I think it was suggested that video cameras like this would replace DSLRs. Even Pentax DSLRs.

G

People may remember the RED video camera, which, on 5 April, was due to be delivered in two weeks time.

I've just checked the website, and was surprised to see this:

"RED is currently on an engineering delay, as we refine some components to reach our target image quality for the initial camera release. A revised approximate shipping schedule will be posted sometime in the near future."

If I had put down $17,000 for this machine, I would now be biting my fingernails. The words "revised", "approximate", "sometime", and "near future" would do little to reassure me.

G

Yeah, Scotty, where are you when we need you?

G

Pete,

One of the big problems with Flash, as every sentient being knows, is that Flash sites often take an inordinate time to load.

The fact that the web designer is too incompetent or uncaring to address even this basic issue is a certain sign that there will be other problems when one does eventually get onto the site.

So, the time taken to load is the litmus test. If it takes too long, the site has failed the test, and is not worth further attention.

But I shouldn't have to tell you this. It's obvious, even to stupid people.

G

PS: Not being a doctor, I don't have even one patient. So in a sense, I suppose my patient IS non-existent.

Rather like my patience, at times.

They're obviously stupid, too.

G

And you think that's a good one?

I switched off before it finished loading.

G

Please don't. Flash sites with 'orrible music are the bane of the Internet. They're for 14 year-olds only.

G

Your picture had nothing to do with this thread, and sheds no light on it whatsoever. You just wanted another opportunity to show one of your own pictures. And your criticism of the OP's picture was both unhelpful and rude.

This is what you said:

"They could have been shot on my camera phone better.

This is one of mine taken with the K10D ..........

Yes its not brilliant but shows what the camera can do"

We all know what the camera can do, it's what the photographer can do that counts, and frankly your picture is not a good advertisement for you.

Because you seem to be a sensitive soul, and liable to lash out like a 14 year-old when you are criticised, I respond to your posts as little as I can. I also try to refrain from personal remarks. Perhaps you could do the same.

G

And incidentally, you've highjacked this thread, which isn't fair to the original poster. When somebody posts a picture asking for a critique, it's bad manners to then start posting your own pictures. Start a new thread.

G

What is right is what works.

Over-exposing may be a good technique for a model with bad skin, but I don't think that is the case here.

My problem with your portraits is that the subject usually looks as though she really would prefer to be somewhere else. This latest one is no exception.

The essence of a portrait is to capture something of the personality of the sitter. When you manage to do that successfully, complaints about technical shortcomings will be irrelevant.

So forget technique, work on your rapport with the subject.

G