If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
On 3/2/2013 7:55 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: BTW I have business and personal relationships with several, and categorically state that you are blowing smoke out of your ass. IOW you don't know WTF you are talking about. except you're wrong, which means *you* don't know wtf you are talking about. furthermore, even if your personal relationships included the pope, it would not invalidate nyquist/shannon. perhaps you've heard of them, although i suspect not. but since you and your cohorts think that you know better, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and go prove it. you'll be *very* famous if you can demonstrate nyquist/shannon is bunk. I think he is claiming that your knowledge of creative directors is bunk. Snce I don't know what his knowledge of creative directors is, I cannot make that claim. But, his statements so far have indicated that I could indeed make such a claim in good faith. and you'd be very, very wrong. I am simply claiming that good creative directors are far more concerned with the impact of the image and the legality of its use, than how it was made. you just contradicted that in another post. Where? -- PeterN |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
On 3/2/2013 7:49 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: He may be technically correct, but the discussion is about commercially acceptable results. Creative directors don't give a rat's rear end about technicalities. They look for the impression created by the image. (At least the successful ones have that standard.) But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Absolutely correct. Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. Yup! And the D800E would not be used for high fashion shooting if that problem existe, or if the photographer did not know what he/she was doing. which means they *do* need to know about the technicalities. Explain your logic, in clear English. this should be interesting. -- PeterN |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
In article , PeterN
wrote: I am simply claiming that good creative directors are far more concerned with the impact of the image and the legality of its use, than how it was made. you just contradicted that in another post. Where? you said photographers do need to understand aliasing: In article , PeterN wrote: On 3/2/2013 7:29 PM, Alfred Molon wrote: But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Absolutely correct. Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. Yup! And the D800E would not be used for high fashion shooting if that problem existe, or if the photographer did not know what he/she was doing. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
In article , PeterN
wrote: He may be technically correct, but the discussion is about commercially acceptable results. Creative directors don't give a rat's rear end about technicalities. They look for the impression created by the image. (At least the successful ones have that standard.) But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Absolutely correct. Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. Yup! And the D800E would not be used for high fashion shooting if that problem existe, or if the photographer did not know what he/she was doing. which means they *do* need to know about the technicalities. Explain your logic, in clear English. this should be interesting. it was clear english. maybe you need to study that too. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
On 3/2/2013 8:29 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: I am simply claiming that good creative directors are far more concerned with the impact of the image and the legality of its use, than how it was made. you just contradicted that in another post. Where? you said photographers do need to understand aliasing: You do understand that I was talking about good creative directors. Or do you. In article , PeterN wrote: On 3/2/2013 7:29 PM, Alfred Molon wrote: But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Absolutely correct. Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. Yup! And the D800E would not be used for high fashion shooting if that problem existe, or if the photographer did not know what he/she was doing. -- PeterN |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
On 3/2/2013 8:29 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: He may be technically correct, but the discussion is about commercially acceptable results. Creative directors don't give a rat's rear end about technicalities. They look for the impression created by the image. (At least the successful ones have that standard.) But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Absolutely correct. Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. Yup! And the D800E would not be used for high fashion shooting if that problem existe, or if the photographer did not know what he/she was doing. which means they *do* need to know about the technicalities. Explain your logic, in clear English. this should be interesting. it was clear english. maybe you need to study that too. I wonder if you even know what a creative director does. i.e. In addition to a lot of other things, they hire the photographer. Few creative directors have the tine, or inclination to do the photography themselves. MOST ONLY WORK 70-90 HOURS A WEEK. If you worked half that time, you would not have the time to post the way you do. -- PeterN |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
On 3/2/2013 8:29 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: He may be technically correct, but the discussion is about commercially acceptable results. Creative directors don't give a rat's rear end about technicalities. They look for the impression created by the image. (At least the successful ones have that standard.) But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Absolutely correct. Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. Yup! And the D800E would not be used for high fashion shooting if that problem existe, or if the photographer did not know what he/she was doing. which means they *do* need to know about the technicalities. Explain your logic, in clear English. this should be interesting. it was clear english. maybe you need to study that too. Your answer lived up to expectations. It should also be noted that you snipped so that comments appear out of context. We also note that the English languish uses punctuation and capitalization as aids to understanding. -- PeterN |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
In article , PeterN
wrote: I wonder if you even know what a creative director does. i.e. In addition to a lot of other things, they hire the photographer. Few creative directors have the tine, or inclination to do the photography themselves. MOST ONLY WORK 70-90 HOURS A WEEK. If you worked half that time, you would not have the time to post the way you do. wrong again. i know what they do and have worked with some. you should quit before you dig yourself a deeper hole. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 01:29:56 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote: In article , PeterN says... He may be technically correct, but the discussion is about commercially acceptable results. Creative directors don't give a rat's rear end about technicalities. They look for the impression created by the image. (At least the successful ones have that standard.) But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. I would expect them to be at the sight of a photographer fronting up with a Samsung GT I9100 cellphone for the shoot. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon new release D7100
On Sat, 02 Mar 2013 19:49:18 -0500, nospam
wrote: In article , PeterN wrote: He may be technically correct, but the discussion is about commercially acceptable results. Creative directors don't give a rat's rear end about technicalities. They look for the impression created by the image. (At least the successful ones have that standard.) But especially for fashion subjects, where there is fabric with regular patterns, aliasing can cause very ugly results: http://www.molon.de/S2/P5.jpg Absolutely correct. Imagine if a whole fashion shoot is like that, horribly messed up by aliasing. You can't fix that with post-processing. Creative directors would be quite ****ed of. Yup! And the D800E would not be used for high fashion shooting if that problem existe, or if the photographer did not know what he/she was doing. which means they *do* need to know about the technicalities. No they don't. All they have to do is know that they get acceptable results. The don't really have to know how or why. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I knew it, I KNEW IT! New D7100 24mp NO AA filter!!! | David Taylor | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | February 25th 13 03:52 AM |
Would Nikon release new telescopes? | Paul Furman | Digital Photography | 7 | August 31st 10 04:16 AM |
Nikon Afficionado's New Release Due When?? | uw wayne | 35mm Photo Equipment | 37 | May 3rd 06 05:02 AM |
FA: Nikon N70 AF Black Body and Nikon Remote Shutter release | J N | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 24th 03 07:51 PM |
FA: Nikon N70 AF Black Body and Nikon Remote Shutter release | J N | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | September 24th 03 07:51 PM |