Not nearly as talented as I would like.
Francis Carver: Oh, Canada.... land of the world's absolutely worst postal system, bar none.
Heck, in the era of the Great Roman Empire the postal system there worked better than the joke that is Canada Post. It gives a black eye to the whole country. I would NEVER order anything from Canada... nor ship anything to Canada... via postal delivery service.
Too bad, really -- now the cash-strapped folks who might be otherwise renting their lenses in Canada will have to resort to get them any and all other way possible.
@Francis Carver: "in the era of the Great Roman Empire the postal system there worked better" And you experienced that personally? :-) Are you talking about the service within Rome or throughout the whole Empire? At its peak was the Empire even as expansive as Canada?
vaclav1: 1.Canada Post has 50% higher prices than USPS.2.Canada Post is much slower than USPS.3.I have shipped hundreds packages via USPS, no one was lost, Canada Post is unreliable.
As it is with everything in life people's experiences with Canada Post are quite varied.
drawer77: Where can i download quality lenses ?
I'd like to know *how* to download lenses! :-)
mark currier: Soccer moms will now be photographing the Super Bowl.
I doubt it. They're too busy doing selfies!
Boss of Sony: TWO REASONS WHY CAMERA COMPANIES ARE LOSING MONEY: 1. Capitalism is dying (finally), because it is based on faulty mathematics, so it has to end at some point. 2. NOBODY CARES ABOUT PHOTOGRAPHY ANYMORE. The only people who care are the obsessives who think looking at an inferior 2-D representation of something on a screen is better than appreciating the real thing with your eyes in real time. Now that everone has a camera, people are waking up and thinking, what the hell is the point of photography? Why don't I just look at the world with my eyes and stop wasting valuable resources and valuable time doing a pointless activity?
You'll probably get roasted for this but about a year ago I read that researchers are starting to believe that because of the ubiquity of cameras people are losing the ability to remember what they see. So they take photos to remember their holidays, children parties and other meaningful events. And the more photos they take the less they remember. It's a vicious circle. I wish I could find the reference. I'm not convinced because I think that our brains are so overloaded with information that we can't manage it all. Maybe in a few hundred years human evolution will provide the means to do so.
That's a good one: Canada Post owns Purolator!
yassarian: I think I'm gonna wait on the newer Thinktank Pro Escort Turbo Diesel Russian version...
Why is it that in the past 10 or so years almost every study I've read about has told us something we already knew? I hope these people don't get paid. :-)
Well, we know that learning something unfamiliar will fire up new brain synapses. But what happens once you've mastered the new skill? Does the brain go back to a state where it needs to learn something new in order to keep fit. I think that's more important. I find that a lot of studies are either incomplete or tell us things we already know. Well, some of us already know. Lots of wasted resources in human-related research.
"We will work aggressively to prevent these types of events from occurring in the future."
How can we believe you since you didn't do this time? Or any of the hundreds of other times you left security holes in your software.
If people don't notice the creases in the background they deserve to be hoodwinked. :-)
More than ever I am convinced that humans have "whining" hardwired in their DNA. Doesn't matter what you talk about complainers will ALWAYS come out to hear themselves talk (or read themselves type if you will).
frankmv: Never opened an account with Instagram...and now I never will. Further, I've deleted the app from my iPhone. I'll take a much harder look at Flickr and other similar social media (read "sharing") sites. I may just swear off them all...
"Unlimited usage does not transfer the copyright to the buyer" In other words, copyright means nothing. One might accept that this state of affairs was common in Dickens' time but in what way have we progressed on social justice. That so many people have egos so large that they don't mind losing their rights for the privilege of exposing themselves in public is quite telling if you ask me. (and even if you don't)
Stephen_H: Just another thought, if I'm art-directing the photographer, how can the photographer claim to have created the image?
I've conceived the conceptI've chosen the message it needs to conveyI've set it upI've chosen the lighting schemeI've hired a stylist to fine tune everything else
All the photographer is doing is making sure that all my efforts aren't wasted by being technically skilled and proficient in his art.
If I can't to claim to have "created the image", then I'm going to give Nikon more credit for making the image than the photographer who trusted his light meter, followed the manual that came with his camera and pressed the shutter.
Perhaps there needs to be a distinction between commissioned commercial work where the photographer is just doing what he's told to do, and the more creative, self-inspired artistic photographs where the photographer has genuinely created everything in the final content?
The simplest solution? Take the picture yourself and get all the glory and any money that comes. Problem solved - no more whining.