Alpha Jack: Not sure why all of the hate. Tablets are potential tools for photography and many photographers are very interested if not already invested. Connect or regular site, there is interest on this site.
Hey guys, we know some of you would prefer not to see us expand into these other topic areas on the homepage. We're exploring ways to enhance the display/filter/view options to let the user have even more control over what they see. We hope to have some options on the way this year for you.
zaurus: Links to both the source and to a page with more detailed info would have been useful.
the link is after the second paragraph:
tkbslc: Doesn't this picture know that you can't get subject isolation with m4/3?
My head is standard sized, I assure you. :)
phantom5691: "it produced images in a visual style that people weren’t used to seeing"
Yeah, no one has EVER seen those hipstagram type filters before. lol
The point is that when his images were coming out in Time, NYT, and New Yorker, they were hitting mass audiences that dont pay attention to the latest movements in photography technology, so yes, most of the eyeballs seeing his Libya or Afghanistan images had not seen Hipstamatic images in 2010-2012.
johnmacp: You can praise or criticize all you like but the fact is that pretty much all the posts below me are arguing over the tools- iPhone, Android, filters, blah blah blah - says it all.
There are virtually no comments on the actual images presented making them simply uninformative window-dressing.
Whats the story behind them? Where are these people standing on a hill? What are these guys praying with a AK47 doing there, and what did they do next? What are they fighting for? Who are they fighting against? Do they have names?
THATS all that matters to me. And is that not what all this new-age connected PJ'sm is supposed to be about ? Telling stories?
I see precious little real communication going on here. SO if using the iPhone is supposed to aid communication of important issues and raise awareness it's failing miserably at least in this context - and I would argue that this is precisely the sort of place that communication should be happening.
Or am I missing something?
Hey John, some context might help you. These photos originally ran in a major publication with accompanying text by a writer. The story was told and the photos were used to illustrate. Could have they been taken on other gear? Perhaps, but I think Ben chose the iphone in certain circumstances due to close quarters, timing, and so on. But, the point, is that the device was a means to get the shots, which were used in storytelling.
Photog74: This reminds me of a story from about 10 years ago when Magnum photographer Alex Majoli would use three Olympus C-5050 compact cameras to document the Iraq war. There have always been, and will likely always be, photographers who use smaller devices instead of the generally bulky SLRs preferred by the majority of their colleagues. This is nothing new, actually.
I actually bought that camera because of that story. :)
Bluebird47: It's a pity that this website gave up all interest in serving serious photographers and instead became a silly "me too blog" on the current fad of mainstream mobile "photography" with phones. Yes, we got it. Influential people use phones, but not because of its technological superiority (in conflict situations, a real camera is certainly superior in terms of shooting speed, low light performance etc.), but as a cheap marketing ploy to pander to the masses, same as you. How about an "why i DON'T use an iphone" article? Now that would show some serious balls! Just sayin.
In the meantime, if you are still confused about Ben Lowy, why he uses an iphone (at times), what kind of work he does for Reportage by Getty (a serious professional photography agency apparently) and want to learn more, I suggest you check out this other site that like Dpreview may have no real interest in professional photography, The New York Times: http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/02/ben-lowy-virtually-unfiltered/
Bluebird47, we are all ears if you have any meaningful commentary on the content of this article or site, but leading with "this website gave up all interest in serving serious photographers" shows a serious lack of understanding of the facts. We have not changed any of the existing Dpreview content, we've just added more, via a new site that is separate from the main site.
As for this particular piece, not once in the post above is the fact that Ben Lowy uses an iPhone presented as novel due to the technological capabilities of the device, yet that is your only real comment, that influential people don't use mobile phones for photography because of their technology (a lot of irony to this statement).
Regardless, we'd love to have you pen a piece on why you dont use an iphone. If it's interesting and actually provides our readers with valuable information, we'll publish it (probably to Dpreview though). I mean that. Drop me a PM with your angle.
Karroly: What I expect from a photojournalist is to report the facts and only the facts, avoiding any kind of distortion if possible.When a photojournalist tries to put some aesthetic in his/her pictures to catch attention or to translate his/her own feelings into his/her pictures, he/she - intentionally or not - MANIPULATES us, the viewers...
For the record, photojournalists are distorting the facts every day by choosing what to shoot. They are making a choice "this is the way to tell this story" (thus choosing what story should be told, and how). The composition, editing, and everything thereafter is just added layers. There are limitations to journalism in every form, including photography. Not trying to negate your point, but I think its worth considering the larger perspective of how this whole system actually works.
backayonder: A good image is one that captures the moment and evokes some sort of emotion in the viewer whether the image was taken on a box Brownie, iPhone or DLSR. I can't help but feel these images would be better if taken wih a DLSR.
From the article: "In the interview Lowy gives reasons for using his iPhone, especially in conflict zones when he's reporting, which you may have heard before: "it was anonymous, it wasn’t particularly heavy, it didn’t get in the way of being intimate with a potential subject. And it was fast, I could just pull the phone out of my pocket and take a picture as things were happening in front of me."
marike6: I just wish DPR would fix the regular site's forums on Google Chrome (mac), my main web browser. I sent a note via Feedback, but the layout is completely broken and unusable.
Congrats on the new mobile forums. Please fix the forum on Chrome (mac) on the non-mobile site. Thanks.
We are using the forums on mac chrome without issue, can you PM any more details about the issues? Would be glad to try and troubleshoot with you.
Henrik Herranen: Just a suggestion:Would it be possible for DPReview to create two separate front pages, with separate URLs. One with only reviews and camera news, the stuff that DPReview used to be about. And another which would include everything: mobile phones news, Leica awards, Hipstamatic, Foursquare, Google+, iOS, smartphones at weddings, Mobile Photography Awards, and whatnot? E.g. http://www.dpreview.com/ for everything vs http://www.dpreview.com/hardnews/ for, well, real news and reviews without the ever-increasing mobile, tablet, and community articles?
Hi Henrik, you can actually do this already. Right at the top of the news feed is a set of option to filter the feed as you like, which will stick with your profile as a permanent setting. Just select the categories you want, say for example, "Reviews and Previews", "New cameras and lenses", and "Firmware & Software updates", and then click "MAKE DEFAULT". Then you will be all set, only hardnews. :)
Photo Pete: I'm with other posters re the review format. No disrespect but this didn't tell me anything other than carbon fibre is lighter and less prone to vibration than aluminium and that the reviewer doesn't like ballheads. The manufacturer's weight rating means nothing.... It may be able to support 11kg, but vibrate like a jelly when it does so.
More critical information would be a guide as to what focal length lens can be used without vibration blur for a mid weight dSLR kit, or did the head exhibit lockdown creep or jerk when making fine positional adjustments. What is the range of support positions possible (max height, min height, angle to vertical etc).
Unlike one poster above, I think a degree of lab testing is something to be expected from DPReview. The forums are the place for opinions, the reviews should be the place for quantifiable and impartial assessment.
The idea of a vibration test by measuring the number of pixels blurred is a good idea. You could use a standard dSLR kit with 300mm lens focused on a test chart. Take one shot at 1/1000 second and one at 1 second (critical vibration from shutter and mirror movement is usually most visible between about 1second and 1/20 second) and measure the extra number of pixels of blur in the longer exposure. NOT using mirror up or exposure delay mode would allow the shutter vibration and mirror slap to expose any instability. Provided you use the same dSLR and lens for each test this would be a good and relatively quick way to compare stability of an overall leg / head kit.
For the heavier duty kits it would be possible to use a longer focal length lens as a more stringent test.
If you wanted to test just the legs then you could use a heavy duty Arca Swiss head in the test. If you wanted to test just the head then you could mount it directly onto studio legs or directly onto a test bench.
If you really wanted to be thorough you could additionally test with centre column up, down or horizontal ( if the option is available). If nothing else that would let people know that a manufacturer's maximum height figure that relies on extending the centre column should be taken with a pinch of salt!
I really haven't seen many good tripod and head tests and DPReview could really set the standard here.
Good and useful feedback, we're still working out what level of detail makes sense for accessories like this.
JohnnyWashngo: It's a website that is aimed at mobile photography and yet the layout is not responsive?
The layout is the same regardless of device it is being viewed on. This may have been a purposeful decision and if so then fair enough, but I would have imagined that the site would have been written to render in a more readable fashion on a mobile phone.
There's a custom mobile version of the site coming.
mapu: No RSS feeds?
They are on the way
jkrumm: A couple questions... the rules say images cannot previously have been shown through any "media channels." I'm guessing they mean newspapers, magazines, and major websites where the image is featured in some way, but they could mean just putting it on Flickr. Can you clarify?
Also, it looks like the image can be from any time, not just taken after the contest started. Is that true?
Correct, the image need not be taken after the launch of the contest. Mainly because there is no realistic way for us to verify this type of rule.
ericinho: [OT] I find the downright rude and simply ungrateful behavior of some here baffling, especially since the entire site is FREE. So an effort to make the site better (again free of charge) should be applauded, supported and critized constructively instead of being a complete d--k moaning like a little kid about things that do not work and are "a big mistake".
ofcourse as with most (if not all) migrations to another system, a lot of things go wrong, but the DP team is working to fix them. So why don't you give them an encouragement by giving useful critique in a way your mother taught you to do. No one of us can make any claims or demands, since you don't pay a dime (and spare me non-arguments like the few ads here and there)
So instead of all this negativety that seems to be going around since too many month, try to be a bit more courteous It will make the boards a fun place again and the site in general more enjoyable to visit (plus as bonus the DP crew will likely appreciate it).
The feedback is all welcomed everyone, just want that to be clear. Obviously when its packaged in a constructive way, its easier to distill, but we did not go into this thinking it would be a simple process. As you will notice, we've already made 30-40 small changes to address some initial user feedback, and for some of the larger issues for some users, such as contrast and color, we'd already planned some options that are being worked through. The key to remember is that moving to this new platform allows us to be much more flexible in addressing user needs than before, where any small change was much more risky and challenging to implement.
pieces: The way the new forum is displaying photographs is very disappointing. I put up a set of photos in the following thread http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3273845 a few days ago. These photos are sharp but in the new thread they are flat, lacking detail and sharpness. This is very disappointing and certainly removes any motivation to show any photographs. I will certainly not be posting any under these circumstances.
I just took a look at the pics, they look nice on my 2008 macbook pro (at home). I'll take a look in the AM on a calibrated monitor and check in with our devs on whether there's any (non-browser related) issues with images displaying. What browser are you using?
Carbon111: *Very* hard on the eyes regardless of the blue or yellow color choice. :(
As noted in the story above, we have some lighter color schemes on the way.
jpr2: is there a way to use the OLD SKIN = the previous layout, color scheme, functionality?
- where are "My Threads" gone?- why such a waste of screen's real estate - readability just got a serious hit !!!- why quoted texts aren't marked by different colors??
given time the list will grow longer, but these are the mostregrettable changes = immediately obvious :(
We will soon be rolling out lighter color schemes that, I think, will be very desirable for a sizable chunk of our users. :)