I finally get you use the old Zero Wing reference.
Personally, I think it's really appropriate as the original phrase makes about as much sense as the latest move from Time, Inc. UK
The company has initiated a new contract for photography freelancers that goes into effect January 1. Any photography working on assignment for one of the 60 niche publications owned by Time Inc. UK will have to surrender all rights to those images to the company. (The weekly Time news magazine is not effected by the new contract terms, at least not yet.)
This is just the latest trend in big companies showing little respect for professional photographers. Yahoo's CEO annoyed photographers with her comments, Getty engaged in blatant copyright theft as well as other actions that annoyed contributors and various media outlets have laid off part or all of their photo journalists staff.
Now, Time, Inc. UK is telling freelancers they are going to treat them like employees in regards to copyright, (as a general rule, the work product of employees belongs to the employer) but treating them as an independent contractor for all other purposes. Meaning the photographer must take care of expenses, taxes, etc.
What professional photographer will be willing to work freelance if they have to take all the risks and except all the expenses if they then have to tuen over all rights to the images produced?
That's the worst of both worlds.
I think all this stems from the prevalence of camera phones. With everyone taking pictures with their phones, all these CEOs have a mentality that there is nothing unique about being a professional photographer.
They're wrong.
It's the same distinction between someone that plays baseball with the boys on the weekend and someone playing for a Major League ball club. There is a reason those weekend warriors don't get paid $20 million a year and some professional baseball players do.
The professional brings a level of talent and a dedication to the profession that separates them from those that don't.
The most annoying thing is that many of the companies involved are media companies that make money by producing a professional level product. (Magazines and stock photos). How do they expect to continue doing that if they don't treat the people that actually take those photos as professionals?
Showing posts with label photography trends. Show all posts
Showing posts with label photography trends. Show all posts
Thursday, December 18, 2014
Saturday, June 14, 2014
Why Phone Cameras Will Never Completely Replace DSLRs
The iPhone Photography Awards website recently announced the winners of their 2014 contest. You can view the winning images on their website.
The thought that struck me while viewing the gallery: there just wasn't a great deal of variety when it came to the images.
Sure, they were of different subjects, but they looked like they could have been taken by the same photographer. There just wasn't anything truly distinctive about any of the images.
The similarity in the images is caused by the limitations imposed by including camera technology inside a phone. Modern phones are extremely thin. This limits the distance between the sensor and the lens, and this greatly limits the type of images that can be produced.
Don't believe me?
Go through the galleries and find an image where focus is used to isolate the subject from the background.
That is what struck me when viewing all those iPhone images.
Not one was capable of producing a sense of depth.
Phone cameras will never replace DSLR cameras until they are capable of doing so.
The thought that struck me while viewing the gallery: there just wasn't a great deal of variety when it came to the images.
Sure, they were of different subjects, but they looked like they could have been taken by the same photographer. There just wasn't anything truly distinctive about any of the images.
The similarity in the images is caused by the limitations imposed by including camera technology inside a phone. Modern phones are extremely thin. This limits the distance between the sensor and the lens, and this greatly limits the type of images that can be produced.
Don't believe me?
Go through the galleries and find an image where focus is used to isolate the subject from the background.
That is what struck me when viewing all those iPhone images.
Not one was capable of producing a sense of depth.
Phone cameras will never replace DSLR cameras until they are capable of doing so.
Saturday, May 17, 2014
Adidas Now Offers Ability to Customize Sneakers via Instagram
Hat Tip: Pop Photo
It started with Nike offering to match sneakers with the colors contained in Instagram images.
Adidas has now expanded the customization option to include using the image itself.
The potential ranges from brilliant to disastrous, depending on the image used.
I do need a new pair of sneakers, and I'm never happy with the appearance of those I find in stores. I might try this. I would need an Instagram account first.
And some money.
It started with Nike offering to match sneakers with the colors contained in Instagram images.
Adidas has now expanded the customization option to include using the image itself.
The potential ranges from brilliant to disastrous, depending on the image used.
I do need a new pair of sneakers, and I'm never happy with the appearance of those I find in stores. I might try this. I would need an Instagram account first.
And some money.
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Lytro Announces New Light Field Camera
Hat Tip: DP Review, Amateur Photographer, ePhotozine
Today's hot news seems to be the announcement of the Illum Professional Light Field Camera by Lytro.
Lytro is currently taking pre-orders for the Illum. Sales are scheduled to start in July. The Illum is listed at $1,599. You can save $100 by pre-ordering (pre-ordering the Illum also provides some additional perks beyond the price drop, including a chance to participate in a photo shoot run by a professional photographer.)
Camera Specs
Included software can be used to manipulate the images and to create interactive images or animation. It can also export still image files that can be edited with other image editing software. (Apple's Aperture and Adobe's Photoshop/Lightroom support the light-field image files. These programs should be able to edit the light-field file without exporting it as a jpg or similar image file first.)
The images can also be used to produce 3-D images on 3-D capable devices.
Lytro has a page with interactive images produced using the Illum. These images give an idea as to the type of post-processing possibilities that exist when editing the light-field image files.
DP Review also has a brief interview with the Lytro CEO.
The most interesting part of the interview may be the part on the zoom lens used by the Illum. The lens uses 13 elements, which is fairly low for this type of lens. Normally the lens would need to address aberrations by including additional pieces of glass (or more complex pieces).
The ability to track light-ray direction enables the camera to omit those. Aberration correction is done by software instead.
This suggest that light-field cameras could wind-up competitively priced in comparison to regular digital cameras. The sensor might be more expensive, but the expense could be offset by less expensive lenses that still produce images of similar quality.
The 40 mega-ray number seems impressive, but that includes a great deal of information not used when exporting a two dimensional image. Those images run about 5 megapixels.
5 megapixel output seems low given the $1,599 price tag.
The resolution produced when exporting still images still needs to improve in order to compete with existing digital cameras.
There is also no information on hardware specifications for using the accompanying software. I suspect it will be higher than the requirements for other image editing software.
Overall, the camera does not seem well suited for traditional photography. The image resolution just isn't high enough for still images. That does not mean the camera is useless, though.
It seems tailor made for game and web developers. The ability to capture 3-D information suggests that 3-D game developers might be well served by investing in the camera. It also promises to be useful for creating interactive web sites.
One thing to remember is that this is basically the second generation of light-field technology. While it might come up short when compared to existing digital cameras, the Illum looks very impressive when compared to second-generation digital cameras. (Those didn't even manage 5MP.)
Today's hot news seems to be the announcement of the Illum Professional Light Field Camera by Lytro.
 |
| (Photo from DP Review article) |
Lytro is currently taking pre-orders for the Illum. Sales are scheduled to start in July. The Illum is listed at $1,599. You can save $100 by pre-ordering (pre-ordering the Illum also provides some additional perks beyond the price drop, including a chance to participate in a photo shoot run by a professional photographer.)
Camera Specs
- 40 mega-ray sensor
- 8x optical zoom lens, 30-250mm equivalent
- Constant f/2.0 aperture
- Macro capability
- 1/4000 of a second high-speed shutter
- 4" tilting touchscreen
Included software can be used to manipulate the images and to create interactive images or animation. It can also export still image files that can be edited with other image editing software. (Apple's Aperture and Adobe's Photoshop/Lightroom support the light-field image files. These programs should be able to edit the light-field file without exporting it as a jpg or similar image file first.)
The images can also be used to produce 3-D images on 3-D capable devices.
Lytro has a page with interactive images produced using the Illum. These images give an idea as to the type of post-processing possibilities that exist when editing the light-field image files.
DP Review also has a brief interview with the Lytro CEO.
The most interesting part of the interview may be the part on the zoom lens used by the Illum. The lens uses 13 elements, which is fairly low for this type of lens. Normally the lens would need to address aberrations by including additional pieces of glass (or more complex pieces).
The ability to track light-ray direction enables the camera to omit those. Aberration correction is done by software instead.
This suggest that light-field cameras could wind-up competitively priced in comparison to regular digital cameras. The sensor might be more expensive, but the expense could be offset by less expensive lenses that still produce images of similar quality.
The 40 mega-ray number seems impressive, but that includes a great deal of information not used when exporting a two dimensional image. Those images run about 5 megapixels.
5 megapixel output seems low given the $1,599 price tag.
The resolution produced when exporting still images still needs to improve in order to compete with existing digital cameras.
There is also no information on hardware specifications for using the accompanying software. I suspect it will be higher than the requirements for other image editing software.
Overall, the camera does not seem well suited for traditional photography. The image resolution just isn't high enough for still images. That does not mean the camera is useless, though.
It seems tailor made for game and web developers. The ability to capture 3-D information suggests that 3-D game developers might be well served by investing in the camera. It also promises to be useful for creating interactive web sites.
One thing to remember is that this is basically the second generation of light-field technology. While it might come up short when compared to existing digital cameras, the Illum looks very impressive when compared to second-generation digital cameras. (Those didn't even manage 5MP.)
Thursday, February 6, 2014
The Death of Selfies? One Can Only Hope.
Reuters had an interview recently with a fairly influential U.K. Photographer (David Bailey) in which he predicted the death of the selfie.
A much younger photographer that writes for SLR Lounge (Adam Kuzik) responded online.
Personally, I don't know which of the two is more out of touch. David Bailey, who didn't even know what a selfie was until recently, or Adam Kuzik who proclaimed the seflie "arguably, the most significant photographic movement ever".
I'm tempted to go with the latter.
I can understand how someone who is currently 76-years old might just miss out on the latest social trend among those 1/4 his age.
I have a hard time seeing how you can honestly call the trend of people taking pictures of themselves mugging for the camera and then posting the shot online as a significant photographic movement. The proliferation of cell phone cameras maybe. This vastly increases the number of people with digital cameras. But the selfie?
The self-portrait photograph has been around since the development of the timer.
How many family photographs taken with one have you seen? Those are basically "selfies".
Personally, I think Bailey might be right in predicting a short life for the selfie trend. The trend has been pushed by teenagers with cell phones. The problem is that adults have started engaging in selfies.
When adults do it, it's no longer cool.
Selfie? That's, like, so 2010.
A much younger photographer that writes for SLR Lounge (Adam Kuzik) responded online.
Personally, I don't know which of the two is more out of touch. David Bailey, who didn't even know what a selfie was until recently, or Adam Kuzik who proclaimed the seflie "arguably, the most significant photographic movement ever".
I'm tempted to go with the latter.
I can understand how someone who is currently 76-years old might just miss out on the latest social trend among those 1/4 his age.
I have a hard time seeing how you can honestly call the trend of people taking pictures of themselves mugging for the camera and then posting the shot online as a significant photographic movement. The proliferation of cell phone cameras maybe. This vastly increases the number of people with digital cameras. But the selfie?
The self-portrait photograph has been around since the development of the timer.
How many family photographs taken with one have you seen? Those are basically "selfies".
Personally, I think Bailey might be right in predicting a short life for the selfie trend. The trend has been pushed by teenagers with cell phones. The problem is that adults have started engaging in selfies.
When adults do it, it's no longer cool.
Selfie? That's, like, so 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)