NDT0001

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Mar 20, 2009

Comments

Total: 260, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Can everyone please tell me how its better to filter in post? I havent heard it in 5 minutes

Link | Posted on Nov 16, 2017 at 23:30 UTC as 8th comment | 5 replies
On article Sharp's new 8K camera is $77,000 (167 comments in total)

Oh boy here we go again with the myopic comments. Its not made to compete with production cameras like Red and Alexa, although it has the capacity, its primarily a broadcast camera made specifically for the upcoming 2020 Japan Olympics which has been committed to broadcasting in 8k.

Link | Posted on Nov 10, 2017 at 22:07 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

CallumG: I bet everyone except smartphone "photographers" will have to pay.

ok...

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 22:45 UTC

Anyone actually read the article before the internet lynching? Show me any city on earth that doesent charge a location fee for large advertising projects. It clearly states non commercial photography and TV/documentary production is exempt. Please read before mashing the keyboard with your hands.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 22:40 UTC as 75th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

dash2k8: With Capture One (and PhotoDirector, and others) already on the market, there is no "need" for another RAW editor. What will break the deal for me is its cataloging capabilities: keywording, flagging, rating, etc.

Just because there are options, it doesent mean they are the right options. The more competing products for us to try the better.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 01:26 UTC
In reply to:

Mutovkin: I see what is essentially manual lens correction. It is probably a lot of effort to profile a lot of cameras for noise and lenses for artifacts, but that's where greatest advantage of various software products comes from - one click and specific noise profile applied for this camera at this ISO level and corrected for that specific lens.

That’s the advantage of using software from a big Corp like Adobe. They have whole divisions dedicated to implementing things like auto lens correction. It takes a lot of work to get that in there. Smaller companies don’t have the resources.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 01:23 UTC
On article First iPhone X hands-on field test with sample photos (384 comments in total)
In reply to:

Krakonosh: Pictures from X are crap, just as pics from my iPhone 7 and every other phone... At least to my eye. Improvements are definitely there, but still far behind my imaging needs.

So use a dedicated camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 21:19 UTC
On article First samples: Leica Thambar-M 90mm F2.2 (223 comments in total)

I get it’s a specialty lens but damn it’s expensive for a limited use optic.
Looks like you could achieve the same result with a Tiffen White pro mist filter or if your really cheap a controlled spray of clear hairspray into a protective filter.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2017 at 20:30 UTC as 115th comment
On article Canon EOS M100 review (769 comments in total)
In reply to:

dwill23: USB Charging is horrible. Get over it, and stop dinging camera companies for not supplying two ways to charge. Almost no camera does that anyway, and when they do it's only in-camera which is just awful. Please please stop, i'm afraid they'll listen to you and get rid of the wall charger....something you can leave in your hotel room while you're out actually using your camera with a spare battery.

I thought USB charging was dumb until I got a Sony rx100, now I love it and use it all the time as it’s very convenient especially when abroad.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2017 at 20:39 UTC
In reply to:

NDT0001: What a joke this is. His entire career is based upon on this type of conduct. And now all of a sudden the fashion industry is running for cover to avoid guilt by association? He never made any attempts to hide his methods and results yet he’s been hired by these publications for years. In a lot of ways I applauded him for at least being transparent about his position. On the other hand you have The magazines and blogs who feed off his perversity and now wish to take the moral high ground only because it may affect their readership. No prospective model can ever claim that they didn’t know what kind of material he produces and the methods he uses to achieve it no matter how young or naive.

Do a web search of his images. There is no absolutely no question what the result will be if you decide to debase yourself for fame. This is not some fashion photographer who dose tasteful nudes that end up in vogue. Everybody who has any association or aspiration with the fashion industry knows what Richardson does and how he does it. Now ask yourself, forearmed with this simple research from any web browser, would you put yourself in this position?

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 21:57 UTC

What a joke this is. His entire career is based upon on this type of conduct. And now all of a sudden the fashion industry is running for cover to avoid guilt by association? He never made any attempts to hide his methods and results yet he’s been hired by these publications for years. In a lot of ways I applauded him for at least being transparent about his position. On the other hand you have The magazines and blogs who feed off his perversity and now wish to take the moral high ground only because it may affect their readership. No prospective model can ever claim that they didn’t know what kind of material he produces and the methods he uses to achieve it no matter how young or naive.

Link | Posted on Oct 26, 2017 at 20:14 UTC as 39th comment | 9 replies
On article Video: Sony a7R III first look (155 comments in total)

I get that internet forums are all about the 'my opinion is more valid than anyone elses', but can we just stop for a minute and acknowledge the power and capability of this camera crammed into such a small package? The speed, resolution, focus tracking, 4k video and more. It is quite simply outstanding. I suspect commentators here complaining that it doesn't have or do this or that, have never made a good picture in their lives, or are simply too spoiled to realise the technological leaps and bounds electronics have made in the past few years.

Link | Posted on Oct 25, 2017 at 20:32 UTC as 32nd comment | 3 replies
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (631 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mateus1: Both are not worth this money. Overpriced.
There are many better offers and cheaper in m4/3 and APS-C.

Your opinion, not a fact. I love my RX100IV. It fits in my pocket and gives great images. I was happy to pay the asking price and would pay it again.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 22:02 UTC
On article Canon G1 X III vs. Sony Cybershot RX100 V (631 comments in total)
In reply to:

Superka: Canon is a clear looser.

Sony is a little tighter.

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 18:38 UTC
In reply to:

CQui: I have nothing against using this kind of filters but I never took a picture where the horizon is a line, there is always some mountain in the background or some house/tree/person in the foreground that would be above and bellow the horizon.
And if I don't get one of those I move the camera to get one, I feel it is better composition... is it only me?

im guessing you might not live on the coast? I do, and most of my landscapes are a clean horizon with a foreground like a seapool, swirly ocean break etc..

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 09:52 UTC

Some people like to use filters and some like to do it in post.
Can we just accept that and move on?

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 09:15 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

NDT0001: The anger on these forums is hilarious. Im happy with the subscription model. <$15 PM is a bargain for 2 top tier pieces of software. If you cant justify that in your business, you better change business because its the cheapest thing in photography you will get. If you are a hobbyist, find an alternative, there are several to choose from. Its a predictable month to month expense and seamless and incremental in its integration. I prefer it over big yearly or 2 yearly updates which may go wrong. Do people here feel the same about their Netflix or cable or utilities bills?

^ You conveniently forgot to add the cost of Photoshop to your argument. It comes as part of the <$15p/m and is indispensable to working professionals. Photoshop alone used to cost close to $1000.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:28 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)

The anger on these forums is hilarious. Im happy with the subscription model. <$15 PM is a bargain for 2 top tier pieces of software. If you cant justify that in your business, you better change business because its the cheapest thing in photography you will get. If you are a hobbyist, find an alternative, there are several to choose from. Its a predictable month to month expense and seamless and incremental in its integration. I prefer it over big yearly or 2 yearly updates which may go wrong. Do people here feel the same about their Netflix or cable or utilities bills?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:16 UTC as 405th comment | 7 replies
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr Thompson: R.I.P. Adobe. This is the final straw.

Every time an article like this is on a camera forum about a million people huff and puff and say " This is the FINAL STRAW, good bye Adobe and good riddance!"
Yet they have increased their user base since the CC model. Curious that....

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:09 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1630 comments in total)
In reply to:

KoolKool: i use lightroom for free so i don't care! :D

^ Theft.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 06:06 UTC
Total: 260, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »