Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Duncan_Andison

  1. Thanks for this, Duncan. Tempting but my trusty NEX-6 still looks brand new, and I'm on a limited budget these days. Then there is the rapidly sinking Canadian dollar (loonie) to consider...


    Too bad Sony or someone else still hasn't dreamed up a rationally priced replacement for the 16-50 kit zoom.


    I too am happy that the 36 MP sensor was just malicious gossip. B)


    Yeah, 24mp seems a sensible size for the APSC body!


    If using a7rii + 24-70mm GM,

    will one get IS from body?

    Or no IS at all with this combo???!!!!!  :(  :(  :(


    & if IS from body, what disadvantage,

    if any, vs. lens with IS?




    You would get the IS from the body IBIS. It doubles up with lenses that also have IS.


    As to how effective it will be on it's own at 70mm I'm not sure but, it wouldn't be the first standard zoom with no IS so having IBIS is a plus in this instance! IS in lens can be tailored to the lens and as such, be more effective. From what people say, IBIS is good for about 2 stops where some lenses can squeeze 4-5 stops.




    Looking around the net, there are quite a few that say the A7rii IBIS is good for 4 stops. I guess it's going to come down to technique as to how much you can squeeze out of it. I know with the 16-35 & 90mm, it does very well when  combined with lens IS. I have a habit of knocking the IS off on the 90mm and I don't suffer from many blurred shots from it.

  2. Thanks for that Duncan.


    Thank goodness they have limited the pixel count to 24.2 MP, and not the rumoured 36 or whatever. Hopefully a super sensor.


    I'm not seeing any reference to in body stabilisation, which is a pity.


    The EVF appears to have a similar resolution to the NEX6, better than the a6000, but no mention of a built in level indicator.


    There are improvements on the autofocus front, but I rarely use autofocus!


    Similarly a better video performance, but I primarily want a stills camera.


    There doesn't seem to be any new lenses specifically intended for this format. The new introductions are for FF, which will be large and heavy, while the standard offer appears to be the rather underwhelming existing 16-50. 


    Not sure that there is enough here to tempt me at this time, but at least they are keeping faith with the format. Maybe when the price drops.....


    Oh they are. About 800g for the 24-70 f/2.8. Later this year I'll be updating my X-T1 that I use along with my A7rii and it's going to be between the X-T2 (when out this year), A6300 or maybe the A7sii. Plenty of time to see how things develop. As it's going to be a 2nd camera, I might go with the A6300 as it seems to be a bargain compared to the X-Pro2 that has the same sensor but also 4k video. Cheaper, takes my FE lenses.... could be a good choice!




    You should get hired by Alamy immediately... ;)





    Haha....  ahhh the days of graphic design, a2 pads, magic markers and storyboarding..... all changed of course, but after using the Wacom 27 cintiq & iPad Pro with the Apple pencil, I'd say it's for the better  :D


    Web design can be tricky these days though, so many changes to take into account it can be a headache and as such, sometimes it's easy to lose sight of the design aesthetics when trying to workout the technical problems. One thing Alamy has done in the past, and that's listen. They tend to make changes afterwards (sometimes a little slowly) but often they do make the right corrections.


    Personally, when carrying out graphical changes to a site, I'd be tempted to create 1-3 mini test sites (basically 1 test site with 3 alternative CSS Style Sheets for different designs) that can be used by testers, photographers and customers and for them to provide feedback on the look and feel etc. A bit like Beta Testing but you do need to involve quite a few people and not just a dozen. But, I don't envy them the job of managing the database behind it all...... that must be quite a job! Respect.


    Edit..... although I do miss the smell and feel of using magic markers....there was always something special using them!

    • Upvote 1

  4. Just checked one of my St. Croix images.  Underneath, well over 80 images and only 4 of them mine.  I have at least 300 St. Croix images. Would be nice if under my main zoomed image, all of those underneath were mine, since I can easily fill that space.


    That is going to drive customers crazy. I mean, they've just searched through hundreds of images potentially and picked one to look at...... that gets lost amongst 80 other images?!?!? The volume of similar images is way out of control, as is there size. They also need to be more relevant.

  5. And on what basis do they select the similars on the zoom page.....????

    Is there some poor soul selecting them manually? Come on, it's bullshit! Doesn't serve anyone.


    Did some more tests:

    "Ile de Ré island France" Guess what pictures comes up ....... World Trade Center / Niedersachsen / Salisbury cathedral / Red Square in Moscow / ... Anybody see the connection 'cause I don't  :wacko: 

    "city Ghent Belgium" Guess what pictures comes up ....... Sydney Harbour Bridge / Beijing, China / Blackpool illuminations / .... Anybody see the connection 'cause I don't   :wacko: 

    'blood pressure elderlyGuess what pictures comes up ....... lady drinking her midday sherry / hands checking calendar / .... Anybody see the connection 'cause I don't. Hell, "blood pressure" isn't even the keywords  :wacko: 


    Well done! I'm impressed  :angry:





    While I said I had no problem with similar images being displayed, I was of course assuming the similar images were indeed similar and relevant  :D


    If the above searches are representative of the whole system, then it should be stopped until it does work..... and, that the similar images are at least 50% smaller than the Zoomed image. Some examples I've seen show similar images that look the same size / bigger than the zoomed image due to the similar being Portrait instead of Landscape! This is not right and takes away attention from the zoomed image.


    Insufficient testing before implementation?!?

    • Upvote 1

  6. Come on guys/girls, if their images turn up underneath your results, your images will show up under their results.

    Any which way you compute this, the other results will be more than yours alone. So your images will show up under more searches.


    The only thing you will now have to do is to make sure yours are better.




    +1 No problems with seeing similars


    That said, I think they need to slim down the volume. One I checked had 27 more images under mine and made it look very confused, which is not good from a customers perspective. Restrict it to 4-8 with a link to "See More" otherwise the "Zoom Page" starts to look messy and confusing.


    Or, make the thumbnails a little smaller and have 1 row of 8 similar images from the same artist and 1 row of 8 from other artists..... this is how it is managed at other libraries and if kept to an acceptable size, will not look overly distracting as it does now (with a massive 27 other images :-)


    Edit. Thumbnails definitely need shrinking, they're too similar in size to the zoomed image, which should be the main focus of the page.

    • Upvote 1



    I'll hold out for the X-T2. I expect it to have the same sensor as the Pro2. Then my T1 will become the backup.

    Me too. The X-pro users I know of pretty well all use the EVF exclusively, so why pay a premium for a hybrid finder? It doesn't make sense unless you only shoot short primes, and then you only have to put up with the horrendous parallax close up!
    Agreed. The only prime I have is the 56. I love my zooms.

    On another note, the 100-400 has also been released, a lens I've waited for along with the macro. But it is very pricey. I'll wait until some time passes and view images taken with it, read opinions from users like me, and hope for a price drop.


    Oops. Thought it was released. Guess not.

    Reviews of the lens looks good. Stacks up with the 50-140. Yippee! Looks like it might ship in Feb.



    Yeah, I could get the Canon 100-400mkii for more or less that and the resale value will hold up better. I'll see how it goes, love the 50-140 and if it's the same quality it will be great but cost wise, I could be tempted to stick the Canon 100-400mkii on the A7rii as the AF works well with it. The added bulk of the Metabones adapter isn't an issue as neither rig is really a walk-about lens  :D


    I'm also waiting on the X-T2 and only then will I decide which camera to go for for my backup camera. I really want to see if Fuji now allow ALL NR to be switched off and not just lowered.

  8. Odd, I am running 2015.0.0 (not updated to very latest version) and it runs very quickly. Only other thing would be the scratch disk but if the same one is dedicated to both versions.....that wouldn't seem to be the problem. I'm on a clean install of W10 with programs on a SSD...the latter may be disguising a software slowdown??


    Also running the latest 2015 CC Photoshop but on a Macbook Pro and it runs as fast as you like.


    If it helps, It's also on a SSD, dual graphics card, 16gb ram & i7 chipset 2.5GHz. I haven't changed any settings from install and as a rule, it finishes processing before I've even pressed go. Which probably means it will stop working now  :mellow:

  9. Seems the courts have changed their minds



    Shame on Peta and Wikipedia. If this is how they use their donations, to fight over monkey copyright, they won't be seeing any money from me. Better to give to people and organizations who work to improve the lives of animals.


    +1 When they say they're fighting for animal rights. What they mean (in this instance) , "We're fighting for the right to grab a hold of someone else's  money".  


    PETA's weekly board meeting - We could grab some of that hard working guys money as the monkey took the shot....Oh, right, the monkey isn't subject to our laws, damit..... never mind, we'll waste $m's of dollars (of other peoples money) fighting a lost cause with the vain hope we may get even more money for us....errr..... I mean for the monkey of course!


    Next thing we'll hear is the monkey is up in court for theft of the camera!



    Perhaps the exceptionately low price derived from the fact that it was an RF image being licensed for "one time use only." If so, it would be a good argument for sticking with RM on Alamy.


    It's not because it's RF. I've had several RF sales over the last month ranging from $120 to $200+. In fact, over the last month and a bit, I've had mainly RF sales, only 5 RM and I've had one of my strongest spells at Alamy for a while. Apart from a couple of $7 ones, they've all been decent prices



    Interesting to hear this. I've never licensed an RF image on Alamy. But then I have very few RF images on Alamy (or anywhere else). Actually, I was thinking that the buyer might have been able to negotiate the low price because Bryan's image was RF and they wanted only one-time usage. But that theory has been debunked since the same buyer apparently licensed RM images as well.



    I have to admit, I've been pleasantly surprised by the $'s for RF from Alamy and hopefully it will continue that way!

  11. Perhaps the exceptionately low price derived from the fact that it was an RF image being licensed for "one time use only." If so, it would be a good argument for sticking with RM on Alamy.


    It's not because it's RF. I've had several RF sales over the last month ranging from $120 to $200+. In fact, over the last month and a bit, I've had mainly RF sales, only 5 RM and I've had one of my strongest spells at Alamy for a while. Apart from a couple of $7 ones, they've all been decent prices



    I saw a research report recently that said roughly 75% of stock photos sold these days are now RF. Makes me wonder the Rm/RF strategy going forward. Alamy sells RF so if one doesn't want the microstock sites to sell RF then Alamy might be the choice.


    I wonder if the reason may be that balance between RF and RM is even higher in RF direction? I mean in general there is more RF images than RM and this may cause the 75%...

    Nope, it's that clients are now preferring to use more and more RF. Every survey that I have seen from buyers is telling us that - US Graphic design one recently. One reason is that more clients now need to use an image through multiple media channels which makes RF more suitable. Image use is changing and one license is becoming more usable for a lot of clients.

    Yeah, the number of platforms for image use etc now would mean RM is quite expensive. If it is a major campaign with plenty of $'s in the budget then great, otherwise RF can be a lot more appealing.


    Also, how many book /magazine editors have asked you for total exclusive rights over an image?!? They do happen but these days with tighter budgets, I'd imagine they will be a fewer in number. On this basis the balance of RM & RF should weigh in RF favour. Keep the very best / rare images as RM and the rest for RF. That said, to do well now the "Rest" have to be very good as well. We need to constantly improve on what we do and keep ahead of the chasing pack :-)

    • Upvote 1

  13. Hi Duncan!  the only way you are ever going to get a price justifying the usage or whatever, nowadays is what I posted in the other forum ( you know the one)  is when a creative buyer scouts around for a client, might be exclusive-rights, copyright sales as the buyer I had looking for a pic to use in a world-wide logo-type.


    Why?  simply because they have no option but to pay, no matter the cost, the pic must simply be exclusive, period. Also when you have ad-agency creatives, art-directors buying etc, money is seldom an object.


    A pal of mine, AD at O&M is right now looking for a stone statue of an old man draped in snow and is prepared to pay 5K for it. How about that???  he could most probably find that in any old agency BUT he wants the copyright, etc.


    In August I did a Land-rover shoot, latest Defender ( 15 year old client), the budget for the shoot was mega big, around, 50K, models, props, this, that and only a day shoot. This they don't mind paying for, same client I told a few month's earlier to use a stock-agency just for fill-out pics in an annual for a meager, $.70 per shot. He thought that was too expensive, HA!


    There is no way you can win, prices have just been slashed too much and going down and agencies are finding all sorts of ways to save payouts to contributors ( not alamy ) but the micros, one of the leading ones are pushing down higher royalty-members in the search-engine, another one is pushing subs-packages instead of credit-sales.


    Talk about some day, this will all backfire on them and we wake up on a Monday morning just to find they've gone out of business.


    all the best Duncan.


    Good to hear from you Chris! Yeah, no agency is ever going to compete with client based work :-) Emailed ya by the way!


    The day we find an agency that can be trusted 100% will be the day hell freezes over (sorry Alamy). They all have too many agendas, shareholders and investors etc who want more and more of the pie!


    In fairness, most have been doing really well of late and that includes Alamy..... cheers Alamy, credit where credits due!!

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.