NarrBL

Lives in US Minor Outlying Islands US Minor Outlying Islands
Joined on Jun 6, 2003

Comments

Total: 222, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

p.s. notes to the website redevelopers -- maybe 'D.L. Cade' can have a look where his experience apparently lies.

- On Brave browser, which is otherwise great for this site and helps me keep it ready and separate from other web topics, the comments completely disappear after you save a Reply. In fact, you end up on the pre-gallery lets-have-more-ad-pushes page, and then you have to go the gallery, then close it to get a button even to see them again.

- Please, to hide the photographer and camera details behind a drop-down that the obscures the image is really a non-starter. It's the main thing you want besides the photo itself, and that in the clear. Please, put the Details back on a tab with the comments, and show it as default. As it was...

Thanks...

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 06:16 UTC as 15th comment

Well, I think the lens can look better -- even the raws seem under-sharpened, and with questionable color balance applied.

Capture One raised the four-pigs and the horizontal shells on log up out of gloom and indistinctness, with very little tweaking except higher number and radius on sharpening; also a little closing in on the endpoints of levels.

The center looks pretty good, not razor sharp at 100%; the right and left edges trail off, the right significantly more than the left.

This is all on a non-stellar laptop screen, but may give an indication things could show better. Maybe one of you with the Eizo etc. setups could have a look developing the raws yourself.

Oh, and the sky in the pigs shot is blown, so that there is a big purple haze to trim out of the darkness underneath them.

This is tricky light, low sun at relatively high latitude, and that color balance issue mentioned may have a lot to do with why these photos appear to have less than stellar pop, no?

Link | Posted on Jan 7, 2018 at 06:02 UTC as 16th comment
In reply to:

NarrBL: Well, the noise is there -- and Carey Rose has very well explained the exposure that allowed it, from those shots being from a helicopter in motion, if you paid attention.

I also thought the visibility of noise was boosted by the haze very evident over the winter landscape. In areas it's less prominent, so also is the likelihood to notice noise.

You know, daddyo, I'm likely older than either one of you, but there seems to be a kind hard-of-hearing problem going on here.

If not a contemporary our-gang folly, but let's not exacerbate that.

Once more, the point is to recognize the circumstances of the photos, and all the perceptions that are normally engaged.

For fairness.

And yes, against all the dog whistle reaction as seems to have interrupted good sense in thinking not only here.

For my view, that's a real snowflakeness speaking, as I'd otherwise prefer not to attend or say.

There's such a lot forgotten that anyone more mature should be contributing to instead move forward, and to thrive.

Let's better try, eh?

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2018 at 21:28 UTC
In reply to:

NarrBL: Well, the noise is there -- and Carey Rose has very well explained the exposure that allowed it, from those shots being from a helicopter in motion, if you paid attention.

I also thought the visibility of noise was boosted by the haze very evident over the winter landscape. In areas it's less prominent, so also is the likelihood to notice noise.

Huh? You're shooting from the hip, Clint.

Read again, either one of these comments, and I think you'll realize they're about understanding the result, to ameliorate the undue complaining.

Link | Posted on Jan 4, 2018 at 16:28 UTC

Well, the noise is there -- and Carey Rose has very well explained the exposure that allowed it, from those shots being from a helicopter in motion, if you paid attention.

I also thought the visibility of noise was boosted by the haze very evident over the winter landscape. In areas it's less prominent, so also is the likelihood to notice noise.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2018 at 23:48 UTC as 1st comment | 6 replies
On article Season's Greetings from DPReview.com (86 comments in total)

Simon, I guess you have had 'some' responsibility for this young, diverse in many dimensions, interesting, and enthusiastic crowd who have put another generation into DPReview itself, with their talents, giving very much that we now have to enjoy.

Well done, then, and good wishes for your next adventure, with quite appreciative Season's Greetings to all!

Link | Posted on Dec 26, 2017 at 06:36 UTC as 13th comment
On article Annie Leibovitz teaches photography in new MasterClass (175 comments in total)

That promo is wonderful -- and the images in it....

So many self-evidently defensive commenters here, and especially the thoughtless talk about reputation and money.

How very much you could benefit, learn, if you would once let your guard down, find more of how an artist sees.

She's giving you the opportunity....

Link | Posted on Dec 20, 2017 at 02:23 UTC as 29th comment
In reply to:

NarrBL: Hmm - well, a little (!) scrolling shows this thing has been up for over 2 years.

I do think it's a little bit of misdirection to remark that you don't have to subscribe to see the pictures, when the link specifically talks signing up.

Thus this seems mostly DPReview promoting itself to Instagrammers. For anyone here, it seems mainly a chance to see a few more shots from staff whose photographic tendencies we may enjoy.

At the same time, advertising, (self)-promotion especially, is a renewed modern pest, which a wise editor would moderate to a level, surely, and especially to kinds which enlighten more than annoy.

Writing full of life is the thing, isn't it, just as with the photos on view? And there, I really think the modern DPReview on @barney's watch does it well, quite enjoyed -- as in the articles which earnestly take on fresh outlooks, insights, techniques, points of view.

These always bring a brightness, make enjoyment, and thanks :)

I was thinking later in the day that this likely didn't make best sense, with all I'd chopped away to fit the mechanisms as well s conscience , but equally glad you liked it ;)

...'tis the season, and all wished well...a smile

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2017 at 05:16 UTC

Hmm - well, a little (!) scrolling shows this thing has been up for over 2 years.

I do think it's a little bit of misdirection to remark that you don't have to subscribe to see the pictures, when the link specifically talks signing up.

Thus this seems mostly DPReview promoting itself to Instagrammers. For anyone here, it seems mainly a chance to see a few more shots from staff whose photographic tendencies we may enjoy.

At the same time, advertising, (self)-promotion especially, is a renewed modern pest, which a wise editor would moderate to a level, surely, and especially to kinds which enlighten more than annoy.

Writing full of life is the thing, isn't it, just as with the photos on view? And there, I really think the modern DPReview on @barney's watch does it well, quite enjoyed -- as in the articles which earnestly take on fresh outlooks, insights, techniques, points of view.

These always bring a brightness, make enjoyment, and thanks :)

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2017 at 22:33 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
On article Top 5 news stories of the week on DPReview (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

NarrBL: To be honest, the spate of tabloid journalism stories is very much downgrading the pleasure of coming to DPReview.

And there is that article with hyped-up violence and mystery right there on your list today: whatever indeed happened regarding a supposed Chinese falling four stories of a building -- to his death, if any of this is to be believed.

Do you really think inciting the worst tendencies of your readers is a wise move, @barney?

Because: you bear the responsibility for such articles, not to say the hiring of these free-lancing clickbait purveyors. Whether staff (I hope not, seeming to see some new sauce vs. knowledgeable one/s), or as stringers.

I hope we can see it as an experiment that will now rapidly get toned down.

It certainly has done nothing to improve or relieve the tone in general of other article replies.

I went back to soften this; of course was blocked by the software.

What I would change is not to suggest against hiring, not especially in today's jobs markets...if the hirees would agree to research and write meaningful stories, in the tone of a magazine interested in furthering photography's techniques or causes.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2017 at 01:11 UTC
On article Top 5 news stories of the week on DPReview (47 comments in total)
In reply to:

PLShutterbug: How does the article on the rooftopper’s death have enough to do with photography that it merits a “top story” placement? It was totally unrelated to photography; its only relevance is the coincidence that a camera was used to record the stunt.

entoman, you've come up with the only possible justification for publishing this apparently quite possibly pseudo-story.

Though it mentions this aspect, the tone however of the article emphasizes the prurient, and it looks like at first publish it might also have included links to the sad (again, if real) atrocity.

I read enough off the 365 comments to feel most of them were indicative of various psychologies acting to distance from actual thought of what was reported. This is not 'considering relevant'.

A simple 'don't do this at home, kids' warning would accomplish the purpose, and suffice, no?

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2017 at 01:01 UTC
On article Top 5 news stories of the week on DPReview (47 comments in total)

To be honest, the spate of tabloid journalism stories is very much downgrading the pleasure of coming to DPReview.

And there is that article with hyped-up violence and mystery right there on your list today: whatever indeed happened regarding a supposed Chinese falling four stories of a building -- to his death, if any of this is to be believed.

Do you really think inciting the worst tendencies of your readers is a wise move, @barney?

Because: you bear the responsibility for such articles, not to say the hiring of these free-lancing clickbait purveyors. Whether staff (I hope not, seeming to see some new sauce vs. knowledgeable one/s), or as stringers.

I hope we can see it as an experiment that will now rapidly get toned down.

It certainly has done nothing to improve or relieve the tone in general of other article replies.

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2017 at 00:51 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies

Nice pictures, Barney; more than a few memories brought of a life in an age you now better know...

Link | Posted on Nov 12, 2017 at 06:36 UTC as 39th comment
In reply to:

NarrBL: I generally wouldn't prefer general statements(!), but one would be prone to think the 'allow and protect drones no matter' statements here highlight a technological fetishism well beyond any humane sense, or just plain common sense, no?

As far as a doable 'technological' solution, I think I'd be well in favor of an undefeatably embedded cease-engines-and-parachute-slowly-down command that can be set off for any drone coming into range -- of any place that doesn't want them.

Light planes these days offer something like this, without undue weight penalty. 'Undefeatable' would be a relative matter, though by requiring the module to be a critically important part of the drone mechanical and radio/informatic structure, you'd at least limit the options for any but the criminally -inclined with resources.

The point would be make the rights of others in better balance with the privileges of those who aren't inclined to pay responsible attention to those rights.

Let me modify the first idea a little, for the design...

Better would I think be an avoidance transponder, which force-flew the drone right out of the area managed against it.

Easier to make a non-disconnectable, as it would be part of the informatics, and my main thought if not at all a complete one is to make the defeat of the drone not potentially damaging to persons who might be in the vicinity.

So if it didn't just drop out of the sky on someone...or its parts, remembering the lady with a shotgun who won her case, wherever she was...anyway, whatever might work, for safety.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 23:26 UTC

I generally wouldn't prefer general statements(!), but one would be prone to think the 'allow and protect drones no matter' statements here highlight a technological fetishism well beyond any humane sense, or just plain common sense, no?

As far as a doable 'technological' solution, I think I'd be well in favor of an undefeatably embedded cease-engines-and-parachute-slowly-down command that can be set off for any drone coming into range -- of any place that doesn't want them.

Light planes these days offer something like this, without undue weight penalty. 'Undefeatable' would be a relative matter, though by requiring the module to be a critically important part of the drone mechanical and radio/informatic structure, you'd at least limit the options for any but the criminally -inclined with resources.

The point would be make the rights of others in better balance with the privileges of those who aren't inclined to pay responsible attention to those rights.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2017 at 21:49 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

NJOceanView: To me, content aware fill was the best innovation PS offered in 10 years. This takes it to a new level. I'm not sure how much I would use it (traditional CAF works fine for 90% of my requirements), but it will be nice to have when I need it.

On this line, you really ought to try out the Affinity Photo healing tool.

Instead of repeatedly trying to outwit Adobe's 'guesses'/'ai' cleaning things near a dark boundary, you find a small _window_ moving with the mouse so that you can see exactly what you're going to get.

As well, the tool has smart boundary-noticing , which lets you go right up the edge of a cleanable area, and with a clever rolloff, correct just as you need.

I found this out after many minutes getting nowhere with a 'let's just use Photoshop quickly' foray -- and then took beneath-flowerbox rust stains off a stucco outside wall, preserving its weathered look, in one pass and a few seconds only.

Other people can indeed do very clever clever optical algorithms, and with great user experience.

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 01:05 UTC
In reply to:

Tommi K1: How many calls this is a AI "deep fill" by results?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZjpkydf2fM

Look example the top left corner of the window where there is a 90 degree angle behind the flagpole.
Or the bottom metal plate that is behind supports etc.

Yet the algorithm finds out the lines like the glass frames, finds out the straight line for the metal plate and finds the 90 degree corner behind the flagpole, and rebuilds all.

And that is without Adobe "AI Deep Fill" or requirements for a leasing software.

It's in the current version of Affinity Photo -- and I didn't know it. Wonderful.

I think I'm going to have to start looking around the next version Beta more carefully also.

Which everyone who buys Affinity has free access to all along the line of its development -- for the original $49 one-time price.

You can view down this page to see what else: https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/

Link | Posted on Oct 23, 2017 at 00:40 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1632 comments in total)
In reply to:

Blaklynx01: 1. I hate being ripped off and I hate it more when lied to.

2. Pay for software that you do not own? Never.

3. With a one-finger salute, just say, "bye-bye Adobe"

Ok then ;)

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 05:04 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1632 comments in total)
In reply to:

Blaklynx01: 1. I hate being ripped off and I hate it more when lied to.

2. Pay for software that you do not own? Never.

3. With a one-finger salute, just say, "bye-bye Adobe"

I think I know what side you're on, but might want to mention who you're replying to in this way.

Or did you mistake my meaning?

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 04:53 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1632 comments in total)
In reply to:

Blaklynx01: 1. I hate being ripped off and I hate it more when lied to.

2. Pay for software that you do not own? Never.

3. With a one-finger salute, just say, "bye-bye Adobe"

Where do you guys get this nonsense?

When you purchase a software license, you are in no way renting.

The Adobe License for Photoshop CS6 says precisely: 'License Term shall be perpetual'.

Section 2.1.1, http://www.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/legal/licenses-terms/pdf/CS6.pdf

Link | Posted on Oct 22, 2017 at 04:28 UTC
Total: 222, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »