iae aa eia

iae aa eia

Lives in Brazil Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Works as a English school coordinator and EFL teacher
Joined on Jan 13, 2011
About me:

I was born in João Pessoa, Brazil. I lived in a few other cities in three neighboring states in the northeastern region before moving to where I currently live, about 1,300 miles away down south. Back then, photography was not offered at colleges and universities, and I never got a higher education. I tried to get in the AirForce—they offered the career of aerial photographer (don't know if they still do)—but I could not get in because they detected a health problem. I tried to work with social photography, and shoot a couple of birthday parties and some portraits, but I wasn't successful. I liked the experience, but I had never been a very social person and the few clients I got had been with the help of my mother.

I was living by myself and in a different city, and I was not able to prospect any clients by myself or get any indication from the few folks I had done work for. I was just to shy to ask for indications. I had some issues related to lack of perseverance. I was constantly feeling down since my later teenager years. I ended up giving up and working with motorcycle sales, an area in which I was also unsuccessful because it had to be socially more engaged as well, but I thought that it was going to work just because I liked motorcycles. After, I found an opportunity to work at those 1-hour photo labs/shops as a minilab operator. Now I was able to do a better job, probably because I didn't need to have high social skills. I worked isolated most of the time. As a minilab operator, I was considered one of the best at all the places I worked at, thanks to the fact that I loved photography, read a lot of technical literature, and learned how to operate and maintain those machines from very good folks. One of them had worked at a Kodak laboratory for more than a decade and opened a photo lab along with two other business partners, and it was the first photo lab I worked at. The other one was a Noritsu consultant/technitian.

I started to get socially more engaged after I got involved with the church of Christ. If I was as socially engaged as I was after 2 or 3 years attending church and doing volunteering work when I started shooting, the story would have been different. Since I got involved with church, I have been often in contact with Americans and my English improved considerably.
It was because of that that I had my first opportunity to teach English, helping some classmates at a course I was attending in which English was an asset. My classmates noticed that I liked teaching and taught well, and they encouraged me to be an English teacher.

After about six years working at at least four schools, I got the opportunity to have my own business, an English school franchise for private classes. This opportunity was offered me by the current company I had been working for as a teacher for two and a half years, but only if I moved to a pretty far city, where I live now. My current hometown is cooler and drier (I had terrible headaches in the Northeast because of the heat and higher humidity), it's also good for business, a little more developed, the fried and cooked food is amazing (except baked stuff, nothing special), and the accent is among the nicest in Brazil (if not the nicest).

INITIAL INTEREST IN PHOTOGRAPHY
The first camera I've ever shot with was my mother's Kodak Instamatic 177XF, in the 80's; I used to disassemble and assemble it quite often. The first contact I've ever had with photography literature was still in the 80's, when the husband of a distant relative of mine gave me a photography guide composed of two magazine-sized and four less-than-letter-sized books. Each one of the magazine-sized books was divided into many sections, like cameras, lenses, flashes, framing, darkroom, techniques, pro-photographers' galleries, etc; and the other four books focused on specific photo subjects. Only photos and commentaries in them. One was about people, the other was about women, another one, about nature, and one about architecture. I loved that kit. Decades later, already late 2000's, when I was able to understand English much better, I could compare them with many other guides and I realized that they were quite complete and technically accurate. Really good stuff for Brazilian standards. It was probably the translation of an American guide.

In 1993, I was living in a city called Natal. I was riding a bicycle when I decided to stop at a newsstand located at a supermarket for a quick look at the magazines, as I used to do. I wasn't looking for anything in particular and didn't intend to buy anything, but while I was browsing, I saw that beautiful red glossy cover magazine with lots of SLRs on it, standing on the top shelf. It was the December's 1993 edition of Petersen's PHOTOgraphic magazine. I was in awe, thinking, "Wow, look at that!" (in Portuguese, of course). I had never seen such an appealing cover (uncommon to Brazilian magazines at that time) and that rich content in terms of equipment. I decided to buy a compact Collins Gem Eng-Port Port-Eng dictionary and a calculator in the same week I bought that magazine, and spent the whole month trying to translate most of the magazine's content and converting feet to meters, inches to mili/centimeters, and pounds and ounces to (kilo)grams, and even dollars to royals (our currency, or 'real/reais' in Portuguese)—well, I started doing currency conversion from 1996 onward, as there was no 'real' in 1993, but only a temporary, transitioning currency in 1994, and I was still not interested in currency conversions by 1995). I continued to buy issues of that magazine for the next 6 months. At first, equipment ads, gear guides and articles, and shopping catalogs where the sections I read the most.

FIRST JOB IN PHOTOGRAPHY
In 1996, I was living in Guarabira, in the neighboring state, and the owners of a photo shop in Natal called me and invited me to move back there and work as a minilab operator. That was my first job. I knew the folks there because they didn't have access that kind of magazines and I used to go there to show them to them and talk about photography, and we enjoyed that a lot and we became friends. While I was working there, and SLR-wise, I had the chance to handle (not only, but more extensively) some very nice cameras like the Nikon F3 and FM2, Minolta Maxxum 9xi and X-370, and quite a large variety of Pentaxes, like the K2000, ME, and P30t. There were other cameras from same said brands and other brands, like Vivitar and Yashica. Canons were rare; I don't know why. I can't really remember handling a single SLR, except compacts. But, two brands I wanted so much to have an opportunity to see live were Contax, Ricoh, and Zeiss. I just drooled over seeing pictures Contax bodies and Zeiss lenses. Even one or two of Contax compacts. I also wish I had seen more Olympuses' SLR's. I also drooled over its µ-II.

I'M GONNA ADD MORE LATER.

Comments

Total: 261, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

jadot: Regardless of how far technology has evolved, photographs like this can still show us how simplicity and authenticity combined can make for an engaging portrait. It's quite incredible to me how some of the earliest pioneering photography can still have such an impact today.

I think it also has to do with the fact that it's been common to take a picture smiling, which was not common at that time (I think). Perhaps smiling was not seen to pass seriousness or power. Smiles everywhere today, and when you see a picture without it, its powerfulness (in its way) becomes more evident.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 19:23 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Not everybody that gives speech is good at the subject of their speech, even if their speech is mostly true, and that's why they give powerful PC speeches instead of being the actors of the speech. Obama is one of them. Says beautiful things, uniting people, politically correct things. That's basically all, or we wouldn't have black vs white, Muslims vs Christians tensions increased.

“No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion." This is true and beautiful to say, but also very stupid. Of course no one is born hating others because of skin color, background, or religion. Even the ones that consider IQ differences a relevant racial issue agree that the IQ level is not very different until late childhood or early adolescence.

@EDWARD ARTISTE So, if Democracts (which manipulate blacks very competentely) and most blacks dance together, and Republicans (the ones that tell the truth and propose down-to-Earth solutions) are the enemies, what's the solution?

Now, imagine that this is the truth (which I believe it is), tell me what you think that should be done.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 20:32 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Not everybody that gives speech is good at the subject of their speech, even if their speech is mostly true, and that's why they give powerful PC speeches instead of being the actors of the speech. Obama is one of them. Says beautiful things, uniting people, politically correct things. That's basically all, or we wouldn't have black vs white, Muslims vs Christians tensions increased.

“No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion." This is true and beautiful to say, but also very stupid. Of course no one is born hating others because of skin color, background, or religion. Even the ones that consider IQ differences a relevant racial issue agree that the IQ level is not very different until late childhood or early adolescence.

@EDWARD ARTISTE, slavery exists since the dawn of humans. Mass slavery happened inumerous times before the last big episode (with blacks), and not only with blacks.

Black slavery only happened because it was a common pratice among blacks to have slaves in some regions. Families were proud when they reached a point they could own slaves, and being able to make tons of money with their export was a great deal for blacks (the ones that own and commercialized them). Having a slave was a luxury desired by most blacks.

White people, in recent history, had slaves because it was a common practice, but they themselves, ultimately influenced by the judeo-christian morals and principles, put an end to it (not blacks).

But well, yeah, I also blame today's worsening blacks' situation to whites, definitely, but the whites that support some form of Marxism, and they are pro-Democrat (watch Hillary's America and Dinesh D'Souza on the Democrats-slavery issue), and blacks continue to support them.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2017 at 20:31 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Not everybody that gives speech is good at the subject of their speech, even if their speech is mostly true, and that's why they give powerful PC speeches instead of being the actors of the speech. Obama is one of them. Says beautiful things, uniting people, politically correct things. That's basically all, or we wouldn't have black vs white, Muslims vs Christians tensions increased.

“No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion." This is true and beautiful to say, but also very stupid. Of course no one is born hating others because of skin color, background, or religion. Even the ones that consider IQ differences a relevant racial issue agree that the IQ level is not very different until late childhood or early adolescence.

@REDred Photo, which one sounds more beautiful?

- Blacks and whites are equal and need to get equal opportinities.
- Blacks and whites have different struggles, and we have to provide more means to black people so that they can compete without the need of quotas.

Wrong, Obama could've helped decreasing the problem (still can, but I doubt he will change speech for actions at this point) if he did not ignore factual differences between blacks and whites, and had looked for solutions to improve blacks' education, and lower children out of wedlock, divorce rate, and criminality among themselves. How can you do that if you increase welfare, go on with quotas, say a thug could be your son, take a little Muslim terrorist to the WH, etc?

I think more whites are aware they better keep away from blacks, for their huge support for Obama, and this is not bad for whites because they don't need blacks to go on with a great life. Blacks lose lots more. Sounds ugly, doesn't it? Not Obama style.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 17:44 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Not everybody that gives speech is good at the subject of their speech, even if their speech is mostly true, and that's why they give powerful PC speeches instead of being the actors of the speech. Obama is one of them. Says beautiful things, uniting people, politically correct things. That's basically all, or we wouldn't have black vs white, Muslims vs Christians tensions increased.

“No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion." This is true and beautiful to say, but also very stupid. Of course no one is born hating others because of skin color, background, or religion. Even the ones that consider IQ differences a relevant racial issue agree that the IQ level is not very different until late childhood or early adolescence.

Well, one good thing about Obama, I must recognize, is his photographer. Pete Souza seems to be better than Trump's, IMO.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 16:24 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Not everybody that gives speech is good at the subject of their speech, even if their speech is mostly true, and that's why they give powerful PC speeches instead of being the actors of the speech. Obama is one of them. Says beautiful things, uniting people, politically correct things. That's basically all, or we wouldn't have black vs white, Muslims vs Christians tensions increased.

“No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion." This is true and beautiful to say, but also very stupid. Of course no one is born hating others because of skin color, background, or religion. Even the ones that consider IQ differences a relevant racial issue agree that the IQ level is not very different until late childhood or early adolescence.

I had black friends when I was a child and early adolescence, but stopped having after entering my teenager years, but only acquaintances. No idea or influence of race. Simply different worlds, but no racism as far as I remember. I started to see the racism because of TV, not because of people themselves. It was through the TV that the differences were so exposed.

You feel there is a difference and recognize it and live your life and respect yours the they theirs, but TV made a mess out of it. I remember how I first started to see things differently. They said quotas were necessary (in my mind, "instead of more means for them to get prepared?"). Then, about Muslims ("they say folks that kill gays like a sport and beat women and marry children to be equal to Christians?").

How can you feel at ease being exposed to that?

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 16:18 UTC

Not everybody that gives speech is good at the subject of their speech, even if their speech is mostly true, and that's why they give powerful PC speeches instead of being the actors of the speech. Obama is one of them. Says beautiful things, uniting people, politically correct things. That's basically all, or we wouldn't have black vs white, Muslims vs Christians tensions increased.

“No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion." This is true and beautiful to say, but also very stupid. Of course no one is born hating others because of skin color, background, or religion. Even the ones that consider IQ differences a relevant racial issue agree that the IQ level is not very different until late childhood or early adolescence.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2017 at 16:11 UTC as 77th comment | 9 replies

Now you're gonna get that awesome bokeh!

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 18:40 UTC as 20th comment

In the other article, Canon seems not to be your friend, but what I see here is that Canon's model seems to be a better friend (more appealing than the Nikon's [not imagewise, 'cause this is more subjective]). By the way, was the difference of 0.1" (and its small impact on the focal length) between their sensors worth of two slides and that amount of text?

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 15:42 UTC as 46th comment | 1 reply
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (248 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Well, it sounds reasonable to me that a Chinese company could achieve that. That's what China's for. To make companies from developed countries---that have been the ones spending more in development and quality of production, in safety, in labor costs, etc---look like greedy companies in the eyes of folks that don't mind where a product is produced, the story behind it or behind who makes it, and all the effort to make the wellbeing of each employee a very high priority. Chinese companies are the antithesis of all that. I don't buy Chinese products (unless I have no choice, of course) and Trump is right when he tries to review trade agreements.

@Paul JM Intolerance? Racism? Haha! I had already had one comment removed when I criticized the fact that a DPR author posted one picture containing a stupid text (in my opinion) about blacks and gays and stuff. Although I think I did nothing wrong and the removal was just because the moderator hates Trump, I learned my lesson. This is his "house," and I'm a guest. That said, I wouldn't write anything truly racist and intolerant. Sometimes what one believe to be facts can simple be confused. Just that. Perhaps because of crybabies' mindset like yours. Ask for clarification before wishing me getting stoned.

If they ever do it again though, it still represents the kind of freedom private companies are supposed to have, which is to decide who to serve or not, and I would support it even that happening to me. Grow up, man.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2017 at 02:14 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (248 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Well, it sounds reasonable to me that a Chinese company could achieve that. That's what China's for. To make companies from developed countries---that have been the ones spending more in development and quality of production, in safety, in labor costs, etc---look like greedy companies in the eyes of folks that don't mind where a product is produced, the story behind it or behind who makes it, and all the effort to make the wellbeing of each employee a very high priority. Chinese companies are the antithesis of all that. I don't buy Chinese products (unless I have no choice, of course) and Trump is right when he tries to review trade agreements.

In relation to American companies making products in China, that's the only way they have to compete in the US market itself. The quality standards when it comes to production is, I believe, the same to those of a factory in the US. But, when it come to the workers, the company has to play by the country's laws, which is good for the company, but still plays against the US since the jobs are overseas.

Folks are not realizing how big the problem is. Once China overcomes the US economically and militarily, don't think they will shake hands with Americans and top on the shoulder and be friends and stuff. China will make the US bow down and make Americans' (and other nationalities') lives hard. China's culture is different. Quite different.

Maybe I'm exaggerating, but well, if Trump gets to at least diminsh China's unfair play, he will have done a good thing already.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2017 at 00:51 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (248 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: Well, it sounds reasonable to me that a Chinese company could achieve that. That's what China's for. To make companies from developed countries---that have been the ones spending more in development and quality of production, in safety, in labor costs, etc---look like greedy companies in the eyes of folks that don't mind where a product is produced, the story behind it or behind who makes it, and all the effort to make the wellbeing of each employee a very high priority. Chinese companies are the antithesis of all that. I don't buy Chinese products (unless I have no choice, of course) and Trump is right when he tries to review trade agreements.

I think that Trump's concern with the deal agreements is legitimate and many people have the same concern. I hope he does a good thing. Once it has gone a long way like that, I don't think everything can be changed, but to some degree, yes. China's job conditions are mostly very different from, to have only one example, the US. This is very known. The country is not as open and democratic as the US are. Most abuses are not reported.

It is simply IMPOSSIBLE for a country to do what China does, make and sell products with great features and acceptable quality for such a low price, or with equivalent quality, but still cheaper, or the same price, but superior quality, and also make extremely close copy of products of all sorts, like even cars (like the Range Rover Evoque I saw another day) and get away with it, without playing by rules that goes totally on the contrary to the of the US.

China is a not a fair player, and it shocks me how the US have let them take advantage of that.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2017 at 00:38 UTC
On article SainSonic launches 50mm F1.1 lens for APS-C cameras (248 comments in total)

Well, it sounds reasonable to me that a Chinese company could achieve that. That's what China's for. To make companies from developed countries---that have been the ones spending more in development and quality of production, in safety, in labor costs, etc---look like greedy companies in the eyes of folks that don't mind where a product is produced, the story behind it or behind who makes it, and all the effort to make the wellbeing of each employee a very high priority. Chinese companies are the antithesis of all that. I don't buy Chinese products (unless I have no choice, of course) and Trump is right when he tries to review trade agreements.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2017 at 15:26 UTC as 10th comment | 19 replies
On article New product overview videos now available: Fujifilm GF (69 comments in total)

Man, how I wish one day I can afford one...

Drooling over.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2017 at 23:29 UTC as 5th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Tom Holly: Why did they cut off centre? I was hoping to see lens cross section

Yeah, man. Cutting off center was not cool. The fun is also seeing the shape of the glasses.

Link | Posted on Jun 21, 2017 at 02:52 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

iae aa eia: A Foveon-type sensor reproduces colors in an unmatching way. It's very perceptible. It's curious that DPR praises more resolution, sharpness, detail, than color. I would like DPR to make a photo shoot using some other pro or semipro cameras, taking same pictures with all the cameras, for side-by-side comparison. No one beats a Foveon-like sensor in terms of color, and this other Sigma just proved that once again. It's just frustrating that Sigma is taking so long to make a more marketable camera. I don't even talk about the ISO, because I would not care to have a compromise in ISO in exchange for sucj natural colors.

Thank you for fixing my English, The Name is Bond. I really appreciate that.

Link | Posted on Jun 3, 2017 at 01:30 UTC
On article Sigma SD Quattro H Review (637 comments in total)

A Foveon-type sensor reproduces colors in an unmatching way. It's very perceptible. It's curious that DPR praises more resolution, sharpness, detail, than color. I would like DPR to make a photo shoot using some other pro or semipro cameras, taking same pictures with all the cameras, for side-by-side comparison. No one beats a Foveon-like sensor in terms of color, and this other Sigma just proved that once again. It's just frustrating that Sigma is taking so long to make a more marketable camera. I don't even talk about the ISO, because I would not care to have a compromise in ISO in exchange for sucj natural colors.

Link | Posted on Jun 2, 2017 at 02:26 UTC as 62nd comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

iae aa eia: One interesting thing about bright lenses on medium format is that the bokeh still looks different than using an equivalent on an FF. Not the amount, which will be the same, but something related to the perspective. You can make people, for instance, look like miniatures without the need for a tilt-shift lens or of applying digital TS effect (well, digital TS to make a miniature of a person standing up while still maintaing the whole body in focus is difficult; requires selective editing).

Why on earth did you show the link to a comparison where the shots were taken with a small aperture? What's the point of that if the bokeh effect is an essential part of our discussion here? That reinforces my belief that you could agree with me if you understand what I'm talking about in the first place. Pictures from different formats with both the foreground and background in focus are USELESS for this discussion.

Link | Posted on May 12, 2017 at 19:54 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: One interesting thing about bright lenses on medium format is that the bokeh still looks different than using an equivalent on an FF. Not the amount, which will be the same, but something related to the perspective. You can make people, for instance, look like miniatures without the need for a tilt-shift lens or of applying digital TS effect (well, digital TS to make a miniature of a person standing up while still maintaing the whole body in focus is difficult; requires selective editing).

No, man. Physics is not wrong. You need a smaller aperture lens on medium format to produce the same amount of bokeh of a full frame format lens, and because the aperture is smaller on the medium format, the bokeh effect is more uniform across the frame, and there is also less vignetting as well.

In order to achieve the same amount of vignetting of the medium format lens, you gotta have stop the full frame format lens down to the same aperture, but the bokeh effect will diminish, but will be as uniform as in the MF lens.

Now, if you want to replicate with the FF lens the same amount of bokeh of the MF lens, you'll have to bring the subject closer to the lens, but doing that the subject will appear bigger in the picture, so you have to make the subject be proportionally smaller.

That's why you get more of a miniature effect when you use an MF lens. It's hard to understand, but it's a practical result and not theoretical as you guys suggest.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2017 at 00:55 UTC
In reply to:

iae aa eia: One interesting thing about bright lenses on medium format is that the bokeh still looks different than using an equivalent on an FF. Not the amount, which will be the same, but something related to the perspective. You can make people, for instance, look like miniatures without the need for a tilt-shift lens or of applying digital TS effect (well, digital TS to make a miniature of a person standing up while still maintaing the whole body in focus is difficult; requires selective editing).

Aside from the pictures with shallow DoF, trying to guess the format based on fore-and-brackground-focused picutres is one of the dumbest things there is. It's not about belief. It's a fact. And I guessed more than 90% of them (the ones with shallow DoF) correctly.

"The only thing different on medium format, is that the lens may have less distortion itself cause of the larger elements [what?... facepalm] and mostly larger focal range you can use [oh my... easy man]."

Link | Posted on May 6, 2017 at 01:08 UTC
Total: 261, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »