Jump to content

TABan

Verified
  • Content Count

    471
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TABan

  1. I switched to µ43 after decades with Canon and haven't looked back. Brand loyalty only goes so far. And, I have to say, the Lumix GX85(80) is way better for travel and not being noticed. Image quality is just fine. Plus, the availability of inexpensive fast primes negates the slight high ISO disadvantage compared to larger formats.
  2. This is pretty funny. https://video.vanityfair.com/watch/emilia-clarke-recreates-stock-photos
  3. There was another case in the USA a few decades back where a photo of a group of guys on Harley Davidsons was used in a textbook to illustrate some sort of psychological defect. It was released, but the folks in the photo were doctors and lawyers. My understanding is they sued and won.
  4. From a lunchtime walk today at the University of Chicago.
  5. From the Women's March in Chicago yesterday.
  6. I'm afraid so. Near Asheville, North Carolina. Not a bad place to end up, really.
  7. I don’t allow PU sales. And a couple of months ago someone actually contacted me for a print of an Alamy image, which I sold her. Much better than PU.
  8. I took a little side trip about a month ago while driving from St. Louis, MO to Dayton, OH.
  9. From Superstorm Sandy's brush with Chicago in 2012. And the Halloween gale in 2014.
  10. Edit: Oops, never mind. They have to buy a personal use license. Good reason to restrict that.
  11. I can't find my image numbers in Image Manager. Anybody know how to get to them? Thanks in advance.
  12. Oops, I see there's already a thread, however, I have not seen this issue on a desktop Mac using Safari.
  13. Has anyone else noticed that when you view your sales report (Download Sales Report button) on an iPad, the page footer covers most of the last entry? I don't download the reports, I just view them.
  14. And do not confuse with with whit . yes indeed... back to school... Whit is fine in parts of NYC.
  15. This reminds me of my favorite political party stock photo faux pas: https://www.wired.com/2008/09/john-mccain-acc/
  16. Can anyone recommend a decent IPTC editor for the iPad/iPhone?
  17. If you're just shooting editorial stock, you don't need a dSLR. I've been using a Panasonic Lumix GX85 for the past several months and the image quality is outstanding even with the kit 12-32 lens, which is sharp wide open at all focal lengths. The in body stabilization works in concert with the lens IS and is much more effective than lens only IS. Plus, nobody notices me anymore. I occasionally used a Sony RX100 successfully in the past but never really liked the ergonomics. I still have a Canon 80D, but use it on rare occasions. I had a GX85 image license in little over a month of using it.
  18. If you're considering the Panasonic LX100, you may also want to look at the GX80/85 (85 in N. America, 80 elsewhere) as it's about the same size and uses m4/3 lenses. I'm heading to a actual camera store today to look at one. From what I've read and seen, it appears to be very good. No anti-aliasing filter and it has 5 axis in body stabilization that's just a bit less effective than Olympus' and works in tandem with in lens IS. I'm heading out today to handle one in an actual camera store. Here's a review: http://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/05/18/panasonic-gx85-gx80-review/
  19. Silly argument. There are those of us who shot transparency film for stock who had no trouble getting it right in the camera. I treat jpegs the same way. If there's a situation where a raw might be better, I switch to raw + jpeg. More than half the time, I take the jpeg. Metering systems have become so good, it's not often I deal with blown highlights. And if you know how to shoot transparency film, you know how to deal with highlights. Not only that, you can bracket and not worry about wasted film. Whatever you folks want to do is cool. For most of my stock work, raw is a complete waste of ti
  20. Silly argument. There are those of us who shot transparency film for stock who had no trouble getting it right in the camera. I treat jpegs the same way. If there's a situation where a raw might be better, I switch to raw + jpeg. More than half the time, I take the jpeg. Metering systems have become so good, it's not often I deal with blown highlights. And if you know how to shoot transparency film, you know how to deal with highlights. Not only that, you can bracket and not worry about wasted film. Whatever you folks want to do is cool. For most of my stock work, raw is a complete waste of ti
  21. Holy crap! I can't believe you got down rated for this. There are plenty of pros who mainly shoot jpeg. If what you get from raw isn't much different from the out of camera jpeg, what's the point? In fact, a very good pro in my area says raw is for amateurs, he gets it right in camera. And you can actually do more to jpegs in Lightroom than most people think and if you go to far, it's easy enough to back off. Then there is this accomplished fine art shooter: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/03/ken-tanaka-shooting-jpeg-instead-of-raw.html You find ideolo
×
×
  • 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.