piratejabez

Joined on Aug 2, 2010

Comments

Total: 485, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Opinion: DJI has abandoned professionals (367 comments in total)

Great article. I hope DJI does the right thing.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 17:49 UTC as 24th comment
On article Photo of the week: Torment (71 comments in total)

Great image! Though personally I'd like to see a little more diversity in the featured images on this site.

Link | Posted on Jul 24, 2017 at 17:31 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

MightyMike: I did poorly, 3 out of 10, now reading the comments I can see why, I wasn't looking for meaningless random alterations, stuff that doesn't help the photo, stuff I'd never do to a photo, I was looking for way someone might deliberately alter the image to make it better and ended up imaging things that may never have been altered in the first place or completely drawing a blank when the alteration was pointless. I'm very critical about my photos, I prefer to maintain realism most of the time, I've seen many very poor edits on these forums but i won't call any of the people who poorly edited them bad photographer or poor editors as we all are at different skill levels with different backgrounds and have learned different things. If it was edited and looks good who am i to judge unless its being passed off as a super accurate portrayal. I'll wear my 3/10 gladly as i went into this test with the expectation that the edits were logical and rational. Still feel it was a waste of time.

I agree that the edits were pretty random, but that was made pretty clear in the introductory video when they overviewed the types of edits they would be showcasing (though apparently some people either missed or never got the video)... in any case, you can always re-take the test.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 17:55 UTC

10/10 :D Interesting test.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 16:43 UTC as 42nd comment
In reply to:

tinternaut: What happens when you push the exposure? Is there there any latitude hiding at the highlight end of the available DR?

tinternaut— got it, thanks :)

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 22:38 UTC
In reply to:

tinternaut: What happens when you push the exposure? Is there there any latitude hiding at the highlight end of the available DR?

(I hate to be pedantic, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you "push" the exposure in post to brighten/bring out details int he shadows, and you "pull" it when you darken/bring out details in the highlights.)

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2017 at 16:57 UTC
On article Should I buy a Canon EOS 6D Mark II? (441 comments in total)

Holy crap... what's everyone's problem?

Barney, thank you for the insightful, thorough (and free!) comparisons. This article is very well thought-out and organized, and should be very helpful to those in the situations you mention. Cheers!

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 19:17 UTC as 58th comment | 2 replies
On article Should I buy a Canon EOS 6D Mark II? (441 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: @Barney
You describe the 6DII as an 'excellent camera' with 'excellent image quality', despite acknowledging that it has a dynamic range that is 3EV behind the 3 year old Nikon D750.

Elsewhere you draw attention to the lack of 4K and very limited video spec, but don't mention the absence of in-body IBIS which first appeared in a DSLR in 2008. Clearly the 6DII has never seen a envelope and would not know how to push it, but if it is still 'excellent' isn't this essentially a meaningless accolade?

I can't imagine a more disappointing camera. Canon users were bracing themselves for a basic proposition, with no 4K, let alone breakthrough features. But in the event the camera appears to not even offer an upgraded sensor, let alone one equal to the 5D4, which is behind rivals anyway.

Isn't this camera actually a slap in the face for its users? Who have waited quite a long time. Shouldn't DPreview be standing up for them rather than helping Canon sell something that should've been better?

"I can't imagine a more disappointing camera." XD

Link | Posted on Jul 19, 2017 at 19:15 UTC
In reply to:

landscaper1: Mr. Murabayashi obviously hasn’t realized that a copyright is worthless unless the photographer can afford to hire a lawyer and pay the court costs to sue the infringers. Even then, there are actual examples of courts awarding less than what the plaintiff spent pursuing the case, to say nothing of an award for loss of income.

As a non-lawyer, I’d surmise that a judge might easily reason that anyone who puts their work product in the public domain must not have valued it all that much in the first place.

Yes, you can submit hundreds of thousands of photos at the same time (they can be tiny thumbnails rather than high-res originals) for a very low price (around $50). Many professionals I know do this once or twice a year as a matter of course, and it pays off when their rights are infringed.

Your chances of winning a court case increase exponentially if you have actually bothered to register your copyright with the government. It's what gives "teeth" to the law.

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 22:29 UTC

👏

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 16:21 UTC as 8th comment

Maybe at CP+ we'll find out what they look like when cut in half :)

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 16:20 UTC as 23rd comment

"But this lovingly formed camera gear will never help you take a photo, because they're made of paper." ;)

Link | Posted on Jul 18, 2017 at 16:20 UTC as 24th comment

Fantastic timing after yesterday's TBT :) This is a MUCH better way to do "disposable digital"!

Link | Posted on Jul 14, 2017 at 15:50 UTC as 28th comment
On article Fujifilm X-A3 Review (211 comments in total)
In reply to:

CCD FTW: It's interesting how the A6000 is treated as a red headed step child around DPR. It's either 'too old' or 'too cheap' it would seem. It's not top tier enough and so only the 6300/6500 go into discussion and yet in this category we need to look at other low end POS, rather than it because 'we can't believe they still make it'. Also what about the A5100?

Problem is nobody is making anything remotely close for the price point, YEARS after it came out. Olympus only have PDAF in their $2k flagship. Fuji are better but still really only the X-T20/2/XP2 are superior and all are much more expensive. Canon has the M10 in its price bracket, no need to say any more. Panasonic are probably the closest with the GX85, which IS an interesting alternative. EVF is poor, but 4K is good and so is the iBIS. Outright IQ might be behind a little way though.

But here we are, reviewing another low end mirrorless camera and pretending the real competition doesn't exist.

From the conclusion: "When placed up against cameras like the Nikon D3400, Olympus E-PL8, Panasonic GX850 and the aging Sony a6000, the X-A3 just can't keep up."

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2017 at 17:12 UTC
In reply to:

M Chambers: $1,950 is pretty steep for an APS-C camera.

$1,950 is pretty cheap for a Leica.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2017 at 19:36 UTC
On article Photo of the week: The Shining (79 comments in total)

Lovely shot!

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2017 at 15:44 UTC as 6th comment

Citograph: Everything is in focus!

Photographers: Which is another way of saying nothing is.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 18:59 UTC as 51st comment
In reply to:

RedFox88: Always in focus = iPhone

Not mine, unfortunately :(

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 17:06 UTC

WTH?

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 17:06 UTC as 67th comment

Wow, it's so sunny everywhere :)

Though most of these look like they have "filters" applied, but I love the concept and end results. It's an excellent study in composition, and also a fantastic way to spend time observing how people live around the globe.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2017 at 16:19 UTC as 2nd comment
Total: 485, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »