rbach44

Joined on Nov 4, 2011

Comments

Total: 87, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

While I wish that the manufacturers would innovate a bit more just like the next guy, I think we take for granted how much time effort, money, and risk goes into these products. How many truly unique products are there currently?

Its a very irrational marketplace, with a lot of misinformation, misguided ideas, and strange\strong opinions floating around. But those are the people who are buying, so cameras must be made for them. In fact, you could argue that cameras are made more for the geeks than for actual photographers.

Imagine if they started making an F1 car that you could take for your morning commute? It wouldn’t be much of an F1 car anymore. It becomes a strange frankenstein of cost cutting, technological limitations, and compromises wrapped up in a package that needs to “feel” good on top of it.

And that is what the camera industry has turned into: weird mixes of limitations, strange expectations, and uninformed customers that spend a lot of money. Blame us too.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2017 at 21:37 UTC as 27th comment
In reply to:

Clyde Thomas: The photographer who dies with the most paying clients wins..?

No... but it you are trying to run a business it'll certainly help.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2017 at 18:49 UTC

Just another example of the unbalanced environment that creatives have been facing for a while now, where creatives are expected to sacrifice income for exposure or portfolio/resume building.

If you want to post your work here, by all means go ahead. But don’t believe the spin that its for your benefit. The chances of you profiting from this relationship are minuscule compared to the certainty that someone will be profiting off of your work. Unless they provide some data to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe this is a one-sided relationship

Also, it is not wise to confuse the difference between sharing work with an audience (the Chance the Rapper example) and giving away a service for free. Big difference.

I know I worked hard (and payed a lot) for my design degree and the skills I’ve gained, and I see no need to give away my services for free for someone else to profit off of it. Creatives can get exposure AND get paid for their work, but it takes some work.

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2017 at 18:03 UTC as 72nd comment | 2 replies
On article Nine new lens adapters announced for the Fujifilm GFX (90 comments in total)

Who on Earth would put M42, OM, or Pentax K lenses on a medium format camera? That AF Contax 645 one looks pretty sweet though…

Link | Posted on Aug 4, 2017 at 12:25 UTC as 5th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

rbach44: Dear Leica, I have a plan for you:

Please start making lenses for other systems. People want your lenses way more than your interchangeable lens cameras. Give Zeiss some competition. I know I’d buy a bunch even at some whacky price. I’m sure I’m not the only one.

"Then Leica would have to reverse engineer the Canon or Nikon mounts and controls."

There's probably about 20 other brands that have done this is in the past...

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

rbach44: Dear Leica, I have a plan for you:

Please start making lenses for other systems. People want your lenses way more than your interchangeable lens cameras. Give Zeiss some competition. I know I’d buy a bunch even at some whacky price. I’m sure I’m not the only one.

Sure that’d work too, just like that new 28 Summaron.

I’d like some high quality ones though as well. Something like a modern version of R lenses that I could put on my Nikon. That’d be sweet. Both seem like good business for Leica, and with the “classic” versions they wouldn’t even have to give up their silly heritage shtick.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 18:42 UTC
In reply to:

rbach44: Dear Leica, I have a plan for you:

Please start making lenses for other systems. People want your lenses way more than your interchangeable lens cameras. Give Zeiss some competition. I know I’d buy a bunch even at some whacky price. I’m sure I’m not the only one.

The price is not necessarily the concern. Its more of a ready made, adapterless solution that I’m talking about, I’m not interested in putting cine lenses on my still camera. Something like the Zeiss ZF/ZE lenses but yknow, Leica. Prices in line with the price of even the M lenses would be fine.

I’m sure that would make a lot of people happy. I would like to be able to use a Leica lens without having to use their cameras or an adapter.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 17:06 UTC
In reply to:

rbach44: Dear Leica, I have a plan for you:

Please start making lenses for other systems. People want your lenses way more than your interchangeable lens cameras. Give Zeiss some competition. I know I’d buy a bunch even at some whacky price. I’m sure I’m not the only one.

I meant lenses that I and most photographers would use. Putting a huge 5-figure cine lens on a camera for stills would be miserable.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 14:34 UTC

Dear Leica, I have a plan for you:

Please start making lenses for other systems. People want your lenses way more than your interchangeable lens cameras. Give Zeiss some competition. I know I’d buy a bunch even at some whacky price. I’m sure I’m not the only one.

Link | Posted on Aug 3, 2017 at 14:20 UTC as 31st comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

photophile: Slightly digressing from the main story here - just how large a print can you make from a 100MP resolution ? Would it be enough for those large advert posters/hoardings you used to see on major roads, advertising breakfast cereals/ latest cinema films etc ? Come to think of - why have those large posters disappeared from the streets - migration of ads online, increased use of LED displays, or insufficient resolution from digital ?

Photophile,

Prepress guy at a large format print shop here.

Unsatisfying answer is: it depends. Its often a balance of viewing distance, native resolution available, and quality of the original file and how well it will take to upsizing. Large posters or banners are almost never printed at 300DPI, partly due to the fact that the resolution is not needed for those viewing distances and partially because it makes our workflow more efficient to work with the smaller files. Big posters are something like 75-150DPI and billboards look great as low as 36 DPI if they are seen from the highway. It all depends.

In all of my years doing this I’ve never seen a native 100MP file. Skilled pros know how to shoot and prep a file that will enlarge nicely, native resolution is only part of the puzzle. We’ve been printing billboards since 12MP has considered a big file, the high res sensors just make things a bit easier.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 14:51 UTC

What constitutes this as fine art? The same old night skyline and landscape photos but with a lot more pixels? A lot of time spent on an image we’ve seen a thousand times before? The same few subjects that stand still enough for stitching? I’d rather see some good prints of interesting subjects that were chosen for artistic rather than technical reasons, gigapixel or not.

As a prepress artist at a large format print shop, I am deeply skeptical of these things. There always seems to be a new kid on the block claiming superior prints based on lots and lots of resolution. Resolution is only part of the equation (and with a bit of time and software, pretty easy to master). Remember, billboards look great at 36-72 DPI…

I’m not sure what the purpose of this “gigapixel” thing is besides geekery. But I will reserve judgement until I can see one of these prints in person.

Link | Posted on Aug 2, 2017 at 14:41 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Roland Karlsson: There is a great misunderstanding in many posts here. Many here think he just has copied images and claimed he is the photographer. And indeed - if he had done that - he is a simple thief. But no - that is not what he has done.

Look at the image above. It looks like an Instagram post made by rastajay92.

So what Prince has done is combining an image, by Donald Graham with an Instagram frame that says rastajay92 and then adding a text he finds suitable. A kind of transformation, which is what he also claims.

So - the judge is wrong when he says that Prince has done no alteration. 100% wrong. So, indeed, if that is the motivation why to convict Prince, it is totally wrong.

What the judge needs to show is that the altered image breaks the Copyright law. If he cannot show that, Prince should go free.

I think thats the point he’s making… he is trying ask where the line is between plagiarism and appropriation in the social media age. Whatever opinion you have on it, it does seem to be getting people talking.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 15:27 UTC

I don’t think this is photography at all, and I don’t think I would be happy if any of my images were used in this way.

That being said, its an interesting conversation in the modern age. What is an authentic photograph in 2017? We take other people’s images and use them for our own ends every day on social media. With ideas and images being copied so commonly and spread so quickly, why is this so much more offensive? Its good conversation and I would be interested to be see how this pans out in court.

BUT… selling these for 6 figures? That seems petty. Starting the conversation and getting the world a bit riled up to make point is something I support. But selling other’s images for large sum of money is not, and seems to discredit an otherwise interesting argument.

Link | Posted on Jul 28, 2017 at 15:25 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Frank_BR: Illuminated controls? Hmmm... A virtuoso pianist would consider ridiculous a Steinway & Sons piano with illuminated keys. He does not need to see the keys to play the piano perfectly. Likewise, a real professional photographer does not need to see the controls of a camera; he knows them by touch.

Nikon + Canon are the only large manufacturers that makes a real professional camera built for serious use.

Most other cameras are built for amateurs that want to FEEL like a pro but don’t actually have the same needs as a real pro. Nor are they interested in learning and implementing the full set of professional features. This is why genuinely useful features on professional cameras are baffling to some. Because they are not the intended user.

Such is the confusing state of camera design in 2017…

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 17:16 UTC

Why does everyone make such a big deal about DPAF or on-sensor AF points? The D5 has neither of them and, according to reviews at least, seems to be one of the finest AF tracking cameras ever. Same thing with the Canon 1 series, Why worry about the underlying tech if it performs well?

I can’t help but feel like AF specs are the new focus since the MP race is pretty much over…

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 15:43 UTC as 44th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Frank_BR: Illuminated controls? Hmmm... A virtuoso pianist would consider ridiculous a Steinway & Sons piano with illuminated keys. He does not need to see the keys to play the piano perfectly. Likewise, a real professional photographer does not need to see the controls of a camera; he knows them by touch.

A camera ≠ a piano. Not at all…

Link | Posted on Jul 27, 2017 at 15:11 UTC
In reply to:

xectis: So Nikon is still holding on to DSLR's like a General Custard.

Haven’t you heard? The SLR is over. The A9 is out now. It has a lot of AF points and FPS. Its for professional sport photographers. Nikon is out of business now.

- Internet Guy

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 20:39 UTC
In reply to:

rbach44: Something I just love about Nikon:

Look that swooshy curve on the top right of the first image form the flash house to the dial. Totally not necessary and just lovely. Design for the sake of beauty. I’d happily take that over the unfinished brick look of an A9, (or even a styled brick like the M or SL).

And the fact that they are also ergonomically better than just about any other camera out there is remarkable.

The A99 looks like it would pop if you put a pin in it...

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 19:31 UTC

Something I just love about Nikon:

Look that swooshy curve on the top right of the first image form the flash house to the dial. Totally not necessary and just lovely. Design for the sake of beauty. I’d happily take that over the unfinished brick look of an A9, (or even a styled brick like the M or SL).

And the fact that they are also ergonomically better than just about any other camera out there is remarkable.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 18:36 UTC as 121st comment | 6 replies
On article Ten things we're hoping for from the Nikon D850 (478 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photog74: Agree with all of your points except for the smaller body.
Why on Earth do you want the camera to be smaller than the D810?
The D5 is bulky, but the D810 is not - the D850 ought to be the same size.

Ive been wondering for years why they don’t just throw it all in a D700 body and call it a day. Best compromise between size/build/weight and perceived “heft” ever, at least in my opinion.

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2017 at 16:36 UTC
Total: 87, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »