Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Thanks. Yes but you were a bit further south. The scenery up in PP isn't actually much to see. The delta can be so scenic as you know.Got myself out early this morning, these are Cham muslim fishers on the Mekong.
Very Nice, seen a few of these in my younger days, sunrises on The Mekong.
Love it.
He tentatively puts up his first photo for critique while hiding behind the sofa :pDon't worry about it, people are normally very nice and any critique is mostly very constructive. I myself is no expert, but I really like the colours in this one.
I love the second one, pure abstract art. Outstanding!I see no difference in the 2 images....LOLI'll try again tonight with pictures of Jupiter..... I'll use the 60D with a telescope for the lens and the GoPro again... but to get closer with the GoPro I'll stand on a ladder...... that should work
Of course it'll work. If it helps, you can use Eric Carle's Papa, Please Get the Moon for Me as an instruction manual.
It's still not working.... these are previous photos of the moon.... one with a 60D, the other with an iPad. What should I be doing to get the iPad photo as good as the 60D photo. Since camera does not matter, I must be doing something wrong, but I can't figure it out.... I tried to get closer to the moon, but I can only reach so high...
Ramon, you're one of the good guys here, always contributing. But the last week or so it feels like you've chewed of the sour end of something. I normally like your comments, the knowledge and insight you share. Please come back.Oh, sure. Look...here's this great photo of the Western Greebe's courtship ritual taken with the A1400. The birds are those two tiny, dark specks there. What a great photo.A great shot is a great shot. Weither its from an a1400 or a 1Dx. It's more convienent to get the shot with a 1Dx but If you got it with a a1400, both would be great shots. That's the principle and has nothing to do with equipment.
A great photo is a great photo. It's irrelevant what equipment was used.
Basic failure of logic. A great photo can be taken with any camera, but it does not follow that every great photo can be taken with any camera.
No one is contesting the former, the latter assumption is where you're incorrect.
But just because the great photo would be different from the a1400 than the 1Dx makes it no less great.
IE: great wide angle shot of a landscape is no less great than a tele-compressed photo landscape, which could also be just as good.
The photographer chooses the shot. For some shots, 'any camera' just won't do.
It's obvious you're practicing reductio ad absurdum - and you're doing a great job of sounding absurd in the process. Feel free to keep on baiting, I've fed you enough troll food in this thread.
More like look, a close up wide shot of the western gebes courtship and here's another of them tele compressed.
Which one is better? Neither, they're both good. That's were I disagree, one shot was easier to get and the other was extremely difficult but the end product is the same.
So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100. The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100. I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.
Pity because if the RX200 rumours are true, it seems that Sony stepped up in the lens department:
http://photorumors.com/2013/05/05/rumors-sony-rx200-coming-in-june-with-a-built-in-pop-up-viewfinder/
I'd rate that as quite possibly true.
Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?
Oh, you're bashing Canon? Big surprise. No innovation the last year? Where have you been?
Ok, name one area where Canon has led the photography field with new innovation in the last year - and by innovation I mean something more than gizmos added to cameras.
So the thing Canon needed to upgrade, the lens, is no different then the S100. The camera also looks much more slippery then my S100. I'm guessing the sensor is the same and the only upgrade will be the digic 6 processor which will be of no help because you'll shot in raw.
Pity because if the RX200 rumours are true, it seems that Sony stepped up in the lens department:
http://photorumors.com/2013/05/05/rumors-sony-rx200-coming-in-june-with-a-built-in-pop-up-viewfinder/
I'd rate that as quite possibly true.
Afterall, which camera has done more innovation with digital cameras recently, Canon or Sony?
And which company has done as little as possible?
Interesting, I tried the RX100 and it's borderline jeans pocket sized as it is, bigger = no deal. Although I really liked the camera as such.Quote from: Sony RumorsThe RX200 will have an improved 28-140mm f/1.4-2.2 lens (compared to the current 29-105mm f/1.8-4.9)
If true, 140mm f/2.2 means a substantially bigger lens assembly, meaning the RX-200 would lose the current form factor - one big reason for its popularity. I'm very tempted by the RX-100, but if the successor won't fit in a jeans pocket like the current model, no interest from me.
i think he got it, it was probably more of a general statement. I agree with him on that one.I hate cloud software. I have a PC only for the internet and not willing to go online with a pc with all my images on the harddisc.
Looks like you don't understand a difference between cloud software / storage and just subscription with cloud server to validate your software license. You don't have to put any of your PSDs to cloud. You even don't have to be always online to use CC products. You just need to download the product, install it and occasionally get connected to internet to get updates and validate license.
The Guys at Cathay Photo in Singapore are betting their right nut on the truth of this, and I have my Nut cutter ready in case it's another false alarm.Damn, I've lost my nut cutter
I do actually think that this time it's legit, but.......
if i retouch the dust spots out of my image is it no longer a photo?I enjoy this thread, it's a perfectly valid question from Sanj to the forum members and I think the discussion has developed nicely. It's fun to try to define this and also to some extent important. At least that's my view.
i am simply stunned at the absurdity of this thread with so many people trying to tell everyone what is and isn't photography. its a pretty pointless exercise. ask yourselves this....who appointed you (in the general sense) the definer of the medium of photography and why should anyone listen?
art and photography are not mutually exclusive.
