Dvlee

Joined on Nov 29, 2011

Comments

Total: 212, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Canon shows off new PowerShot N100 'Story Camera' (162 comments in total)
In reply to:

noflashplease: The concept of a picture of the photographer within the intended picture is something that doesn't immediately appeal to most North American, English speaking photography enthusiasts. The picture-in-a-picture concept is way too "meta" for this forum. However, it's a big world and there might a more obvious application in other global markets, such as non-American social networks in non-English speaking countries.

Personally, I wouldn't want to have to "smile and say cheese" every time I take a still photo, but I'm sure that you can turn that rearward facing camera off.

I'm not the intended market and I can really see parents and grandparents buying this camera as a gift. We can only hope that Canon has identified the market niche for this camera and can communicate the benefits of the product to the intended consumers. It's not for me but that doesn't mean that it won't appeal to someone.

I think this feature could be very popular with narcissistic teen-aged girls in America.

I have to disagree with regards to the appeal of such a feature in North America. North America teens are as frivolous, trendy and gullible as teens in other nations. Camera and cell phone manufacturers frequently make products available only in their domestic or regional market before introducing it to the US or global market. Since most of these devices are made in Asia by Asian companies, Asians may see products that never get into the American market. This creates the false impression that they are more hip to new products than Americans are. American teen are certainly not lacking in narcissism, so I could see them embracing this feature, but not at that price-point.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2014 at 19:46 UTC
On article Want to remember something? Don't take a photo (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: I didn't know a psychologist can be called a "scientist"!!!

I always learned that science deals with theory and facts; facts that are usually indisputable.
Not sure how much in psychology you could label as indisputable facts, if any.

For someone to take a few students on a field trip, then publish her findings to the world as "science" is perplexing, and amusing to me. That goes a long way to tell me about how psychology professors do their research!

I think she herself needs to see a psychologist, but a good one, if there are any!

Keep on shooting, guys and girls. Twenty years down the road, when you look at your pictures, you'll have a vivid memory of every one of them.

Just my humble opinion, and my 2-cents. You are of course entitled to your own opinion.
For me, this study (if you can call it a study) is ridiculous, and is dismissed.

Alison looks good in the picture :) ... if I recall her name correctly (again, dealing with memory)! :)

Yes...psychology is a science...so is economics, film making, fashion design, auto racing... even photography. it's not so much what the subject is that makes it science, it's how it is studied or practiced. When we cook an omelet, there are a lot of chemical processes going on. When we just blend the ingredients and toss them in a pan we are practicing the act of cooking but not the science. When we endeavor to understand the processes involved and experiment with different ingredients, proportions and methods in order to cook the perfect omelet, we are engaging in the science of cooking and at the same time mastering the art. Art itself is science, as we not only need to learn the processes and technology of the craft, but also the science of perception and aesthetics.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2013 at 22:30 UTC
On article Want to remember something? Don't take a photo (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: Look at all these scientists with their own research disproving this one!

Didn't know we had so many scientists on this site.

Everyone that posts is SO awesome! They must be superior to other inferior people!

Some people act as if scientists are Gods and the scientific method is infallible. I have worked in the sciences long enough and known enough scientists to know that neither of those things are true. And I have known as many non scientists that were as intelligent and as capable of studying something and drawing conclusions as credentialed scientists are. Because the non scientists studies were not conducted with the scientific method does not necessarily mean they are invalid, in fact many scientific studies are conducted simply to confirm what has already been concluded through anecdotal observation by ordinary people. My experience has been that if I assigned 2 individual scientists to separately undertake a study to answer a particular question, they would both use different methods and come up with different results. This is especially true with medical, psychological and sociological studies which have many variables and require large sample groups to overcome. Even then . . .

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2013 at 06:41 UTC
On article Want to remember something? Don't take a photo (183 comments in total)

While the casual snapshooter may just grab a picture and not pay as much attention at what they are seeing, a serious photographer would look even more closely at the subject than a person not taking a picture might. She would study not only the shape color and texture of the subject, but also the way the light hits it, the shadows that fall upon it, reflections in it's surface. She will pay more attention to what is behind or next to the subject. And if the subject is animate, the photographer will observe that motion and try to take the shot at the right moment.

Whether or not the person has less or more recall of the situation when they take or don't take a picture would be highly variable, depending upon the situation and the person. I have found that sometimes that act of photography distracts from the act of experiencing the event. But sometimes it forces me to look much closer at what is in front of me than I might have were I not taking a picture.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2013 at 23:36 UTC as 60th comment
On article Want to remember something? Don't take a photo (183 comments in total)
In reply to:

SRHEdD: It is more subtle than that. I live on Florida's Space Coast, and was lucky enough to get tickets to what turned out to be the last night launch of the Space Shuttle. All geared up and ready, I waited at the closest place even VIPs are allowed. The countdown reached "liftoff" and in that short delay from the time the sound reached us, I was compelled to just lower the camera and take in the sight and sound of that moment. Would I have grabbed a few pics of the launch? Most likely. But others with better access privilege will have pics I can always see. I've never regretted just living that moment without a camera stuck to my face.

