RKGoth

Lives in United Kingdom Earth, United Kingdom
Works as a Journalist, writer
Has a website at http://www.geextreme.com/
Joined on May 15, 2007
About me:

"I'm just zis guy, you know?"

Comments

Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

webber15: As per I've said many times...drones should come under the same regulations as radio controlled aircraft...no wiggle room on this...period.

They do. In fact they are more strictly controlled in the UK; but basic UAV rules below 20Kg apply PLUS exclusion zones from crowds and built up areas covering recording/surveillance devices.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 14:26 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: As an architectural photographer I am sometimes asked if I offer drone images.
After a lot of research I found these things:
1. Drones are banned in most places I shoot.
2. Clients don't want to pay for drone images (its just a snap or two!)
3. It occupies a disproportionate amount of time in relation to the potential revenue.
4. Every guy in the world seems to offer drone photography for $50.

(Disclosure: I use a drone and enjoy it, a Typhoon Yuneec H; I've also made sure I know what the laws are for recreational and commercial use, and why those laws exist, because I don't want to end up with a paranoid member of the public getting me in legal crap. And trust me, they are there. Watching a Mavic being used locally at a park, I chatted to a random - and their first comment on drone use? "Pedophiles using them to spy on kids". I am not kidding).

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 14:22 UTC
In reply to:

Photomonkey: As an architectural photographer I am sometimes asked if I offer drone images.
After a lot of research I found these things:
1. Drones are banned in most places I shoot.
2. Clients don't want to pay for drone images (its just a snap or two!)
3. It occupies a disproportionate amount of time in relation to the potential revenue.
4. Every guy in the world seems to offer drone photography for $50.

It is very unlikely the rules in the UK will "burn out and disappear"; they're not relating to the flight of UAVs, but the use of them with cameras and audio recording equipment, they are in essence high-tech surveillance equipment.

For estate agents (and wedding examples) lower liability and frankly, greater ease of getting the shot in a wide variety of conditions can be achieved with the telescoping poles that attach to a towhitch or roof bars on the car.

I find it hard to believe that America and Canada would be so much more liberal in the use of flying surveillance equipment, or be happy to tolerate untrained novices flying 45Km/h devices above densely populated areas and traffic. On the other hand, anyone flying a drone over an interstate or high-traffic area, having an operational failure or loss of control, will probably greatly enjoy the resulting lawsuit in North America.

The law is catching up to drones and it's not making them easier.

Link | Posted on Aug 10, 2017 at 14:17 UTC
In reply to:

TheWhiteDog: Despite the SONY a6500 introduced today, this is still the camera I desire despite the maddening exclusion of a tilt screen. This and the 16mm f1.4 lens and I'd be deliriously happy.

Want a tilt screen, get an X-T2.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 08:54 UTC
In reply to:

joyclick: A barebone FF with either 50mm/35mm/28mm /1.2/1.4.1.8/2/2.8
with aperture ring,focus ring and a needle for under/over exposure,1/4000 shutter speed,ISO upto 6400,flash sync of 250/500 is all that we need

M-mount lenses too expensive? Aside from LTM-M39 adaptors being ridiculously cheap, and thus, countless Russian and other lenses, there are plenty of M-mount lenses from the likes of Voigtlander that are very good value for the quality.

I have a sneaking suspicion the first shot I capture on my new M will be with a Lensbaby on Nikon adaptor. Ah, Live View AND Rangefinder :D

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2015 at 19:29 UTC
On article Adobe celebrates 25 years of Photoshop (366 comments in total)

Been through them all, from the very roots. Sod complimentary birthday cake, how about a couple of months of complimentary CC ;)

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2015 at 00:02 UTC as 31st comment
On article Sigma dp0 Quattro announced with 14mm F4 lens (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

RKGoth: But still no support in Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom, which is the real issue for these - Sigma Photo Pro is simply not fast or stable enough, and is too limited in cropping/rotation and export to be worth the time taken to use it. It will no doubt be an exceptional camera and lens.

This is true. However, even a darkroom allows scaling for output, cropping and rotation. I'm a huge fan of Foveon and Sigma and yet, I find SPP's featureset and the corresponding lack of Lightroom/ACR/Capture One support inexcusable.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2015 at 23:16 UTC
On article Sigma dp0 Quattro announced with 14mm F4 lens (138 comments in total)

But still no support in Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom, which is the real issue for these - Sigma Photo Pro is simply not fast or stable enough, and is too limited in cropping/rotation and export to be worth the time taken to use it. It will no doubt be an exceptional camera and lens.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2015 at 16:40 UTC as 17th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Anastigmat: If I were the judge, I would dismiss the lawsuit because Nike did not use the original photo without paying the photographer. They shot a similar photo. Does that mean that a similar photo shot by anyone, if it resembles an earlier photo, would be guilty of copyright infringement? Let's say, if a director shoots a scene similar to that of Marilyn Monroe having her skirt being blown up by wind, would that violate the copyright of the original movie? What if no one had any idea a similar but earlier photo existed. What if, for example, I shoot a particular photo of a famous bridge like the Brooklyn Bridge or Golden Gate, and it resembles, by chance, someone else's photo of the same bridge? Then am I guilty of copyright infringement even if I have never seen the other photo and were not attempting to imitate it?

Copyright does not have to be a specific image.

If you shot the same picture of the Golden Gate bridge in absolute, demonstrable innocence of any similar works, even if you created an identical copy of another image that you were unaware of, then you have not infringed copyright; though as musical works show, if you're competing within a commercial arena similarity can be found to be infringing - see Elastica and Wire, or Sam Smith & Tom Petty.

Further reading:

http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/wheels-on-birss.html

The upshot is that someone sought to create an image 'similar' in identifiable elements in order to bypass the ownership and licensing of an existing work. That's an infringement.

Nike's approach may well be seen to be the same thing. They want the iconic image, but they don't want to pay for that source of it. Realistically they probably merely wished to refine the image and simply didn't consider that they would need to licence what is, essentially a person.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2015 at 17:13 UTC
In reply to:

PicOne: How would say, the image quality of this paired with a Leica top-o-the-line prime lens, compare to that out of say a Sigma DP merrill (or Quattro) of similar FL?

I wouldn't say that it's a guaranteed win for Leica on the glass - the DP has generally had decent glass, and I compared M9-P with Merrill at the relevant point. However, the Sigma is F2.8 and APS-C, so depth of field control etc... Have both. It's not like the quattro is that expensive for the quality it delivers.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2014 at 21:19 UTC
On article Leica M9 users report sensor corrosion issue (379 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: It is interesting to see/know Leica has so many old stock CCD sensors for replacing ALL of Leica M9 / M9-P / M Monochrom / M-E sensors for life which means that one camera could need many sensors.

Oh well.

"Plus the great care of its owners."

I treated my M9-P will less care than I do my D4. The whole purpose of buying one was the fact that it was a small brass brick that would capture images, with no AF, mirror, etc.

Flipside was that when I had an injury and couldn't work as well, I was able to sell it for only a small loss compared to the same investment in a mainstream body. I wish I still had it almost as much as I wish I could still run :)

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2014 at 21:05 UTC
In reply to:

Richard Franiec: If you look at the beautiful piece of wood (the grip) alone, meticulously carved and finished, don't blame Italian craftsmen for the fail of the whole concept. Taking quite ordinary camera, re-badge it, put the work of art on the front plate and expect that it would sell for 10 x the price of the RX100 is unthinkably naive concept.
Hope that the people who lost their job in process will not suffer for too long and steer away from Luna(r)tical and idiotic ideas as this whole concept is.
Their talents could and should be rewarded in so many different ways of expressing themselves - think Leicatime.
I'm curious if the guy responsible for this monumental blunder is still milking Hassy, or he is gone (in disgrace).

A couple of years back I was asked what I thought Hasselblad should make. I had no hesitation.

A pro body SLR with an available mount, with excellent viewfinder, manual controls and exquisite materials. It should be capable of meeting pro photographer expectations - so, 1/8000th shutter, decent frame rate, 14-bit or 16-bit ADC - but could forgo ridiculous AF point counts for maybe one central or three, and a nice split-screen/PRISM finder.

Bonus points for making the rear screen flip inwards or articulate for waist-level shooting.

I suppose Nikon came close to making what I wanted with the Df, but it's not the same. What I thought was more like a 35mm Leica S, ready to take M42 or K, or maybe even Sony (with a partnership in mind) lenses. As Sony dropped their DSLR line, Hasselblad could have stepped in with a higher-end but compatible system.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2014 at 15:39 UTC
On article Apple expands OS X Mavericks Raw compatibility (86 comments in total)
In reply to:

Scottelly: Too bad Apple can't figure out how to provide raw camera support for the amazing new Sigma Quattro cameras OR the old Sigma Merrill cameras. Quality imaging USED TO BE what Apple was all about.

Foveon appear happy to work with third parties. No reverse engineering required. What use would the ability to decode the file be without the IP, the tech, the fab, to build the sensor?

Link | Posted on Aug 11, 2014 at 20:33 UTC
On article LifePrint's portable wireless printer hits Kickstarter (19 comments in total)
In reply to:

WizardOfOss: Apart from the app, how is this device different from the Polaroid Pogo?

Bluetooth was only an issue for the iPhone, just like Pivi's IrDA based interface was incompatible with a surprising number of devices (my hit rate, 2/8 so far).

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 22:13 UTC
On article LifePrint's portable wireless printer hits Kickstarter (19 comments in total)

The difference is, as with Fuji's variation between Pivi and Instax Share, the application and infrastructure behind it.

They're cagey about the technology, but I'm betting some dollars ($170 of them) that it's Zink without the limitations of the GL10 or Pogo, and maybe, MAYBE with some effort made to improve the print quality. Where it differs is in integration with social networking.

Fuji could do this. Fuji could make it so Instax Share's app could broadcast a presence or watch an online service for other paired Instax Share apps, and print to a nearby printer a file 'sent' by a friend or family. You wouldn't necessarily want it automated, though there's some fun in the idea of trusted partners being able to surprise you with a print.

Link | Posted on Mar 19, 2014 at 22:11 UTC as 8th comment | 1 reply
On article Samsung explains the Galaxy S5's ISOCELL sensor (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

ybizzle: Not bad but still ways to go. Funny the Nokia 808 was released in 2012. Two years later and no one has still managed to catch up...

But the worst smartphone to ever carry a camera!

Link | Posted on Mar 15, 2014 at 20:20 UTC
In reply to:

Poss: Can’t wait for the new enthusiast level Aston Martin...

http://www.astonmartin.com/cars/aston-martin-cygnet

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2014 at 11:16 UTC
Total: 65, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »