All Forum Comments
Comment by Don posted on What is photography? at 07/01/2011 - 16:43
I'll give you an example...
there was a news report a while back depicting some instances where completely unaltered images were found to have been deliberately misleading... turns out one woman and one man appeared repeatedly in photos released by agencies representing the Palestinians. (you can google it and search if you want) apparently there was a woman repeated photographed wailing in front of cameras at several conflict sites she was paid to pose. Apparently there was also a Hamas official that repeatedly showed up at conflict sites with blood soaked blankets who would take a healthy child, wrap him up with the blood soaked blanket, and pose for photos as if he were rescuing an injured child.
then there were at least two photographers that were fired for submitting digitally altered photos during conflicts in recent years, at Reuters.
and you're complaining that digital artwork is fake?
there was a news report a while back depicting some instances where completely unaltered images were found to have been deliberately misleading... turns out one woman and one man appeared repeatedly in photos released by agencies representing the Palestinians. (you can google it and search if you want) apparently there was a woman repeated photographed wailing in front of cameras at several conflict sites she was paid to pose. Apparently there was also a Hamas official that repeatedly showed up at conflict sites with blood soaked blankets who would take a healthy child, wrap him up with the blood soaked blanket, and pose for photos as if he were rescuing an injured child.
then there were at least two photographers that were fired for submitting digitally altered photos during conflicts in recent years, at Reuters.
and you're complaining that digital artwork is fake?
Comment by Don posted on What is photography? at 07/01/2011 - 15:35
walkeja wrote:
It seems, apart from one, that people are suffering from the modern affliction of either not understanding or ignoring what has been written. I took slides, therefore the darkroom was not involved, was not interested in the darkroom. What you see is what you get.
well there was always film and development choices... double exposures, selective dof, tricks, lens choice, perspective controls, selective compositions, juxtapositions, staging shots, all available to distort the viewers perception of what they see....It seems, apart from one, that people are suffering from the modern affliction of either not understanding or ignoring what has been written. I took slides, therefore the darkroom was not involved, was not interested in the darkroom. What you see is what you get.
There is no such thing as wyssywyg, even when looking with your own eyes, because if there were, every magician would be out of work.
I understand what you are saying. I disagree with your veiwpoint.
Comment by Don posted on What is photography? at 07/01/2011 - 15:24
walkeja wrote:
What is photography?
When I first started using a camera many moons ago, the only medium was negative black and white film. I found this very boring and dull. Then colour film was released to the masses and I bought my first proper camera - a K1000- and took negative colour photographs. I was then persuaded by a work colleauge to try taken slides instead as I was not interested in the darkroom. By taking slides I soon learnt that what I saw is what I got, and that is how I view photography today.
I recently bought a photo magazine which came with a free DVD on digital photography. I was sat watching this and the expert was showing how to use use, I think it was Photoshop, and the wife said, "That is not photography!", and I agree completely.
I have seen photographs of members of my local camera club where the images have been completly altered by use of a computer to look like oil paintings. Learn to paint!
If you want to be any good at photography, you better learn to paint.What is photography?
When I first started using a camera many moons ago, the only medium was negative black and white film. I found this very boring and dull. Then colour film was released to the masses and I bought my first proper camera - a K1000- and took negative colour photographs. I was then persuaded by a work colleauge to try taken slides instead as I was not interested in the darkroom. By taking slides I soon learnt that what I saw is what I got, and that is how I view photography today.
I recently bought a photo magazine which came with a free DVD on digital photography. I was sat watching this and the expert was showing how to use use, I think it was Photoshop, and the wife said, "That is not photography!", and I agree completely.
I have seen photographs of members of my local camera club where the images have been completly altered by use of a computer to look like oil paintings. Learn to paint!
Karsh would be a nobody, if Rembrant hadn't taught us lighting.
Paintbrush + paint
Mechanical Camera + chemicals
electronic camera + computer software
all different means to the same ends... visual communication.
It's a tool. get over it.
Comment by Don posted on What is photography? at 07/01/2011 - 14:46
Apples multi packs licensing are based on the honor system. You can install the os and ilife suite on as many supported macs as you have, without paying for the "Family pac" licence.
The only caveats are in their pro software lines. If you were to install Aperture on more than one machine, for example, you will get a licensing error if you try to open Aperture on two machines simultaneously.
Providing you got both machines connected to the same network of course.
This is a somewhat easy to live with limitation if for example you have a laptop and desktop, and do quick edits in the field, then transfer the project to your desktop for final editing.
It is however preferable to have two licensed copies of Aperture.... if you need two editors editing images from the same referenced library, at the same time.
The only caveats are in their pro software lines. If you were to install Aperture on more than one machine, for example, you will get a licensing error if you try to open Aperture on two machines simultaneously.
Providing you got both machines connected to the same network of course.
This is a somewhat easy to live with limitation if for example you have a laptop and desktop, and do quick edits in the field, then transfer the project to your desktop for final editing.
It is however preferable to have two licensed copies of Aperture.... if you need two editors editing images from the same referenced library, at the same time.
Comment by Don posted on Mac App Store - Wow! at 06/01/2011 - 20:14
Had the remark been directed AT a specific woman with some intent to offend, I would not have found the remark funny at all... But I responded to it with a joke because I perceived it as a funny thing to say.
Humor should push boundaries and open up dialogs on subjects where people might be perhaps too easily angered. I chalk this up to perhaps a cultural issue.... I would not take offense to being called a clump of grass, but apparently in England calling somebody a sod is offensive... So I apologized for offending...
Humor should push boundaries and open up dialogs on subjects where people might be perhaps too easily angered. I chalk this up to perhaps a cultural issue.... I would not take offense to being called a clump of grass, but apparently in England calling somebody a sod is offensive... So I apologized for offending...
Comment by Don posted on Pentax please pay attention: at 06/01/2011 - 00:42
johnriley wrote:
Two posts removed. That was over the line.
Darn it. I always miss the good stuff.Two posts removed. That was over the line.
hehehehe
Comment by Don posted on Interesting K5 Review at 06/01/2011 - 00:09
Gwyn wrote:
Thank you for that Ken. I'm glad I'm not the only one upset by that and the jokey replies to it too.
Perhaps a cultural issue... I did not find the remark very offensive especially in the context it was said.Thank you for that Ken. I'm glad I'm not the only one upset by that and the jokey replies to it too.
I have never equated it to the "C" word.
But I see some are offended and do equate it to a nasty thing to say.
Sorry for offending.
Comment by Don posted on Pentax please pay attention: at 06/01/2011 - 00:04
they are handy but limited.....
one: you have to practice with those to be any use at all..
two: they try to keep the camera level and that is limiting if you want to tilt up or down....
truth is... with practice... leaving your collapsed tripod attached to your video cam adds some weight and balance and you can get just as good as if you were using the mini steadycam rigs...
you want to look at the body mounted glidecams if you want to use a bigger camera, that is where you'll get footage just like Kubrick's revolutionary (at the time) "The Shining" scenes.
I've got a design I'm trying to patent that will change the game for small cameras... can't say much more than that.
one: you have to practice with those to be any use at all..
two: they try to keep the camera level and that is limiting if you want to tilt up or down....
truth is... with practice... leaving your collapsed tripod attached to your video cam adds some weight and balance and you can get just as good as if you were using the mini steadycam rigs...
you want to look at the body mounted glidecams if you want to use a bigger camera, that is where you'll get footage just like Kubrick's revolutionary (at the time) "The Shining" scenes.
I've got a design I'm trying to patent that will change the game for small cameras... can't say much more than that.
Comment by Don posted on 60-250 or 300mm DA* With a twist... at 05/01/2011 - 04:05
robbie_d wrote:
saw that. it looks good but fragile.... I think Pentax could do better one of two ways:Don wrote:
Best macro light idea I've seen lately is the Dr. Octopus affair that Olympus are previewing on the E-PL2 (can't link as off-topic, but worth a search).Pentaxophile wrote:
What I'd really like is a W90 with a much improved low-light sensor, and build on the idea of the little lights around the lens to provide a proper integrated mini-ring flash. That'd be sweet for photographing underwater beasties.
not a bad idea... integrated lights on a macro lens would be sweet as well!What I'd really like is a W90 with a much improved low-light sensor, and build on the idea of the little lights around the lens to provide a proper integrated mini-ring flash. That'd be sweet for photographing underwater beasties.
Ring of led's around the bezel of the macro lens, (even power available power contacts where the old Powerzoom lens contacts are inside the mount), and also the storm trooper white bodies? make it translucent and mount two flashes inside the body, light the whole camera up from inside......
Now google the casio TRYX and tell me if they pull an imac photobooth trick and use the lcd on that camera as a lighting panel...
Comment by Don posted on Please Pentax, Pleeease! at 05/01/2011 - 03:56
Not wanting to debate the conflict or taking sides in a conflict here, just pointing out one recent event... it happens all over all the time.