I DO agree with the research. You can be so deep into apertures and shutter speeds and DOF and composition that you lose a sense of what's going on. The photo alone can't always capture the enormity of the moment.

I once made the great mistake of watching the Navy Blue Angels through the viewfinder. I got hundreds of similar shots, a few of them were actually good, but I missed the experience of seeing them fly around in the big blue sky. What I saw was a tightly framed view. I learned to watch air shows and similar experience without impairing my view with cameras or binoculars. I take the time to get some shots, but I weigh which is going to be better...getting the shot or seeing the event with my own eyes.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2013 at 22:42 UTC

One of the virtues of the Nikon and Canon systems is the wide availablity of third party accessories. When weighing the decision of which brand camera to buy, the option to use third party accessories is a strong selling point.

With each new camera I have purchased in the past ten years, the batteries have changed, and I can easily burn through three or four batteries in a day. The cost of extra batteries and accessories add up and could be a deal breaker. Being able to buy aftermarket brands makes the camera more affordable, or leaves more in the budget allowing one to buy a better model camera, ir perhaps a quality lens instead of the kit lens.

Nikon is shooting itself in the foot on this one by makeing the Nikon system a little less desirable, at least with the specific models affected. Since all these models are the less expensive models, this has a more significant impact than it would for the top models

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2013 at 22:38 UTC as 22nd comment
On article Adobe hack affects 38 million users, not 2.9 million (156 comments in total)
In reply to:

drdancm: I'm currently still on hold with Experian who is the provider for the complementary 1 yr credit monitoring. This is the fourth time I am on the phone with them and they are still unable to get me to login under my newly created account, at protectmyid.com.

I have wasted at least 4 hrs on the computer and on the phone. It has been 3 days that I have been unable to get the account working. I spoke with 3 different very nice reps who have done all they know to fix the problem but I still get the same message that my login is unsuccessful and I need to either e-mail support or call them at the provided phone number.

A recent program on 60 Minutes reported that getting any response. much less getting the credit beureaus do fix any errors or problems is next to impossible. The way the credit agencies operate is a travesty. In this era if cyber crime and identity theft, we need a system that actually works for the consumers. That doesn't help you (or me) now.

The best suggestion I can make is gp tp your bank, ask them to reissue the credit card with a new number, so the number they have stolen will be invalid. Under circumstances of a credit card number being hacked, the bank can issue a new credit card number while retaining the history of the original credit account.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2013 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

JWest: How odd to call playing games a "passive" activity. I suppose it depends on the type of games they're referring to. Most of the games I've played require plenty of "complex reasoning", "abstract thinking" and "continuous and prolonged mental challenge".

I think it's pretty obvious that keeping your brain active is going to help prevent its decline. My Dad is re-learning photography at the moment, having owned an SLR in the film days, but been away from it for a while. I'm glad he is - I enjoy being able to help him out with his questions.

Not all games are created equal. Perhaps the writer was thinking in terms of the popular video games which involve mostly eye/hand coordination, which may not improve thought processes but do develop ones ability to react quckly to rapidly changing visual stimuli.

Other games may involve deep analysis and strategic thinking, mathematical calculation and verbal problem solving, all of which have positive long term benefits, if practiced throughout a lifetime.

But outside of eye hand coordination, many of the most popular video games do not offer any other mental challenges.

One of the biggest downsides of video games is that they require long hours sitting, which in and of itself is not healthy, but also uses up free time that could otherwise be spent engaging in physical or more mentally challenging activities.

Link | Posted on Oct 30, 2013 at 18:20 UTC
On article Ten things we learned this week (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

KariIceland: Let's just call it "Ricoh" As Pentax is dead to me, the body's are of worse design, and the old design style of Pentax is GONE

@ Groucher; That's not really a fair assessment to say that most of those features have little value when taking pictures. These cameras are packed full of usefull features. Which ones you use depends upon your needs, skill level and approach to photography. I always work from RAW files, so picture styles, color balance bracketing and many other automatic functions are useless to me, but to other photographers, those features might be very uselful. Those companies already make a range of cameras to meet the needs of different kinds of photographers. There's no harm in including those features you might not use, in fact it would be more costly to build more models to meet the specific needs of individual photographers than to include as many features as possible into fewer models.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2013 at 01:54 UTC
On article Ten things we learned this week (91 comments in total)
In reply to:

KariIceland: I don't mind reviews about cellphones, what I do mind is that you seem to be gving unbalanced reviews when it comes to iphones like if you were being paid by apple. However I do like iphones, yes they are good, but please stop being FANBOYISH in your reviews of them, be FACTUAL don't become PROMOTIONAL

Smart phones did not take over for low end compacts, they created a whole new catagory below low end compacts. They created a cataogory of camera for people whose interest in photography is so low that carrying even a low end compact camera is too much of a bother...which turns out to be most of the people who owned low end compacts! They say that the best camera is the one you have with you, but I've found that people who own low end cameras, as tiny as they are, often do not bring their cameras with them! But people who own bulky DSLRs are more likely to drag their cameras with them everywhere they go. For the average person, the cell phone camera means not having to think about bringing their camera because it's built into the phone. So in that regard the cell phone camera is better, only because they have it with them.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2013 at 01:25 UTC

In the above poll , there should have been an "all of the above" option because all those things are of concern... except "I thnk it might work fine."

I'm actually using the subscription option now because when factoring in the initial cost of CS6 plus upgrades down the road, and other economic factors, it makes more economic sense.

But due to the many changes the photography market and the economy have undergone, there have been many photographers, amateurs and pros alike, that have had to tighten their belts and cut back on monthly costs.

Being dependent upon a credit card that can be charged monthly and an internet connection to keep PS functional might mean that many folks who are struggling through this rough economy would lose access to PS.

I muddled thru with CS3 for 5 plus years, thru unemployment and lean times, I still had PS to work with. If it was a subscription service, I would have had to let it lapse and turn to GIMP or some other program to continue photography.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2013 at 16:32 UTC as 414th comment | 2 replies
On article Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction (1841 comments in total)

Be sure to save all your files as TIFFs or some other universal file format so you can open them in some other software.

This opens up the opportunity for some other company to develop a competing program. If Adobe ends perpetual licensing they will create a whole new market of consumers eager to dump Adobe. Google just acquired NIK...maybe Google could develp a stand alone professional grade program that offwers perpetual license? They have the know how and the resources to do it.

Disgruntled and rebelious PS user will be stampeeding to whomever offers an alternative.

Link | Posted on May 8, 2013 at 05:21 UTC as 656th comment
On article You'll have to wait a "year-ish" for Google Glass (76 comments in total)

This creates something of a conflict of rights. The right to freely take videos and photographs and the right of individuals to not be photographed and recorded without their permission.

Photographers have been dealing with this conflict for ages, but this takes things to a whole new level.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2013 at 19:56 UTC as 34th comment | 2 replies
On article You'll have to wait a "year-ish" for Google Glass (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deleted pending purge: Well, someone can begin working on a wireless device that disables or scrambles all image and sound-recording gadgets within, say, 50 meters around it.
I imagine many would like to have something like that installed on their premises, so it should be on the shelves sooner than in a year-ish.
Unless, of course, some big money finds a way to make it illegal, by declaring that "personal freedom of recording has been taken from the people"...

@ Old Arrow...I beleive it is already illegal to operate a jamming device but it is not illegal to construct a pysical barrier that blocks cell signals. Some movie theatres and restaraunts have installed copper sheeting to block cell signals from their establishments.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2013 at 19:51 UTC
On article You'll have to wait a "year-ish" for Google Glass (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deleted pending purge: Well, someone can begin working on a wireless device that disables or scrambles all image and sound-recording gadgets within, say, 50 meters around it.
I imagine many would like to have something like that installed on their premises, so it should be on the shelves sooner than in a year-ish.
Unless, of course, some big money finds a way to make it illegal, by declaring that "personal freedom of recording has been taken from the people"...

Our soldiers in Afghanistan carry with them a device called "Thor" that jams cell phone signals so that explosive devices cannot be remotely detonated. It weighs about twentyfive pounds.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2013 at 19:34 UTC
In reply to:

QuarryCat: makes no sense for me.
I use a 35 or 50 mm or even a 28 mm - one alone is enough - my feet are the zoom - no ned for another big, expensive compromise lens.
sounds crazy.

a 2,0/35-105 mm would be fantastic and a 4,0/50-300 mm is urgent needed...

There's a time and place for everything...times when a prime is fine and times when you need the flexibility of a zoom.

If you are in a fixed position and don't have the option to move in or back away, then a zoom will allow you to get some extra coverage or to get a little closer without having to crop in post and sacrifice pixels.

Changing position also changes perspective and with a wide angle getting in closer could result in some unpleasant distortion effects.

And packing a couple wide aperture primes covering that range;an 18, a 35 and something in the middle like a 24 or 28, would cost some serious cash and take up some serious camera bag space. In the Sigma line that would cost about 2K for comparable primes.

As far as I know Sigma makes the shortest 1.8 prime, a 20MM which goes for $630. So a 1.8 zoom of that focal range makes alot of sense.

The only arguement in favor of a prime would be superior image quality, which at 1.8 may be no better than a zoom.

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2013 at 20:38 UTC
In reply to:

utomo99: Why DIGIC 5 ? Why Not DIGIC 6 ?
Canon SX270 HS using DIGIC 6

Because next year they can release an upgraded version so that everyone who bought this one can have a touch of buyers remorse. Its a new model so of course they have to hold back on features on the first one.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2013 at 17:50 UTC
Total: 212, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »