jadot

jadot

Lives in United Kingdom Surrey, United Kingdom
Works as a Photographer
Has a website at http://jlphotography.co.uk
Joined on Aug 27, 2010
About me:

Professional Photographer - Weddings mostly, Portraits of real people are high on the list.

Comments

Total: 593, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Lots very right-handed to me, which suggests that the current options from DJI and the like are probably more universal, ergonomically speaking.

Looks good though...

(I am right handed, my assistant is left handed = stick with OSMO mobile this time)

Link | Posted on Dec 8, 2017 at 13:42 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article Why Capture One can't replace Adobe Lightroom (64 comments in total)
In reply to:

xPhoenix: One reason I chose Nikon is because I like the look of their colors. LR can replicate this, but C1 looks a lot different. Sure, I can try to match the colors manually, but why bother? For $300, I expect more.

Never had a problem with it

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 15:46 UTC
On article Why Capture One can't replace Adobe Lightroom (64 comments in total)
In reply to:

xPhoenix: One reason I chose Nikon is because I like the look of their colors. LR can replicate this, but C1 looks a lot different. Sure, I can try to match the colors manually, but why bother? For $300, I expect more.

Or, just shoot JPEG (so you know that you're actually getting Nikon's colours) and use Apple Photos or summat?

Otherwise Capture One's handling of colour from RAW files is second to none and easy to apply according to taste anyway.

Link | Posted on Dec 6, 2017 at 14:56 UTC
On article Why Capture One can't replace Adobe Lightroom (64 comments in total)

I've used Capture One since v-3 - It might be when Phase one extended it's support out to Canon and Nikon RAW photographers. I'm guessing that was in 2003/04...

Since then I've used Aperture and Lightroom too, but neither of them could 'process' in the same way as C1Pro, though I quite liked Aperture it has to be said. Lightroom was mostly a joke in the studios, and might still be as far as I can tell.

Phase one MF systems are awesome and the software is optimised for their own hardware. It's a fine thing that I can shoot nearly any other Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sony smaller format cameras and it's now one of the most versatile DAM software out there. I can organise in sessions or catalogues. I have layers, superior colour adjustments and it's the best for x-trans when it comes to the full package.

The FujiGFX (and the Hassy) will likely not be supported by Phase One, but so what? If you're shooting MF with C1 you have better MF options. Rent a Phase One. Otherwise get a D850.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2017 at 10:28 UTC as 4th comment
In reply to:

landscaper1: Still waiting for DPR's head-to-head review and comparison of the Adobe competitors.

Still waiting ...

Don't wait - C1Pro isn't a 'competitor' - It's the one to beat. LR doesn't come close.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2017 at 17:38 UTC
In reply to:

RadPhoto: Most of commenters here should stick to their wedding photography!

My wedding photography is already out of this world.

Link | Posted on Nov 14, 2017 at 15:19 UTC

Bit dizzy now

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2017 at 19:15 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

fnannini: Shouldn't they just shoot it down? What a waste of time!

Because shooting live ammunition at airports is a good idea...

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 15:09 UTC
In reply to:

Sdaniella: *egads* ips panel ... paltry indoor shaded comfy LOW 350 nits display ...

expect 500-1000+ nits (with color accuracy maintained)
for viewing, especially

do folks who edit at a low 350 nits with great color accuracy know that's all wasted on displays used by others likely to view at much more naturally brighter displays (500-1000 nits) even for mobile computers, like tablets and smartphones, which already have very high accuracy displays ?!?! AMOLEDS, too?!

of course, i don't expect 7000+nits displays intended for outdoor blazing sunshine viewing?!?! especially, viewing at arms length! (ultra-bright displays are bad for one's eyes, 'cuz our are better suited to see light reflected, than light shining directly from light sources over long duration)

Jacques Cornell is right. In fact, it's usually the first mistake that people make when editing photographs - if your display is cooking along nicely at full brightness your images aren't going to look anywhere near calibrated. Nobody is expecting to be sat in front of a monitor in any environment where you need to blast it up that high anyway. It's not like a camera monitor screen where you might be in full sun.

120 nits is my target for well balanced exposure, colour accuracy, and contrast levels.

Sdaniella - you're not really making sense, at least in relation to editing photographs on a computer.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2017 at 13:27 UTC

It looks decent for Lightroom users wanting to jump ship. I've never used it - is it fast enough?

Anyway, I've been using C1 for years now, and only had Lightroom installed as part of my Photoshop subscription. I recently changed to Affinity so now I'm good to go without a subscription to pay, and lightroom has been uninstalled.

If I wasn't using C1 already I'd probably be alright with something like this from Macphun. Fair play to them.

Link | Posted on Nov 1, 2017 at 15:03 UTC as 97th comment
In reply to:

davids8560: My dad had a box in the attic full of old Playboys. When I was in my early teens I used to get a hold of them and sneak off somewhere and they helped me calibrate. Then I met this other young photographer. Her name was Jocelyn. There were differences in our gamuts, but we got along famously. We calibrated a lot! But those were tumultuous years, full of rapid change. Our operating systems diverged with each update to the point where conflicts due to compatibility issues were an everyday occurrence. Eventually she went off to some grad school program somewhere in Bhutan. Lost track of her after that. But the point is that all this calibrating is nothing new. You've probably had experiences with calibration yourself, too.

Is this funny?

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 19:41 UTC

Another kickstarter smartphone slider? Really?

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2017 at 15:29 UTC as 10th comment
In reply to:

McArchive: So for 9 years that 1099 was okay?

Mcarchive - that started well, but didn’t really turn out to make much sense in the end. I read through your post more than twice, but it didn’t scan too well, I’m afraid.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 21:43 UTC
In reply to:

Noogy: I hope a new kind of battery, more lasting and safer than Lithium Ion, soon becomes mainstream. Otherwise, we might see the day when we're stuck in a 14-hour flight with just newspapers and magazines in our hands. Though come to think of it, that'll be a good time to catch some sleep. On wait, the flight is crowded, elbow-to-elbow, in cramped seats, not conducive to sleeping :(

I'm with you here. In the mean time it's time to patent my 'Peli' style airtight and fireproof mini case that you can legally stow all of your individually wrapped batteries in. I'm also going to set up compatible battery hire services at all major airports so you can pre-order the batteries you need and pick them up at your destination, then drop them back in before you fly home.

I need a few quid to set this up...

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 13:13 UTC
In reply to:

McArchive: So for 9 years that 1099 was okay?

Putting up with it might just be the only thing you can do in a hand to mouth freelancer life, so it HAS to be OK.

But it's not OK, or ethical, or right. It might be vaguely legal [By The New York Times], but that doesn't make it OK either.

I'm not sure what your history is, but if you'd been working freelance for the last 10 or 20 years as a photographer, you'd know that you worked for nothing, then maybe £70 (eq.) per 14 hour day, and then when you tried to do something about it your job was given to someone else and you were back where you started, or probably worse off because you had to keep yourself in food, rent, camera equipment, computers and beer, just to keep up to speed.

Holiday pay? Sick pay? Expenses? Benefits?!!! Forget it. Doing good work? You HAVE NO CHOICE or you're out.

I'd suggest that for 9 years it was probably not OK, and when it finally broke the dude, he figured it out.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 10:52 UTC
In reply to:

Stigg: When I landed a full-time position as photographer's assistant they were telling me I was old at 25! Some of the actual older people advised me to get out of the salaried racket and get into my own thing. They said in 15 years or maybe less I'd become expendable like them. Ever since then I've been on my own and in most of the major and many of the minor publications. I passed 48 a while ago and things are more interesting than ever for me. Money is only important for food, shelter and a few cameras. Beyond that its mostly a burden.

I don't know - There's a lot of burden in my life that $500K would lift.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 10:43 UTC
In reply to:

karlx: It boggles my mind why serious photographers go along with instagram.

Editing photos from raw, and then using a phone to upload them, only to see them morphed into crappy low resolution highly compressed images, cropped with forced aspect ratios.

Well, at least now you don't need to use a phone anymore.

Graham - Sorry to say this, but you're just feeding the troll. Best to leave it. He'll keep wanting 'The Last Word' so let him have it.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 12:14 UTC
In reply to:

Aper1st: So, your saying to save all my LR photos in jpeg
and then I can export them to desktop,
external HD or wherever?

What saying is that then?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 17:32 UTC
On article Hello Lightroom CC: Embracing the future (510 comments in total)
In reply to:

kamituel: Fortunately being Adobe-free is getting easier by day:

Lightroom -> Capture One (or other)
Photoshop -> Affinity Photo

Sure, but it's arrogant for Adobe to assume that professional users don't value their costs. The bottom line will always be the bottom line, and traditionally you'd have to stump up the cash for things like software to be in the game, but that's different now - there are equal or close to equal products out there, including Affinity Photo, which does 90 per-cent of the same job, and is even sometimes quicker for some tasks. Capture One Pro has always been more powerful than lightroom. It has it's problems, sure, but it's still streets ahead of Adobe.

The point is, if PS and LR were the only restaurant in town they could serve up whatever they want and charge whatever they like - people would have no choice but to pay if they wanted to eat well.

It's not like that any more.

To answer your example - If I need 5 TB of data, I'm going to carry a Hard Drive. I'm not going to be working on that much data on the move anyway.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:10 UTC
On article Hello Lightroom CC: Embracing the future (510 comments in total)
In reply to:

kamituel: Fortunately being Adobe-free is getting easier by day:

Lightroom -> Capture One (or other)
Photoshop -> Affinity Photo

kamituel - Totally agree. Anyone who doesn't like where Adobe is headed can follow your example. I use Capture One, have done for years, and it's currently the best option for offline personal DAM and RAW conversion workflow.

Photoshop is a harder fish to fry, but Afinity Photo is a great companion to C1 Pro, so no problem.

Yes. It will be a monumental pain in the ass to start fresh in a new (to some) program, and adjustments lost and so on, but the fact is that if you don't like a cloud subscription model, Adobe just told you that cancelling your service with them is exactly what you're going to have to do.

Put it this way: complaining about it here (or anywhere) isn't going to stop it from happening. Choosing where you put your money, might.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 13:43 UTC
Total: 593, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »