Lives in Netherlands EHV / NB, Netherlands
Works as a Software engineer
Joined on Apr 23, 2004


Total: 211, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Sessility: This doesn't make any sense to me
1. I'm a maximiser, do my research, and pretty much always very happy with my purchases for years. I happily held on to my previous camera for 10(!) years. A year ago, after a lot of research again, I bought an X-Pro1, which was/is perfect for my requirements/needs - I couldn't be more happy with it (and that's even before applying the latest firmware updates! ;-)

There will be better cameras in the future, no doubt, but I bought the best for me *at the time*, and that's enough to make me happy with it for years to come (like with my last camera).

2. Most of these photos don't look like "street photography" to me, but perhaps I have a different understanding of the genre?

PS: The only thing that does make sense is the recommendation of the X100S.

There is a big difference between doing research for a reasonable target and a perfect one.

A maximizer goes above and beyond whatever is reasonable.

Besides, most of us have a little of both.
I doubt anyone is at the extreme end of the scale.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2013 at 19:17 UTC
In reply to:

SeanU: I'd add another mantra to this article. Buy last years camera when it goes on closeout. The GX1 is an extreme example of how low you can go when it dropped to around $200 for the body. While other cameras may not drop as drastically, 40-50% reductions are pretty common. The X100 is a great deal now... and the X100S will be a great deal next year.

Except most people will universally hate you for doing so ...

Ever tried to tell a woman to only ever buy last years clothing ?
Us geeks love getting the latest gear just like fashion fans love the latest trends.

Besides ... if you really were that consistent with your gear then you most likely wouldn't even be reading sites like this one.

If the tech is mature then buying last years model is a very effective and cheap way to upgrade.
New technology doesn't have that advantage until it's done a few iterations and the basic issues have been resolved.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2013 at 19:11 UTC
On article KaleidoCamera teaches your DSLR new light field tricks (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

Francis Carver: You don't really need it for anything, so don't pay anything for it. Another "must have" invention that nobody had asked for.

We never needed to fly either.

If we only ever invented stuff we 'needed' we wouldn't have had half the stuff we currently do.
Heck, we probably would still be stuck in the sea as a single cell organism.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2013 at 16:49 UTC
On article KaleidoCamera teaches your DSLR new light field tricks (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: Fascinating.

BTW - inventions that nobody have asked for? I would guess that a vast majority of the inventions are not "asked for". How many asked for digital cameras in the film days?

All this said - maybe it will be nothing. Just another fun thing.

But .... I assume that something will happen with digital photography ... something you don't expect. And not is asking for. I am quite sure of it.

the best inventions can be failures to achieve something completely unrelated.

The real problem is finding practical applications for stuff like this.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2013 at 16:45 UTC
On article Can Photojournalism Survive in the Instagram Era? (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Donnie G: The dynamics of the marketplace have flipped 180 degrees among today's news media consumers. Whereas, in the days before the widespread availability of phones that were equipped with cameras and video capture capabilities, the consumer expected a very high level of image quality and story telling proficiency from the images that accompanied a news article; and that's why photojournalists existed. Today however, it's all about quantity of content instead of quality of content, and today's average news consumer, having been trained to accept this tradeoff through years of daily social media exposure, "i.e., facebook, etc.", is no longer aware of the difference. Yes, every once in a while, some good quality content from a neophyte image maker will get published, but the majority of content will simply garner bragging rights for the person who can get their garbage published first anywhere, just like on facebook. Garbage in, garbage out, is now the mainstream journalism standard.

you mean "years of reading crap like 'the sun' and other media that aren't worth the paper they're printed on"

We had crappy journalism before Facebook and Twitter became trending.
The only real difference is that the internet makes it easier to spot if you're willing to look.

We never knew that every paper sourced their articles from the same source without checking for facts, until we got access to that same source.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2013 at 17:36 UTC
On article French student creates SLR using 3D printer (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

M Lammerse: 3D printing is the new technical revolution, and this is again a wonderful example of it.

I doubt that technical limitations will stop it from becoming popular.

The real problem is similar to the one that the media industry faced when digital media became available and reproduction of the source material wasn't limited to expensive machines.

The fact that those dinosaurs are still fighting the digital revolution is enough proof.
Things like copyright and patents will need to be changed.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2013 at 18:12 UTC
On article French student creates SLR using 3D printer (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

Simon Elwell: Why?

because for people like us the journey itself is often more interesting than the destination.

it's in the designing and building that fun can be had.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2013 at 18:03 UTC
On article French student creates SLR using 3D printer (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

RichRMA: The 3D plastic gun a guy made looked a lot cleaner. I thought the whole idea of 3D printing was to be able to print things impossible to machine in one piece? Like a hollow ball, that kind of thing. The whole body could have been printed as one piece (except the back) yet this one looks like it has been printed in pieces and bolted together.

This is consumer level printing, which still is in its infancy.
So don't expect super accurate results, unless you pay for high-end models.

The guys printing the gun(parts) probably used an extremely accurate high-end printer.

A list of available options :

I think it's comparable to the early dot matrix colour printers.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2013 at 17:56 UTC
In reply to:

mrdancer: Can't really tell from the video, but the ground does look a little damp. Hopefully he had the foresight to do this video after a heavy rainfall, or at least heavily wet the ground in the area of the fireworks - this would negate most of the forest fire concerns. However, that message should be relayed in the video to keep redneck copycats from burning down their forests.

Btw, I think he should re-do the video with a marshmallow gun.

The people who need to be warned that this is a potentially stupid and dangerous stunt are never going to read that message (or obey its intent).

That's why there are two types of movies :
- those done by professionals
- those done by very (un)lucky amateurs

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2013 at 19:11 UTC
In reply to:

djawon: yesterday our region hits by powerful earthquake, 6.2 magnitude, thousands house destroyed, by now 22 death toll, hundreds wounded...

unfortunately at the same time
(a) [insert celebrity] did [something embarrassing],
(b) [dumb teenager] said he would do something stupid on facebook and got jailed
(c) [trivial newspost]
which was deemed more important.
(d) Sorry, but your country doesn't have enough famous people or important things for us to care about.

Try inviting Madonna or Angelina Jolie. They need cheap orphans so they may be willing to mention how awful it is.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2013 at 19:01 UTC
In reply to:

balios: How many people did those photos and the ad campaign help? How many people did this article on DPreview help? None directly. But it raised awareness of the issues, just like "liking" a Facebook page does. Not everyone has the time, money, or desire to help every good cause in the world. But by helping to spread the word then maybe somebody who does will get the message.

spread what word ?
That people are suffering ? We know already.
We just can't be bothered to actually do anything about that.
In fact we need charities, not to help people but to show how much we care.
We need them for the tax breaks they offer.

A true solution would mean we wouldn't have any cheap labour.
It would mean an end to testing our military hardware.
We can't even handle the competition from Europe/China/USA
Imagine how lethal the added competition from Africa (and other 3rd world countries) would be if we ended their suffering.

Cynical ? I hope so.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2013 at 18:54 UTC
In reply to:

jkoch2: Well, what might be the "best" way to raise money for disaster relief? Challenge #1 is to get attention. Remember, the sea of potential donors will prefer the sensational, even the lurid, over the bland. Scenes of pain and destruction are the only plausible tools. An abstract or sermonizing plea is doomed. Attention-grabbers don't necessarily raise money, but money won't come without attention.

Otherwise, how to explain the countless articles, stories, or pictures about certain social celebrities? Publishers and editors count the hits and conclude, correctly, that viewership soars based on certain key names or types of content?

But here's an effective (but unpopular) proposal: a univeral $0.01 / click or $0.01 / email tax whose proceeds would go to disaster relief. This would also virtually eliminate spam.

[Why do I hear boos?]

A better solution :
reduce the number of charities to one global.
I mean seriously.

The amount of donations that are wasted just to fund all the managers of all those charities must be more than enough to save a few countries in Africa ...

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2013 at 18:48 UTC
In reply to:

Digitall: Great campaign. Indeed. This shows how cynical are social networks. The social has nothing, or very little. Social networks have become commercial networks. Unfortunately.

As if all those charities repeating the same message over and over again are any better ?
Charities should also take a good long look at themselves and ask why there were a few dozen of them 'helping'.

I wouldn't be too surprised if only a few percent of the actual donation was used to actually help those in need.
Everything else seems to be spend on managers, ad campaigns and corruption.

Link | Posted on Jul 3, 2013 at 18:39 UTC

'gif' is Dutch for poison ...
I wonder if he knew ;)

Link | Posted on May 23, 2013 at 15:34 UTC as 30th comment
On article Introducing... What The Duck on dpreview.com (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Trollshavethebestcandy: Seems WTD needs to go mirrorless. His camera is too boxy.

Be glad he didn't use an iPhone ;-)

Link | Posted on May 18, 2013 at 12:08 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Sometimes... people feel the need to get a piece of timber from the woods, saw and chip and chisel it to a camera shape, sandpaper and smooth out the rough edges, apply a shinny lacquer black finish...

Then gouge out a tiny one square centimeter hole on the front face...

...and put a tiny cell phone/laptop camera in there.

Oh the joy of complexity...


Sounds like something for James Mays' "Manlab"-series.
"We could have gone to the shop and bought [insert project], but we decided not to and create our own ... from scratch, just because"

Link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 19:17 UTC
In reply to:

Adrian Tung: I bet someone would take this, strap the whole thing onto a battery-powered platform and make a robot out of it.

You mean like this :

Link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

xlynx9: Entirely misses the point. You don't buy a load of timber and then complain your house is not assembled. Nikon doesn't complain Sony's sensors are hard to use.

These are COMPONENTS. They are used to build things.

If they are hard to use that's because you haven't done your job and made them easy to use. This user should direct his complaints to himself.

One also doesn't sell a load of timber to a newbie and claim that building a house is easy either ...

yet that is what webshops are doing with this device.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 19:13 UTC
In reply to:

Kuppenbender: Weird choice of Technology correspondent.

'As someone who is anything but a digital native, I find this stuff hard'

It's not a weird choice.
Not all sports correspondents have played in sports either.

There are basically 2 types of technology lovers :
(1) the ones that want to know how stuff works and what makes it tick (they build their own multimedia device from scratch if need be)

(2) the ones that simply love seeing the endresult (they simply buy the latest iDevice )

Rasberry Pi is clearly aimed at type 1, but that shouldn't prevent a type 2 from looking at it from their perspective.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 19:12 UTC
In reply to:

fillkay: He's writing for a general, rather than specialist audience and trying to demonstrate that one needs rather more nous than the average punter can be expected to have. He did do it and expressed satisfaction, so don't give the bloke too hard a time.

It is nightmarishly complex to someone who is not a programmer by nature.

Add to this that modern users haven't seen a CLI in decades (ignoring Apple/Macintosh legacy for a moment) and the fact that this stuff isn't sold with a proper manual.

Link | Posted on May 16, 2013 at 19:08 UTC
Total: 211, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »