Paul Grupp

Paul Grupp

Lives in United States Portland, OR, United States
Works as a Full-time professional photographer
Has a website at
Joined on Oct 28, 2002
About me:

I've shot just about everything, and am hungry for more!


Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5
In reply to:

dwill23: More political stories on dpreview. What a shame.

Politics forced a wedge between police and half the country (dems). This story has NOTHING to do with digital Photography reviews.

The sad part is, every dept settles, and normally much faster than 5 years. This is a fail, not justice. Hopefully it will be paid out after Trump's tax cuts so she'll get more than $33k after taxes.

You can't be serious. In these tumultuous times, photographers find themselves taking pictures where they can easily come in direct contact with police officers, many of whom have proven to be not shy in violating civil rights of photographers. This fact, combined with average photographer's fuzzy understanding of their rights and responsibilities, makes this a vital subject wherever photographers convene and exchange information. Over the years, DPReview has hosted healthy debates on subjects like privacy, publicity rights, and the ind and outs of model releases and when permission is - and is not - required to take or use a photo. This subject is no less appropriate, especially since there is a very real risk of physical violence and possible arrest when dealing with law enforcement personnel, some of whom don't know the law, and others willing to bend or break it to avoid being caught on camera.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 16:48 UTC
In reply to:

Hanoise: Adobe is a company who has worked out how to rip customers off completely and utterly.
They have worked out how to charge all adobe user to pay for EVERY SINGLE UPDATE and pay through their teeth!

My subscription has finished this month, and I am looking for different options now for video and stills editing software. I would be much happier to pay a one off fee of many hundreds then keep giving adobe money mo th after month for ever.

It will be much more affordable to pay a lot in one hit, then have money ripped out of your account every month forever,.


How ironic that you're complaining about a software upgrade that provides support for among many other things, a Fuji camera that costs $6500 with lens over $2500. Total cost for the entire set of Photoshop, Adobe Camera Raw, Adobe Bridge, and Lightroom? A paltry $9.95 per month. And here you are whining like a baby. For most of us serious amateur or full-time photographers, these software packages are irreplaceable must haves, and yet they cost less than your monthly big date at McDonalds.

Seriously- if you truly understood the size of the team and the energy spent keeping Adobe software mission-critical reliable, you'd slap yourself for being such a pathetic cheapskate. You can't keep youself in wheels on your skateboard or buy clothes for your Barbie doll for what it costs to acess the entire goodness of the Adobe photo suite. Photography is neither an inexpensive hobby nor an easy profession to make a living at, but any way you look at it, Adobe software is a rare bargain.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2017 at 08:45 UTC

Nikon should focus its energies on getting bought out by Sony, who are in a position to maintain the venerable Nikon DSLR business.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 19:22 UTC as 193rd comment | 2 replies

Any serious hobbyist or professional who thinks that it's worth switching to another platform just because Adobe rents a combination of Photoshop and Lightroom for a measly $9.95/month is either just playing around or being flat-out unrealistic. I get it -- some of us would prefer to own the software. Well, that's not on the table. The question is, if you are serious, is $9.95 a month really burdensome? Not even close. And if you have invested hundreds, maybe thousands of hours in learning the ins and outs of Adobe products, switching to something else because you think $9.95 is too much to pay is being penny smart and pound foolish.

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2015 at 06:44 UTC as 66th comment | 33 replies

It is very clear to me that this product line was conceived with very little Nikon USA/Europe input, and is designed primarily for the tastes of consumers in the Japanese home market. I think its a complete miss outside Japan -- too fidgety cute with too many little parts and pieces, all of which are far too expensive.

Outside Japan this product line will be an embarassment that will quietly disappear over the next year.

Link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 20:56 UTC as 23rd comment | 1 reply
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5