YrKum

Joined on Apr 9, 2012

Comments

Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Does sensor size still make a difference? (1067 comments in total)

And nothing about optical pixel resolution in the article. If a number of sensor's pixels is equal, then, for example, 4/3' lens must be able to rezolve double number of lines per mm (lpm) compared to FF' lens (300 lpm via to 157 lpm for Oly Pen-F and Canon 5D M II), and for 1" sensors - even more (415 lpm for Sony RX100V). One can see studio 100%' crops: at RAW and base ISO my old Canon 5DMII has better pixel shurpness.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2018 at 19:10 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

YrKum: The first photo looks like too cropped: bride's dress and column of smoke are clipped. If there wasn't place to step back, FF body with wide angle lens and (if necessary) lower camera point should be used, to include the first and the second into the frame. Besides of all, lower angle of view would add some dynamism and expression.

MZ Scott. In other words, you claim that, for this shot of couple in low light conditions (ISO 400, 1/30, f4), any FF body with the best lens available - Nikon D5, Nikon D810, Nikon D850, Nikon D750, Canon 5DMIII, Canon 5DMIV, Sony 7II, Sony 7RII, Sony 7RIII, Sony 99II, Pentax K-1, etc - wouldn't give better image quality than Olympus Pen F with it's M43-sensor? Are you really thinking it's true?
Guys, let's speak about things which are true, insiead of things which we want to be true. Let's be honest fellows!

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2018 at 09:57 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: The first photo looks like too cropped: bride's dress and column of smoke are clipped. If there wasn't place to step back, FF body with wide angle lens and (if necessary) lower camera point should be used, to include the first and the second into the frame. Besides of all, lower angle of view would add some dynamism and expression.

Cagey75. What a completely false repost!
1. "...if he had more time...".
Would a grandmother have a pen*s then she would be a grandfather.
Mr. Kurtz: "... Just as they got to the overlook, the volcano started its eruption...Before I started photographing, I introduced myself to their wedding photographer...During a break, I talked to the couple. I told them who I was and asked if I could put the photos on the wire...". So he tells YOU the volcanic eruption wasn't the moment like atomic explosion or airplane crash - he had a lot of time for shots. Or did you mean the couple's kiss was unrepeatable?!
2. "...A full frame camera would not have done anything to make the volcanic eruption more dramatic...".
Yes, it wouldn't. FF only would have done better image quality, for large prints especially.
And if YOU are ready to claim the opposite then YOU looks like a dumb Olympus gear whore and Mr. Kurtz' whore.
My best wishes!

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 13:01 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: The first photo looks like too cropped: bride's dress and column of smoke are clipped. If there wasn't place to step back, FF body with wide angle lens and (if necessary) lower camera point should be used, to include the first and the second into the frame. Besides of all, lower angle of view would add some dynamism and expression.

Terrible Photographer. F*** youself, if your lust is such unbearable.

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 00:37 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: The first photo looks like too cropped: bride's dress and column of smoke are clipped. If there wasn't place to step back, FF body with wide angle lens and (if necessary) lower camera point should be used, to include the first and the second into the frame. Besides of all, lower angle of view would add some dynamism and expression.

Juksu, sorry, but I can't find any reason for pro photographer to shoot a landscape with volcano by pocketable camera. Previous articles (parts 1-4) by Erez Maron tells about shooting Kilauea Volcano from a drone, the ground, a boat and a helicopter. Exept a drone story, the three last parts were passed with Canon 5DMIV+24-70, 70-300, 16-35. 11-24. I believe it wasn't easily to carry, but it was worth it: the photographs captured are astonishing!

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2018 at 11:30 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: The first photo looks like too cropped: bride's dress and column of smoke are clipped. If there wasn't place to step back, FF body with wide angle lens and (if necessary) lower camera point should be used, to include the first and the second into the frame. Besides of all, lower angle of view would add some dynamism and expression.

P.S. And what about vertical frame?

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2018 at 00:24 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: The first photo looks like too cropped: bride's dress and column of smoke are clipped. If there wasn't place to step back, FF body with wide angle lens and (if necessary) lower camera point should be used, to include the first and the second into the frame. Besides of all, lower angle of view would add some dynamism and expression.

Barty L, I'm agree with you. My point is that the framing looks like nonprofessional, as captured by some mediocre amateur photographer. The more rare shot given the higher qualification requared. Unfortunately, the wedding photo could be and should be better.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2018 at 23:16 UTC

The first photo looks like too cropped: bride's dress and column of smoke are clipped. If there wasn't place to step back, FF body with wide angle lens and (if necessary) lower camera point should be used, to include the first and the second into the frame. Besides of all, lower angle of view would add some dynamism and expression.

Link | Posted on Feb 2, 2018 at 20:36 UTC as 7th comment | 15 replies
On article Film vs Digital: Fashion photography shootout (404 comments in total)

As some comments said below, only digital images are really shown in the artickle. To compare correctly film to digital, one must review side-by side the two images with their best IQ possible.
There are corresponding devices for transparency film: projector and white plastic screen. But there is paradox: we hardly could find something to represent digital adequately to DSLR's sensor IQ. Since prints have too low contrast, then one has to use a display. Resolution for prints 300 dpi is often used as a standart; then, for Nikon D850's sensor 8256 x 5504, a display's screen requared must have at least resolution 9000 x 6000 (for pixel-to-pixel representation) and dimensions no more than (9000 d : 300 dpi) x (6000 d : 300 dpi) = 30 i x 20 i, with proper color reproduction. Is it exist? When we'll see something like it, then one could speak about real film's preference to digital.
It.s TOO EARLY to compare!

Link | Posted on Jan 24, 2018 at 11:34 UTC as 13th comment
On article Film vs Digital: Fashion photography shootout (404 comments in total)

Result of comparison would depend on kinds of review available. Would a transparency color film projected on a screen, it'll give it's best look: original color, high resolution and high contrast. As for digital, usually one can see it as a PC-screen image (distorted colors, lowest resolution and high contrast) or as a paperprint image (distorted colors, high resolution and lowest contrast). I must have a monitor with 1:1 resolution to my sensor, with calibrated professional color reproduction - to compare film and digital correctly.

Link | Posted on Jan 21, 2018 at 04:45 UTC as 44th comment | 1 reply
On article Film vs Digital: Fashion photography shootout (404 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hobbytake2: This is getting old. Sooooo many rehashes. When you scan you are now digital, what do they not understand.

Talley; That would depend on kinds of review available. Would a transparency color film projected on a screen, it'll give original color, high resolution and high contrast. As for digital, usually one can see it on a PC screen (distorted colors, lower resolution and high contrast) or on a photopaper (distorted colors, high resolution and lowest contrast). I must have a monitor with 1;1 resolution to my senыor, with pro color reproduction - to compare film and digital correctly.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2018 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

ms18: Lens selection is very crucial aspect in type of photography. I would first go through the lens selection then look at a a capable body with that mount. If the have good lens they will definitely have good body.

ms18: In my opinion, it'd be useful to compare some body+lens pairs in the category, with total prices shown. For example, landscape: Nikon D850 + 17-35 f2,8 (14-24 f2,8) or Canon 5DMIV + 16-35 f2,8 III (11-24 f4)?

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2017 at 17:43 UTC
In reply to:

ozuidema: I suspect of all those people whinging about Leica, there is a fair amount of jealousy among them. If somebody wants to spend $8k on a rangefinder camera, why not, if you can afford it and it gives you pleasure? That said, looking at the images I honestly do not think that they are any better than what you can do with a Fuji X100F, which is 7 times cheaper. But maybe you do see a difference when you blow images up to A2 size prints, I don't know.

As for me, I suspect you are wrong. Even if I have $80K to spend on some photo gears, I would't buy Leica M10, just by your reason: the images aren't better.
To say, if it could make a landscape frame with night moonlight stormy sea&coast at 1/2000s f16, without any visible noise and loss of details, I would have "a fair amount of jealousy"!
I agree with you: if somebody wants to spend $8K on M10, why not. As saying speaks: "nice to live not forbid". But there are no any meaningful reasons for such public ultimate overstimation.

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 23:13 UTC

Would it the best gear for Barney, if it'd be the same body with the same lens exept not "Leica" but "Canon" at it and S2500 only instead of S7995? But it's surely so pleasantly to go with Leyca spinning around your finger!

Link | Posted on Nov 15, 2017 at 14:03 UTC as 18th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Lea5: Fantastic Photographs capturing emotions, situations and authenticism!
Of course the most here don't understand them. There are no brickwalls, sundaycats and backyards, shot with the latest and greatest gear. They are living in the past and missed the Zeitgeist. They will vanish and these new young talents will make their way. I'm sure these talents never wasted their time in a gear forum, talking about corner sharpness and other unimportant stuff.

armandino; I agree with you. But authenticism is the only excuse for a lot of talentless art objects, unlike science and engineering. Would Nikon or Canon design some mediocre product, everybody say "foo", but, looking at some picture, photograph or clothes, one can think; "Ou, yes, there are originality and new trend!".
To say, some shots by Sasha Dudkina seems rather artificial for me, as Russian. For example, a woman in headscarf with a cat looks ridiculously likewise an englishman having his breakfast in hat-cylinder. Nevertheless, those "Russian style" was the main deliberate feature to win.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2017 at 03:39 UTC
In reply to:

Lea5: Fantastic Photographs capturing emotions, situations and authenticism!
Of course the most here don't understand them. There are no brickwalls, sundaycats and backyards, shot with the latest and greatest gear. They are living in the past and missed the Zeitgeist. They will vanish and these new young talents will make their way. I'm sure these talents never wasted their time in a gear forum, talking about corner sharpness and other unimportant stuff.

Lea5; As for me, it isn't issue what kind of gear a photo captored with. There are great photographs, mediocre photographs ans bad photographs. But you are right - I can't understand, for example, some Sasha Dudkina's shots - they are too complicated for my brain ;) . I have to confess that I "living in the past and missed the Zeitgeist"! Strictly speaking, any things express some emotions, thoughts and сapturing authenticism, but are they always have a value? It's too hard to discover a black cat in a dark room...especially if it's absent there! Sorry, but your message sounds like some praise yourself, isn't it?

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2017 at 10:35 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: When I saw Russian name Sasha Dudkina, I was proud for Russia. But, after reviewing her "great" and "outstanding" phrames, I thought it was some fun joke to give her the prize. It seems like ANY photo by ANY photographer all over the world is able to win. There are hundreds or even thousands really beautifull photographs at popular Russian site "Yandex fotky" ("Яндекс фотки" in Russian), and I woudn't give "like" or even pay attension to those Saha's ones. In my opinion, there are no reason for constructive critics.

Magnar W; I'm able to explain my point for every picture. 1) It's a folk dance, not a ballet. Usually there are no dramatic or tragic themes there, so it looks like she blinked. 2) Cut; bath, head, hands. What was she (he;)) dealing by her hands?! Nothing but pretentious angle. 3) Nice blanket, with Russian's flag colors. 4) Nice laughtering girl. Is there any hided quality? 5) Interesting phrame. Hands on chest and closed eyes. Woman in love in a pool? Stilted image. 6) Nice tattoo? No comment. 7) A Man in a Field, with Sun rays. Kitsch in English, lubok (лубок) in Russian. In addition, it's awful technically. 8) Smoking woman with her eyes looking directly into the lens. The main feature is a towel on her head. She is upgrading and degrading her health simultaneously, that is the meaning? May be.....13) A Back. Like number 2; cut hands and head (by "water-shore" border). What is he doing? A Universe of conjectures....

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2017 at 00:24 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: When I saw Russian name Sasha Dudkina, I was proud for Russia. But, after reviewing her "great" and "outstanding" phrames, I thought it was some fun joke to give her the prize. It seems like ANY photo by ANY photographer all over the world is able to win. There are hundreds or even thousands really beautifull photographs at popular Russian site "Yandex fotky" ("Яндекс фотки" in Russian), and I woudn't give "like" or even pay attension to those Saha's ones. In my opinion, there are no reason for constructive critics.

Magnar W; Photographs are imagies, pictures, graphics first of all, with their specific language. And, as they are uninspiring, then I'll not tend to go into depth. It's also true for films, music, etc. It's like to say that rap is the best kind of music due to it's deep meanings. May be yes, but there is no MUSIC in rap at all!

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 22:10 UTC
In reply to:

YrKum: When I saw Russian name Sasha Dudkina, I was proud for Russia. But, after reviewing her "great" and "outstanding" phrames, I thought it was some fun joke to give her the prize. It seems like ANY photo by ANY photographer all over the world is able to win. There are hundreds or even thousands really beautifull photographs at popular Russian site "Yandex fotky" ("Яндекс фотки" in Russian), and I woudn't give "like" or even pay attension to those Saha's ones. In my opinion, there are no reason for constructive critics.

Magnar W: What kind of hided qualities do you mean there? Is it magic composition, light, colors? Or sudden moment? Fantastic rare event? Or the portrait of smoking angry girl is too mystical? There are a lot of photographs with similar conception but far more interesting.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 21:12 UTC

When I saw Russian name Sasha Dudkina, I was proud for Russia. But, after reviewing her "great" and "outstanding" phrames, I thought it was some fun joke to give her the prize. It seems like ANY photo by ANY photographer all over the world is able to win. There are hundreds or even thousands really beautifull photographs at popular Russian site "Yandex fotky" ("Яндекс фотки" in Russian), and I woudn't give "like" or even pay attension to those Saha's ones. In my opinion, there are no reason for constructive critics.

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2017 at 20:16 UTC as 20th comment | 13 replies
Total: 28, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »