meta user
network profile
| bio | website | j.mp/NZPHOTOS |
|---|---|---|
| location | Auckland, New Zealand | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 9 months |
| seen | 5 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 322 |
Electronic designer. Professional Engineer. Oldish aka "reasonably experienced" :-). Contact - apptechnz gmail com <- you know the drill.
Special interest in technological solutions for developing country applications. Extensive in-China experience in product development & manufacturing in China. Jack of all trades, Master of Electrical engineering. (aka ME (elec)) Interested in all aspects of modern technology. Professional qualifications in electrical engineering but practically proficient or conversant in many peripheral areas. Recent extensive experience in solar powered LED lighting development and manufacturing in China for markets worldwide.
"Servant of the Most High God" / committed Christian. Happy to work enthusiastically and interact amicably with people of all nationalities and creeds.
Married with 2 adult children.
Obsessional photographer.
|
1d |
comment |
Is vector photography possible? You say " ... a camera can make ..." - if a CAMERA can make it but it was not a photograph, you may have to redefine either or both terms compared to current usage. | I'd hazard that if you poitnted a DOOFER at a scene and it produced a vector image that represented the scene as well as a typical photo does now then the DOOFER IS a camera and it makes photos. Processing power has no obvious sensible upper limit any time soon, so the answer to your question seems to be "Yes". |
|
2d |
comment |
How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? @AJHenderson ... I chose that section as the most evident one but there are many variably uncertain examples throughout the image - some mix, while some over or underlay fully. It's not obvious that this range of variability matches your explanation. FWIW - even IF you are completely wrong your answer has some usefulness - so no down vote :-). |
|
2d |
comment |
How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? @AJHenderson - Your stated certainty in the accuracy of your analysis may be warranted, but whether such subsequently proves to be hubris or correctitude is as yet tbd. IF done in post then providing a description of some completely different effect that looks similar is equally "not an answer". I'm "acquainted with" the effects of mixing two sources of differing amplitudes, with one present spatially in a given area only for part of the exposure time. Over many years I've made images with eg ghosts (moving object passively lit), lanterns (moving source), moving strobes and more. ... |
|
May 20 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
May 20 |
comment |
How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? The "non-post ideas do not account for what appears, to me, to be background intruding over foreground at the top of the arc as shown in my crop. Or, are my eyes/brain deceiving me? I'm surprised that either everyone has not agreed with me OR that several people have not pointed out that I'm seeing it wrong. |
|
May 20 |
comment |
How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? The "non-post ideas do not account for what appears, to me, to be background intruding over foreground at the top of the arc as shown in my crop. Or, are my eyes/brain deceiving me? |
|
May 20 |
comment |
How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? This does not account for what appears, to me, to be background intruding over foreground at the top of the arc as shown in my crop. Or, are my eyes/brain deceiving me? |
|
May 20 |
revised |
How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? added 392 characters in body |
|
May 16 |
revised |
How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? added 479 characters in body |
|
May 16 |
answered | How to take a picture with subject in focus but with a circular light-trace effect around it? |
|
May 16 |
revised |
What is the best way to get good quality digital pictures from negatives? added 424 characters in body |
|
May 16 |
revised |
What is the best way to get good quality digital pictures from negatives? added 424 characters in body |
|
May 16 |
answered | What is the best way to get good quality digital pictures from negatives? |
|
May 13 |
comment |
How can I achieve this look @mattdm - as long as his new photos have the same common thread as all the existing ones all shall be well :-). Very nicely done. Even his Instagram page looks lovely - as many of the photos on Instrgram are also on the page coted, maybe Instsagram has some tools that are actually worthwhile, after all :-) |
|
May 12 |
comment |
Parameters to be considered while buying DSLR ... such as the 18-200 ever did, and at the same lake you'll find people with 17-50's also enjoying their experiences, and even a few people with 70-200 ~-$3k surprised to find themselves at the Lake and in such low brow company :-). |
|
May 12 |
comment |
Parameters to be considered while buying DSLR @Michael - Candidates are the 18-250 and 18-270. The 18-200 was significantly inferior. | I could tolerate being fatally flawed at f/3.5 compared to f/2.8 - a factor of only (3.5/2.8)^2 = 1/2 a stop. I'm more bothered by the f/6.3 at the top end - although, by then the 17-50mm has stopped working :-). I've not used the 17-50mm, f/2.8 but those pages I linked to indicate that it too has significant distortion at the low end. BUT what I'm really saying is that as one wanders around the Lake Wobegon area you find the 18-250 will often produce far better results than prior "ultrazooms" ... |
|
May 12 |
comment |
Parameters to be considered while buying DSLR Agh: Fatlly poor ==> fatally poor (ie 17-50 cannot cover 51-270, of course) | I won ==> I own, | Sony HP ==> Sony HK = Hong Kong. |
|
May 12 |
comment |
Parameters to be considered while buying DSLR ... telephotos. Sony HK allow you to play with their range of lenses on your own camera. 70-200mm f/2.8, 300mm etc. $2000-$4000 range typically ($NZ). While the Tamron/Sony "never stood a chance" against multi-k$ heavyweights I was amazed how well it did in such company, and the price made me feel much better about its known limitations. || I'd rate the 18-270 "better and worse" than the 17-50, and I'd swear that some of the guys and gals out at lake Wobegon are using those big heavy multi k$ lenses and in many (not all) cases not getting discernibly better results than my SAL18-250 gives. |
|
May 12 |
comment |
Parameters to be considered while buying DSLR ... mind when doing comparisons. In CA and vignetting the 18-270 is either superior to the 17-50 or so close you will not notice the difference. In the crucial MTF 50 (sharpness) and mtf= 10 (contrast) measurements the results are amazing. In many cases the 18-270 is superior to the 17-50 or close enough that it is irrelevant in practice. The 18-270 has slower AF, and variable and inferior aperture. And vastly more zoom range. I won a Sony SAL18250 (earlier version, faster AF, rounded aperture petals. When buying a spent hours in a Sony HP showroom comparing it against their professional ... |
|
May 12 |
comment |
Parameters to be considered while buying DSLR ... as provided by the well enough thought of Photozone.de site. Tamron 18-270 & Tamron 17-50. The 18-270 covers an immense 15:1 focal length range and distortion is "higher than some" especially at extremes. While yoi'd rather the lens 'just worked' modern software deals with this 'well enough'. The 17-50 is fatlly poor by ALL measures in the 51-270mm range and this needs to be kept in ... |
