DA photo

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Nov 15, 2011
About me:

Former self employed photo business operator.

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1601 comments in total)
In reply to:

AP14: This news prmpted me to look at the new Windows port of Darktable which looks quite promising for replacing the raw processing part of Lightroom

I have used the LR subscription since it came out. I just finishing evaluating a replacement that I found overly complicated for my simple processing of sports in volume. LR works for me. I don't have any problems. I would like to keep it that way. If one doesn't like it buy or rent something else. It is a broad market.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 17:43 UTC
On article Don't buy another lens, buy a flash instead (334 comments in total)
In reply to:

WillWeaverRVA: Or, since flashes are getting cheaper, why not have both?

I had a wedding business in the late nineties and early 2000s. I Used Bronica and Canon gear. I used Vivitar 283s with the Bronicas with film. The highest I went with ISOs was 800 and even then I worried about noise or grain. I did most weddings with ISO 400 at the highest and usually 160. Flash was indispensable and I was very good with a stop or two under flash fill. I have done some sports with flash particularly in those years. Things have changed I have not used flash for sports in quite a while because I can be successful today with ISOs up to 6400. One of the best swim pictures I ever took was with direct close flash. I have at least three flashes that I never use now. i knew how to quickly calculate one or two stop under flash exposures in my head and manually set them. A lost art.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2017 at 17:58 UTC
In reply to:

DA photo: I view some of my photography as art and have sold it that way. Ansel Adams freely admitted his darkroom enhancements. I can enhance a sky just by manipulating luminance sliders in lightroom. How many of you use the LR clarity slider as It improves the look of pictures. And what about the transform function to straighten buildings. My question is where does one draw the line. I worked for a paper never changed a picture and didn't have time anyway because of deadlines. I was in a home today where I looked at an artists paintings of the inlet she lives on. They are nice but they all are her pure invention. It is called art. The same can be done with photography and also be called art. In the over thirty years I have made photographs both professionally in my business and as a hobby the medium has changed enormously. It will be what it evolves to not what some of us would like it to be. There is room for all sorts of experimentation in producing images.

The question then becomes where do you draw the line?. Who draws it? It is clearly drawn in written guidelines in the print media. Certain edits are allowed. Look up the Reuters guidelines. Photographers have been manipulating skies for years. The Adobe Sky enhancement will make it easier as it currently takes some time to do it now as I have done it. Ansel Adams long ago described his dark room manipulations. What do purists think about that?

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2016 at 03:23 UTC

I view some of my photography as art and have sold it that way. Ansel Adams freely admitted his darkroom enhancements. I can enhance a sky just by manipulating luminance sliders in lightroom. How many of you use the LR clarity slider as It improves the look of pictures. And what about the transform function to straighten buildings. My question is where does one draw the line. I worked for a paper never changed a picture and didn't have time anyway because of deadlines. I was in a home today where I looked at an artists paintings of the inlet she lives on. They are nice but they all are her pure invention. It is called art. The same can be done with photography and also be called art. In the over thirty years I have made photographs both professionally in my business and as a hobby the medium has changed enormously. It will be what it evolves to not what some of us would like it to be. There is room for all sorts of experimentation in producing images.

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2016 at 03:09 UTC as 54th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

DA photo: After a few days shooting an airshow with a gray background while getting great exposures of the aircraft (no shadows) I put a blue sky with clouds background on one. It is hanging in my office. Photography is not a religion. There is no dogma as there was no dogma for Salvador Dali. Unclench where you are tight and live and let live.

Having done newspaper work I know what it means to be accurate. I think there is room for all genres and for free expression. All of it "is in the eye of the beholder" not in the eye of the photographer. Dali is still revered. We will see what survives.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2016 at 21:41 UTC

After a few days shooting an airshow with a gray background while getting great exposures of the aircraft (no shadows) I put a blue sky with clouds background on one. It is hanging in my office. Photography is not a religion. There is no dogma as there was no dogma for Salvador Dali. Unclench where you are tight and live and let live.

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2016 at 18:58 UTC as 74th comment | 5 replies

If you don't like plastic don't fly on the 787 because the wings are plastic (carbon fiber). The weak point on metal mount lenses is where the metal mount is joined to the plastic lens body. That does not exist on an all plastic lens. One can assume, then, that plastic is stronger, lighter and does not rust or corrode and does not deform as easily as metal. If you watch the wings flex on a 787 you can see it has a large plastic range depending on the actual material. That's why it is used on the 787. I see no problems with my 55-200M in terms of sharpness. This may not be true on larger, heavier lenses like my white 100-400 but it also weighs three pounds.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2016 at 12:51 UTC as 37th comment

I accidentally got into my own photo business in 1997. I did weddings, PR, newspaper sports, PR etc. I used a Canon 1N and Bronicas. I got successful pictures even then. In 2002 I went to digital and gear has gotten increasingly better since. I have always been able to get decent pictures and being able to digitally process my pictures has greatly improved their quality. In my former R&D endeavors the last five per cent was always the most difficult to achieve in a system. I think we are approaching that last five per cent in digital camera technology. We are expending an increasing amount for smaller increments of progress now mostly at the margins. Gear today for just taking pictures is superb with a great number of choices. I have an EOS M3. I think the M3 body represents some regression in what has been progression in mirrorless because of flaky point and shoot ergonomics, and sometimes slow focusing. I am excited about the 5M but not about the investment in the 3M.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 13:50 UTC as 44th comment

Hindsight from the sidelines laced with hubris is unbecoming. Having been on the other side in a different but highly technical and somewhat hazardous endeavor I have had to agonize over decisions that led to unforecast and unintended consequences. Hindsight is 20-20 but no one can see the future. There is a vast difference when one is actually responsible for actual outcomes rather than just writiing about them. Not withstanding the above the M5 looks pretty good to me and I think I will put in an order;however delivery will be too late to use it this Fall in New England. Despite your protestations Canon remains in businss. I have used them for over thirty years.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 21:06 UTC as 57th comment

I could buy an 80D for not much more.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 13:15 UTC as 47th comment | 2 replies

I would go buy an SL1 for less than half the price but I would be stuck with four M lenses.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 13:09 UTC as 48th comment

After buying an M3 and EVF a year ago that has proven to be somewhat frustrating, although producing decent pictures, I feel like like the groom who was left waiting at the church. A thousand bucks for a new body? ugh.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2016 at 12:29 UTC as 52nd comment
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (463 comments in total)

Although I regularly use the M3 I agree with rrccad. The damn menu drives me nuts at times. So does the viewfinder when it goes from one view to another as if driven by some unseen finger. I could go on. However I have gotten some very nice blow -ups with it and the lenses are inexpensive and better than my former Sony E mounts. . Maybe someone from Canon will read rrccad. What bothers me is that I like the lenses and the concept but I might have to wait for the successor to get resolution to the problems that rrccad stated. I have the EVF and don't mind it being separate as that allows a smaller body when off particularly with the 22mm f2.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 02:35 UTC as 26th comment
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (463 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: with evfs in mirrorless by sony panny fuji , oly. so very popular ,.i cant fathom the inability of canikon to grasp whats important &produce what folks want in the mirrorless realm:
a camera w\ a proper evf[if you like framing at arms length get iphone]
a camera w\ proper metal build,a real camera, not amorphous polycarbonate lumps like canon and nikon slrs of the last 20 yrs..while canikon mirrorless designs are attractive ..canon m3 &some nikon 1s are smart looking too,
canon and nikon are clueless generally with mirrorless as they have been with highend point and shoots
if nikon and canon produced mirrorless analogues of their late model rangefinders
with a trio of primes for each , can you imagine the success they would have ??
they would fly off the shelves and be the most exciting cameras from canikon in many decades... so i can guarantee they will never have the wisdom or fortitude to do such a thing ......just sayin

I don't worry about defaming a product or the maker. I have spent my time for almost thirty years learning how to use my equipment. I have been successful in producing a great number of pictures with a great variety of cameras. A lot have been published and sold. As for EVFs I have one for my M3. I like it because I can take it off and it can be tilted.

Link | Posted on Aug 21, 2016 at 19:40 UTC
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (463 comments in total)

I have an M3. Vignetting is not a problem with M lenses for me. The 24MP pictures enlarge very well. I have been at this professionally and not since 1988. I just wonder where all you technocrats are selling or producing pictures that requires endless nit picks about quality and ergonomics. I use the M3 as a walkaround and although I have complaints about the camera I use it a lot. I have had somewhere around twenty bodies MF, film 35 and dslr and two mirrorless. I have learned use all of them effectively.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2016 at 16:02 UTC as 36th comment

I am a former military and Airline Transport Pilot with 8000 hours flight time. Had I never done anything stupid in an airplane I would be self-righteous. BTW I am not a great fan of side stick controllers.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2016 at 17:32 UTC as 31st comment | 3 replies
On article Rebel in your pocket: Canon EOS M3 Review (463 comments in total)

I have this camera. It is schizoid. It makes really good pictures, doesn't do sports, but goes with me when I go out light. The menu frustrates me. The lenses are great for the price. I agree with the review.

Link | Posted on Aug 16, 2016 at 21:07 UTC as 121st comment | 1 reply
On article Canon EF-M 28mm F3.5 Macro real-world samples (17 comments in total)

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? The best is the enemy of the good. I use the M3 and the kit I described below as a light walkaround system. I have bigger and better equipment for more serious work. But, as an example I shoot swim meet action with L lenses on a 7DII. I bring the M3 along to do head shots because it is light and I get arm weary. I do a lot of them. These head shots are perfectly acceptable for enlarged prints and the web. I use the M3 for street and for parties. I don't care if your camera blows it away. I have gotten some beautiful printable landscapes with the 11-22. I use the M3 because it is light and unobtrusive. I have a camera, an 11-22, kit lens, a 55-200, and a 22mm f2, all for a total than $300 less than I paid for my 7DII. I think the 28mm will make a great addition and provide some fun shooting bugs.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2016 at 03:12 UTC as 8th comment
On article Canon EF-M 28mm F3.5 Macro real-world samples (17 comments in total)

I am an M3 user. If I stay with M lenses I can carry four lenses, the EVF and the body in a bag weighing less than four pounds. This lens is probably going to be one of them. The big appeal for me is the M3 24MP sensor, and the low weight, quality and low price of the M lenses. I think Canon has a sales winner with this lens judging from the publicity, interest and the initial sales. Yeah I know the M3 could be improved but the pictures I get enlarge very well.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2016 at 20:54 UTC as 12th comment

I can push-pull my mark II as an alternative. In fact I just did so to prove I am not dreaming.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2016 at 13:43 UTC as 42nd comment
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »