anti-drone technology may be used without violating the freedom of drone owner/operators flying outside, rather than above, restricted events? If anti-drone tech is illegally employed outside property boundaries, how can the drone operators prove this?

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2019 at 13:52 UTC as 50th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

TBLF: Yeah, as some have said, the opening picture is sensationalized, but if you ignore the DPR article and click to the source article from TechCrunch in the first paragraph and read that instead, you get a much more balanced, techie, and less sensationalized view point. I have been a model aviation enthusiast since I could walk... I've been a Pro photographer, and now just a hobbyist photog, so I am torn on the whole drone issue as a photog, but as a model aviation pilot, I hate drones because I think they will destroy true model aviation... The regulations the Govt will impose on them will destroy my hobby. The AMA should NEVER have embraced drones as part of the hobby, and left them as a separate segment to fend for themselves.

@brycesteiner ... Or so you believe. The fact is, the very nature of drone tech, like the Internet, practically guaranteed that it WOULD get out of control.

Link | Posted on Mar 18, 2019 at 13:44 UTC
In reply to:

barrym1966: Im going to make a lens out of bacon just fyi

At least in this case, swallowing your pride can be downright tasty.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2019 at 00:15 UTC
In reply to:

cirtapfotos: That Cutting In 1/2 Deal..will cost you all $4,999.98 ...when Nikon finally releases.

Is that $4,999.98 for the half of the lens or the whole lens?

Link | Posted on Mar 1, 2019 at 10:05 UTC
In reply to:

otto k: Just slap the speed at the end - 5G, 10G, 20G and when the time comes 40G and 100G. It works for ethernet.

That kind of thinking is utterly alien to engineers who need to complicate things so they feel superior to the rest of us.

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2019 at 22:37 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: Real photographers shoot film and paper.
Amateurs shoots digital.
Pros review latest cameras out in the market.

Real photographers shoot whatever the hell they like and don't give a damn what anyone else thinks about it.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2019 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

DotCom Editor: Bad strategy. Smaller, periodic (annual, etc.) price increases are more palatable than one massice increase.

"Yes, people will be upset, complain, adjust budgets and get over it."

It's also likely a certain number of those people will have a renewed appreciation for one of the great attractions of digital photography, the very low per image cost of taking pictures compared to the cost of buying one-time use film and chemical processing.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2019 at 19:20 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: Why is this a surprise? Film has its fans and rightly so, but it's very much a niche product nowadays so prices will inevitably sky-rocket.

Given that Brexit is on the way, I wouldn't be surprised if that 30% increase jumped to 50% for UK buyers. And heaven knows what will happen to camera prices after 29 March... the following day perhaps it might dawn upon the Brexiteers that they are the biggest April Fools in UK history.

"... perhaps it might dawn upon the Brexiteers that they are the biggest April Fools in UK history."

Don't bet on it. One thing I've observed in my long life is that most, perhaps nearly all, people would rather go down with the ship than admit they should've changed course when they still had the chance.

Link | Posted on Feb 25, 2019 at 19:15 UTC

Yet another advertisement posing as "news." Worse yet, it's a solicitation to gamble one's money on something that may not ever come to pass.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2019 at 15:43 UTC as 27th comment
Total: 588, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »