Messages

16

Canon General / Re: That's my money you are profiting from Canon!!!

« on: April 24, 2013, 10:32:33 AM »

No. It's not.

Unless you own stock in Canon, you traded them your money for that long list of toys you so proudly display at the bottom of your post. You own that stuff now and can do whatever you want with it. It's yours. It's also now Canon's money and they are free to do what they want with it. So, No. It's not your money.

Secondly, why do people post stories without bothering to read them? Or in this case, even reading the headline.

Canon is adjusting their earnings estimates because the Japanese government's monetary policies have resulted in some inflation at home and some loss in value of the Yen against other currencies in international trade. It's an accounting adjustment.

Finally, I never understand why people get upset when Canon makes money. Do you think they would have more money to invest in research and development if they were losing money? Do you think they would be able to cut their prices if they were losing money?

Couldn't agree more... JR if your upset that canon is turning a high profit, stop buying their stuff... simple... i'm sure canon is shaking in their boots...  Hell i shoot professionally and I have half your gear...  People get hot and bothered with any one company or individual earns a lot of money or capital... Why?  They worked their butt off to earn that...  Sue Bryce said we need to check our attitudes about money and being rich.  If we get offended about those who are rich and big profitable company, we ourselves will carry that same mentality towards money and push it away psychologically.  In the mean time I hope to use my gear to make my studio have a profitable year this year... hope you dont get offended by me. 

17

Portrait / Re: Pretty bad...

« on: April 22, 2013, 02:30:20 PM »

I have never shot a wedding and never plan to, but I am 100% sure I could take better photos than those shown in the article. Having taken photos at a few formals/dinners in similar conditions it can be challenging but I could have taken better photos on my phone.
Too many people call themselves pro photographers nowadays and they are nowhere near the standard, in terms of final images or the gear required. Taking on someone's wedding is a big step and you have to be sure you're up to it.
Having said that, this story stinks of a couple who have tried to skimp on the cheapest "photographer" without seeing any proof of past work.

well as i mentioned before, are these representative of the whole, or are these JUST the worst?  Every photographer in every wedding will get bad shots, it's a thing of certainty... BUT WE DONT SHOW THEM TO THE CLIENT.  We show them the lovely exposed and framed and focused images... shoot, my typical wedding with me and my assistant... we have about 1800 images... Once i cull that down to 300-400, then i'm showing my strongest work.  so... if these just weren't edited out and most of the other shots before and after these frames look good and these are the few bad ones... oh well, it happens... if the entire thing sucks, then complain. 

18

Portrait / Re: Pretty bad...

« on: April 22, 2013, 11:31:04 AM »

ummm... ok... did ANY good pictures come out of them, or were these representative of the whole batch....  If he gave them even 400 images and these 5 were the worst, and 395 are good and even OK IMAGES, then this lawsuit is meritless..  But, then again, edit out these images... the should NEVER be shown to the clients... Every photographer will get an occasional blurred shot or wrongly cropped shot, but likely the next frame will be in focus and properly cropped...  No need to ever show these images... If the photog was a complete airhead and all or even half the images are bad, then sue their butt...  I agree there are too many shoot and burners that need to be weeded out in the industry and bringing the industry down reputation wise, but then again, if these are the only bad images, then deal with it. 

19

Software & Accessories / Re: Websites

« on: April 19, 2013, 12:52:05 PM »

From my understanding, any image displayed in the browser is stored in the browser cache. You can copy the image from there without any hassle at all so there is no need to get a screen shot or right click and copy or anything.

Just assume like everything else on the web, if you put it there, it can and will be taken. Then decide what you want to put on the web.

If you want to limit access to images put them in a secured directory and password protect the directory giving out access to only those you want to have access. But assume they will copy the image if they want to.

Fair enough argument, and for what it's worth, it copies the directory of the file, which is hosted on your website, and the same can be argued if you know the exact source of the file, it could be easily downloaded as well.  Then again, most casual people who aren't website nerds who know all this coding and back end stuff would be stopped when they realize they cant right click...  There are the few, the brave, the nerds who have nothing but time on their hands to comb through the cache and stuff... thankfully if they repost the image, even with minor tweaks, google image can find them and tell me exactly where they are...  digimark makes that even easier and seamless...  I've even known photographers who dont watermark and makes it super easy to steal... almost like putting a plate and a cupcake in the middle of broadway street for anyone to enjoy... but since he can track where every image goes, he hopes someone like IBM, Apple, Honda, Samsung etc takes the image so he can sue their pants off... =)  There's always a risk, but knowing the risk, planning for the risk, and having systems in place makes things easier. 

20

Software & Accessories / Re: Websites

« on: April 19, 2013, 11:40:51 AM »

If you are professional or trying to break into the professional world, NO facebook is not even close, it's not even safe and secure... ANYONE can right click and download your images, and people have been known to steal images and post them as their own on facebook

While I agree with you on the facebook angle, the "safe and secure" part is false.

You say "anyone can right click and download your images" on Facebook. This is NOT specific to facebook. There is NO WAY to prevent a user from copying an image displayed in a browser. There are MANY techniques out there to try and prevent it, and NONE work.

I've seen many sites waste a ton of time trying to prevent "right-click and save", and as a curiosity (I was researching this for myself a while ago) bypassing these schemes is often trivial. Something as simple as a screen capture will defeat EVERY SINGLE METHOD I've seen.

As a result, I came to the conclusion that trying to prevent right-click and save is a complete and utter waste of time, and most of the biggest sites on the net seem to agree with me.

TTYL

Safe and secure meaning A) you dont control the page, B) they can take down ANY page ANY time for ANY reason, just like they did with Sandy's page...  I'm aware if there's a will, there will be a way to steal an image... but right click i would say would have to be 90% of all images stolen.. it's simple, its easy, works on every computer... it's just a no brainer...  The average person isn't going to have the time or know-how to take screen shots, crop the screen shot in photoshop or the like, it's just too much work for most bonehead people who would otherwise want to steal images... Flash used to be the biggest fail/safe because it eliminated the right click option, but now flash is going by the way of the dinosaurs and the floppy disk... Now javascript and jquery is the new standard... At least on my jquerys, the simple right click, on most devices are safe, BUT, i know on certain devices it's possible and if someone screen shots my work, there's always a way... BUT... that's where digimark and google image search comes in to protect me, at least a little.  Long story short, yes, there will always be snot nosed little pissants who will know how to steal images and do whatever, but if we at least protect ourselfs a little and not make it so freaking easy to get away with it, we can all sleep a little bit better.   

21

Software & Accessories / Re: How do you print your photos for those who still do?

« on: April 19, 2013, 10:25:52 AM »

I never never never print "at a store", BUT, when I print, I press the order button at my photo lab's ROES program and they get it at their end and process it just like I would at home... I have a home printer, but use it for emails and such... The cost of an 8x10 or 11x14 is far cheaper at my lab after shipping than paper, ink, unclogging the freaking heads should they decided to get a hair up their ass and get clogged, reprinting because the color was a tad off due to a new batch of paper, reprinting because the printers ink left faded stripes because an ink is running low or clogging... far less headaches and makes my job so seamless.  Plus I can experiment with different papers, canvas's, metal, metallic, etc... stuff I couldn't do otherwise. 

22

Software & Accessories / Re: Websites

« on: April 19, 2013, 10:21:37 AM »

Will face book not be enough?

If you are professional or trying to break into the professional world, NO facebook is not even close, it's not even safe and secure... ANYONE can right click and download your images, and people have been known to steal images and post them as their own on facebook, Sue Bryce had a handful of them recently, of course her work is very known and was found out... Childrens Photographer Sandy Puc had a facebook page and one day, like magic, facebook took her page down... all her contacts, all her followers, everything... gone.  After that she redid a new page, but does not rely on that being her marketing and all to be all, she uses it to drive people to her website. 

Anyways, I was fortunate to be forced to learn HTML many moons ago and like babysteps learned CSS and html5 and such and have built my website from scratch...  It's still not perfect but at least if anything needs changed, i can do it myself quickly and upgrade as I go along.

23

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: "I am boycotting Nikon" campaign

« on: April 15, 2013, 10:43:21 AM »

Killing hogs is murder!  Yummy tasty murder!  breakfast time, where's my bacon!

24

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X NOT compatible with Pocket Wizard!

« on: April 12, 2013, 06:32:24 PM »

You can always use the good ol' fashion sync cord that comes with your flashes...  But yeah, these cameras have nearly been out a good year and we are still twiddling our thumbs for PW to show up to the game...  At least with my 5d3 and PW3, i can get good results at 1/160. 

25

Canon General / Re: Ever borrow from CPS

« on: April 05, 2013, 11:52:01 AM »

I eval equipment pretty frequently.  Loaned equipment I generally keep on me at all times and if I have to leave at home it is locked in a safe.  Check with your homeowners and auto insurance to determine personal coverage but if you get held up when using it it's generally your responsibility to cover the loss unless you have specific professional coverage.  Always ship it insured back to Canon 1, 2 or 3 day delivery with signature.  Costs a small fortune but it's still cheaper than renting.

It brings up an interesting point.  I frequently have friends that ask to borrow lenses and gear from me and I always ask, if you drop it, get held up or it gets stolen, can you afford to replace it?  That usually gets them thinking and they stop asking.  So my point is if you don't have insurance to cover the loan and you don't have enough cash in the bank to replace it, then you probably shouldn't borrow equipment from Canon or anyone.  A loss could be catastrophic to your finances, relationships, friendships, whatever.

Replacing a 1DX is perhaps 2 or 3 mortgage payments for most people and that could be serious if you don't have funds to get by.

Once you get through that, CPS eval is a great service.  In the US, GOLD level doesn't let you pick the dates to eval.  They ship when it's available so hard to schedule trips.  PLATINUM level gets priority and you can pick your date, and Canon picks up shipping and insurance both ways!  But it's 500.00 a year! 

I'm on gold level... I usually tell them a specific date i need the equipment by and they will ship it 2 days before that date so it gets to be by that date.  I also give them at least 3 weeks to a month notice (like when I get a wedding booking or the like and want to try out a cam/lens).  But you do have to take shipping to and from in account when planning on a equip eval. 

26

Canon General / Re: 24-70Mk2 fell off my 5DMk3 and smashed

« on: April 05, 2013, 10:17:53 AM »

Uh, the 24-105 also has teh zoom ring in the same spot. Never knew this was an issue. 

Never used the 24-70M2, but my 24-105, the zoom ring is a good inch away from the lens release (when mounted), so I almost have to TRY to hit it.  Unless the 24-70m2 zoom sits RIGHT AT the edge of the lens, or if you just have monster hands, I cant see that being a problem... 

27

Canon General / Re: Ever borrow from CPS

« on: April 05, 2013, 10:13:10 AM »

I've borrowed several times...  I've been pretty careful with the gear and haven't had any problems... Just be in communication with them to be safe... When I get the gear I inspect everything, check focus, cosmetic, etc...  If there's any scuffs or dings or the like, I make note of it, photograph it, and send an email to the CPS rep just so they are aware of it, just in case they question you when they receive the gear back.  Heck once I was even late in returning it and I provided tracking info and was in communication with them and they were cool with it.  Treat them as if they aren't yours and you should be fine.  =)

28

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DMk3 at wedding receptions

« on: April 04, 2013, 10:16:39 AM »

Try AF expansion. Avoid single point AF in extremely low light and Its worked good for me.

I second the AF expansion especially for low light.  In my weddings I haven't noticed too much of a drop off... Also, on certain lenses, the center column has double cross points...  Not sure if that means they can go any faster or just more accurate, but something to play with...  But if your struggling, do a few test shoots in similar lighting situations and try different modes and AF scenarios until you find a system that you like best.

29

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III & Possible 1D X Issue With PocketWizards

« on: April 01, 2013, 11:00:15 AM »

Any updates... We upgraded to the PW3's and they still have the 1/160 sync limit...  oh well... 

30

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D L Announced, Shipping in May

« on: April 01, 2013, 10:31:16 AM »

Gotta say I'm stunning...  so... devils advocate, in a few months if they come out with a 7d2... will there be a 7d2L as well?