rfsIII

Lives in United States Midland, MD, United States
Works as a Writer and Photog
Joined on Sep 9, 2006
About me:

I take a lot of pictures. Sometimes for money.

Comments

Total: 582, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

rfsIII: Please stop showing off your knowledge of pretentious Britishisms such as "shortlist." This is a US -based publication so please observe US usage; the term you want is "finalists."

It is annoyance at the lack of consistent style on websites. Doesn't matter what country—every publication or website must obey the grammar and usage rules of the country in which it is based. "Shortlist" would have been fine when the brilliant Phil Askey ran the show and the site was based in England. But the site has relocated to Seattle, WA and when you change countries, you change the rules by which your writing is governed.

For instance, the staff almost never observes the British rule of using plural verbs with collective nouns: In Britain they would write "Nikon are introducing a new 105mm lens" while in the U.S. you would say "Nikon is introducing...." So where is the line drawn?

Scrupulous observation of grammar and style let the readers know that the writers actually care about communicating with their readers. Ignoring the rules signals that the writers' only concern is the selfish gratification of their own infantile egos.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 19:27 UTC

Please stop showing off your knowledge of pretentious Britishisms such as "shortlist." This is a US -based publication so please observe US usage; the term you want is "finalists."

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 13:36 UTC as 22nd comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

photogeek: What's good for the goose is good for the the gander, right Getty?

The proverb is "what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander." Means what is appropriate for one person is appropriate for another.

Link | Posted on Jul 29, 2016 at 01:24 UTC
On article Canon EF-M 28mm F3.5 Macro real-world samples (17 comments in total)

This lens has that soft-sharp quality that so desirable in the lens for expressing emotion. The deeper I get into photography the more I feel that it's all about picking the right type of lens and that the actual quality of the lens is really secondary. This Canon macro may not have the outstanding test scores but it produces gorgeous pictures when used as it is makers intended.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2016 at 12:49 UTC as 5th comment
On article Nikon D500 versus D750: Which one is right for you? (344 comments in total)
In reply to:

AlexCHStudio: why should an exclusion be made D500 OR D750? why not just buy both of them? both are not very expensive - most people could afford to have 2 cameras instead of 1. I have 810 and 750, now will buy 500 as well. very nice camera - why not?

Most people are not like us. The median annual income worldwide is $9,733 according to a 2013 study. Now tell me how you're going to buy three professional bodies plus lenses, pay your Adobe Creative Cloud subscription, feed your family, have a place to live, a bicycle or motor scooter to ride, and still afford a plane ticket to America so you can shoot the Slot Canyons.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 14:47 UTC
On article Top tips for composing great landscapes (127 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leonp: I see saturation is very En Vogue. I will make a photoshop batch process to add 40* points of saturation to all my landscape pics to greatly "improve" them. (But I'll keep the originals for the time this ridiculousness is over) ;-)
*: tried and estimated with the article images.

Don't be so hard on others. All photographers go through phases in their artist's journey. You may love muted and delicate hues right now But in five years you could be the one cranking vibrance all the way to 100.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2016 at 13:05 UTC
In reply to:

cgarrard: Its like time travel.

We're all time travelers; don't believe it? Google berenstain/berenstein paradox.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2016 at 03:13 UTC
On article Bentley creates a 53 billion pixel car commercial (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

fenceSitter: LMAO. Kudos to Mr Stock and his chuzpah to scam Bentley's corporate bigwigs with the most preposterous bullsh!t I've heard in a long time: "To capture the giga-pixel image we used multiple robotic heads based on the NASA technology developed for photographing the surface of Mars."

Oh dear. That's a mouthful for an ordinary Gigapan Epic Pro, owned by everyone and his dog.

Did I miss the sale? I still don't have one.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2016 at 14:34 UTC
On article Getting up close: Canon EF-M 28mm macro hands-on review (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

PKDanny: Don't forgot about Pentax Macro lenses!!??

Because Pentax has always had the most innovative lenses and great camera bodies. It's is the Arya Stark of camera companies.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2016 at 14:22 UTC
On article Getting up close: Canon EF-M 28mm macro hands-on review (103 comments in total)
In reply to:

pannumon: Lead: "Thanks to built-in LEDs and very close focusing abilities, Canon's 28mm F3.5 for EOS M offers a great place to start learning more about shooting macro."

This really promotes the idea that (Canon) mirroless is for the beginners, and real photographers use real cameras. This matches my idea of what is the target group of EOS M system. It also tells a lot about the (general?) attitude regarding mirrorless systems.

I am writing this simply because I find it interesting.

It's just part of the blindness and condescending attitude that this site and its audience display toward lower-spec cameras. They can't conceive of the idea that someone in a professional situation might have a need to choose a lighter or smaller camera over a larger or better specified model.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2016 at 14:18 UTC
On article Getting up close: Canon EF-M 28mm macro hands-on review (103 comments in total)

Vindication! At last a lens that will make people take the EOS M seriously.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2016 at 14:01 UTC as 11th comment | 6 replies
On article Bentley creates a 53 billion pixel car commercial (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

PaulDavis: Looks like the car was just photoshopped into the image. The angle and perspective of the car doesn't even look quite right. Not sure how you get motion blur on a stitched image as if the camera is following the car?!

This type work should be like a magic trick where people can't figure out how it was done because the technique was flawless. This one looks like the rough draft shown to the boss to show where the project is going.

What a surprise, the passenger chair has perfect lit so we can all see the logo on the seat, even though the sun is clearly at the seats back. Also amazingly there are no reflections on that part of the window.

No reflections? Probably took out the windshield. And how about the empty bridge? Maybe used the Photoshop scripts >statistics>median technique where you merge exposures and subtract out the cars, don't you think?
The whole shot is very impressive in its execution.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 15:42 UTC
On article Bentley creates a 53 billion pixel car commercial (189 comments in total)
In reply to:

rrccad: what Nikkor 1500mm lens did he use?

Maybe he means the Zoom-Nikkor 1200-1700mm f/5.6~f/8.0s P ED IF?

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 15:31 UTC
On article Bentley creates a 53 billion pixel car commercial (189 comments in total)

"it would be the size of a football pitch.'"!!!???? When did we stop explaining sizes by comparing them to cricket fields? It's a good thing we're leaving the EU. Hopefully at long last we can go back to Her Majesty's imperial measurement system as well.

In the time of King Edward II, an inch was 3 kernels of English barley laid end to end, how about measuring sensor sizes that way; (unless you'd prefer using the length of a saint's finger bone....)

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2016 at 15:13 UTC as 58th comment
In reply to:

DuxX: Excellent captures of a terrible accident. This is what nuclear technology will bring to us in future. Now it is happened in Japan. Tomorrow can be everywhere else. Human kind must stop with exploitation of nuclear energy. Immediately. :/

Not to mention the coal miners who have died or are slowly dying from black lung—or the thousands killed in accidents over the years. And all the other havoc caused by transporting and burning coal.
Humans are a scourge. The real answer is to stop population growth and bring it down to a sustainable level.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 15:38 UTC
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (99 comments in total)
In reply to:

RUcrAZ: I've been down the road you describe over 30 years ago, and encountered the issues as you relate them. Congratulations on a fine job of documenting and explaining them, in easy-to-follow terms. (I would mention that, on a "one-man-video production," including shooting, developing graphics, selecting any audio/music background, editing, etc. it typically takes me about 1 hour of work per 1 second-on-screen on the final product. It borders on masochism!)

Eamon! You've set yourself up to fail with that much gear—especially to shoot a small fast-moving dog. Start with one camera and one medium zoom—a 24-70 or equivalent.
Next, all animals are very sensitive to cameras being in their space so put the camera on the floor and let the dog sniff it, lick it, bite it a little bit—it has to get comfortable with the camera.
Then narrow down your options of what to shoot. Pick out the three most amazing things that the animal does and focus on those. If you try to get everything, you'll get nothing.
Finally, shoot a bunch of three-shot sequences of the behavior you want to capture. For each behavior get a wide shot, a medium, and a closeup. Next get the reaction shots, either the reaction of other animals to the poodle or your girlfriend's reactions to what the poodle is doing. Reactions are what will make it a story. Otherwise it's just stupid pet tricks.
Cut that together and then you can refine with multi-cams and the rest.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 15:26 UTC
On article A photographer's intro to the world of video (99 comments in total)

Nice job Mr. Butler. It's so refreshing to read a story written with humility and openness rather than the usual DPR mode of arrogance and bluster.

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2016 at 15:13 UTC as 10th comment

Awesome! Five groups lets you do key, fill, back light, hair light, and a kicker. I predict a renaissance in multi-light setups. Take that Zack Arias!

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 14:02 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

fullstop: Oh dearie me what a crisis smartphone companies are selling cameras instead of camera companies trying to sell smartphones. This has put so many camera fans in a spin.
You guys are becoming the new dinosaurs ...... the dpr crew are smart enough to realise that the new direction of image creation is worth writing about.
ps I still use film but I do not lament its demise as a mainstream media player. As for marketing isn't that what all manufacturers of goods do here.

He is too depressed by the decline and fall of western civilization to reply to your thoughts. Me too.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 13:40 UTC
In reply to:

2eyesee: From the article:
"...to achieve high-quality low light performance, you need to capture more light with bigger pixels..."
"...lower megapixels with large pixels to enhance low light image quality."
"...strong low-light performance demands systems that can capture more light, including big pixels"

This is rubbish - you need a bigger SENSOR to capture more light - NOT bigger pixels.

Smartphone cameras are rubbish in anything but good light because they persist with wafer-thin designs which limits them to tiny sensors.

The problem is that you don't know what you don't know, which is my entire problem with DPR's approach to the topic—they try to make sweeping generalizations from essentially zero experience in the design and manufacture of complex imaging systems. It's like trying to discuss film if you only got as far as high school chemistry.
You are basing your assertions on what you consider "common sense." But unless you work in the imaging industry, attend their conferences, keep up with peer-reviewed journals, and produce products you have no idea what the actual parameters of imaging involve, nor how to improve them.
But don't feel bad. It's not just you. Our entire culture has become infected with the idea that anyone can be an expert if they know a few buzzwords and refuse to listen to people who actually know what they're talking about.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 13:29 UTC
Total: 582, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »