WellyNZ

Lives in Australia Sydney, Australia
Works as a Web developer
Has a website at http://alastairmoore.com
Joined on Sep 6, 2010

Comments

Total: 102, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article What's missing? Ming Thein on the state of mirrorless (743 comments in total)

I see that my digital photography colleagues are still continuing to place importance on gear over photographs, despite more or less any camera costing upwards of a couple of hundred dollars/pounds/euros being capable of generating images that far outweigh the quality (technically speaking) of images from almost any 35mm camera ever made.

I'd wager if you're unable to create a high quality image from almost any of these mirrorless cameras, the problem is probably not with the technology.

Link | Posted on Nov 11, 2015 at 03:30 UTC as 17th comment | 4 replies

7 months? Of continuous cutting out and stitching? I bet it didn't. How much actual time did the cutting and stitching take because saying it took 7 months is meaningless.

I could say it took me 7 months to print a recent negative because I developed the negative last year and only just printed it this week.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2015 at 15:34 UTC as 37th comment

What rustles my jimmies most of all is this is a black and white conversion of an originally colour photograph. The concept of the image was colour and has been previously printed and published in colour. It has no basis in reality. He's made it black and white because, to quote a million instagrammers, it "looks more arty".

It's basically a con.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 23:32 UTC as 147th comment
In reply to:

daddyo: I think it's a very unique photograph, and is very visually compelling.

I also think there is a moral question regarding anyone paying $6.5 million for a photograph when there are untold aids orphans in Africa dying for want of food, water, and basic medical care.

That said, the photographer and the buyer may both be very charitable people -- they won't have to answer to me. :-)

Unique?

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=antelope+canyon+black+and+white&tbm=isch

Really?

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 23:25 UTC
In reply to:

Daniel L: There's nothing special about pay to get in, pay to get more "ray of light" and pay more to do more, again and again photo.... especially on a scene that never changed - That's Antelope Canyon for people that never been there before. Everyone has to pay to get the picture, you just have to go at the right time of the year.

Nothing more than joining a photograph-tour shooting on a rare captive snow leopard in a zoo.

who cares

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 23:21 UTC
In reply to:

(unknown member): I wonder if the original negative / electronic file changed hands, thus, ownership is now exclusive to the buyer.

I do too!

That's pretty lazy commentary, Daniel L.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2014 at 23:20 UTC
On article A second glance: two takes on the Leica X (403 comments in total)
In reply to:

pdelux: Pretty average images. I dont mean to be disrespectful, but those images could've come from any camera released in the last 5 years. Where is this "leica" look Leicaphiles are always raving about?

Not every Leica camera is the same just like not every Nikon, Canon or Pentax is the same. They all make turkeys and this looks to be one of Leicas, particularly at the price.There isn't one single "Leica look". And you certainly wouldn't get it from this particular camera either, and I happily say that as someone who used to shoot with and loved shooting with a Leica.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 03:34 UTC
On article A second glance: two takes on the Leica X (403 comments in total)
In reply to:

Retzius: The image quality does not impress.

Nice looking piece of kit though ;)

Agreed. And actually half those images were in light that ANY camera should be well capable of capturing and those captured images don't stand out in particular. I used to shoot with a Leica M6 with a Voightlander 50mm F1.5 lens - that combination with the HP5 film I would shoot with had an an exception quality.

Link | Posted on Nov 7, 2014 at 03:31 UTC
In reply to:

Peter Jonkman: Sorry Sony, but the Leica M9 was the first fullframe mirrorless camera. :)

@Plastek,

How in the wide, wide world of sports does the Leica not fit the definition of a mirrorless ILC camera? That is *exactly* what it is. It doesn't have a mirror and the lenses are interchangeable.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 08:59 UTC
In reply to:

Sam Carriere: This is all pretty irrelevant. Photographers use cameras, not phones.
And to everyone who wants to show me a superb picture taken with a phone, all I can say is "Just think what that person might have done with a real camera."

The iPhone clearly IS more advanced than the cameras Ansel Adams used in the same way that Adobe Illustrator is more advanced than a pencil.

My primary cameras are 4x5 and 8x10 large format cameras. They're nothing more than a black box with a lens on the front and my iPhone is significantly more advanced as a camera than my film cameras.

That doesn't mean it can create better images.

Every photograph I've made with my large format cameras are by far more impressive, more beautiful and more meaningful than anything I've captured with my iPhone. But not every photograph needs to be a piece of art and that's where my iPhone comes in.

Some artists can create amazing work with a pen and ink, others need something more than that. Horses for courses.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2013 at 12:50 UTC
In reply to:

AbrasiveReducer: There seem to be three takes on this. (1) It's a phone, so it can't be good. (2) It's technology, which automatically means it's fabulous and you are a loser if you don't agree. (3) These phones aren't perfect but they are good enough for most people, most of the time. If I was selling these, I'd bank on #3.

I'd buy this phone in an instant if it was an Android phone. As it's a Windows phone, I wouldn't touch it with a stick covered in poo.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2013 at 10:50 UTC
In reply to:

Kumara: Sheesh, all this fuss remainds me when the first polaroid came out and all these trendy & fashonable photographers went into a ramp to show unusual images, while the rest of us Pro used the technology just to check the exposure & light.

Sure it may be a fun toy to play with and may be able to capture significant images, but remember the more sensors' cells you add in a confined area the more noise you record: and that's valid for the many commeents here trying to sell us this latest techno hype as a God sent gift that we would be lucky to use.

The IQ of my MF films is stll unreachable for the digital world, not to speak of the 5x7 & 7x10 "

8x10

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2013 at 10:47 UTC
In reply to:

rallyfan: So guys, if this article generates enough clicks, would you consider a follow-up on something like cannibalistic infanticide? It might get some click-throughs to the Gearshop site.

@rallyfan,

...which this website quite clearly provides and to suggest otherwise is utterly ridiculous.

The internet is not limited by size. It is quite possible for a website such as DPReview to provide reviews of cameras and gear (as it does very well) AND provide stories that are related to the subject of digital photography.

I don't see what your problem is, excepting the subject matter of the story?

Link | Posted on Aug 19, 2013 at 02:19 UTC
On article Is the snapshot dead? (70 comments in total)

What defines the snapshot that used to be? To me, a snapshot is an every day capture of a person's life. The internet is absolutely full of them.

The photographs shown in the video above look like many of them have had much more pre-thought than a simply snapshot. Or perhaps it's down to the snapshotter of days gone by were more inherently creative than the snapshotter of today who captures an image of their bagel and latte.

Maybe he has a point.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 06:46 UTC as 31st comment

They need to start making ink out of cardboard next, if it'll offer us a cheaper future.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 02:12 UTC as 9th comment
In reply to:

Mikhail Tal: Oh come on that's such a blatant photoshop I can't believe DPR really fell for this.

@JWest,

Didn't you know that Mikhail Tal has seen a few 'shops in his time? He can tell by the pixels.

Link | Posted on Aug 14, 2013 at 02:07 UTC
Total: 102, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »