Disqus - Latest Comments for mmmarc

Re: The Jake Olson Rabbit Hole Goes Much Deeper Than “That” Facebook Comment

mmmarc — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 03:43:06 -0000

In a lot of those photos, the sun placement is fake. He's trying to make some photos appear backlit, but there isn't any rim light on his subjects.

Re: TWiP Family 025: Martin Bailey on Making Great Prints

mmmarc — Sat, 12 Dec 2015 20:24:21 -0000

Very helpful. Thank you.

Re: Street Focus 60: Weddings and Street with Kevin Mullins

mmmarc — Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:07:01 -0000

Will do!

Re: Street Focus 60: Weddings and Street with Kevin Mullins

mmmarc — Sun, 15 Nov 2015 20:47:47 -0000

I didn't mean to be so harsh. I'm an asshole when I'm sleep deprived. Where can I e-mail you?

Re: Street Focus 60: Weddings and Street with Kevin Mullins

mmmarc — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 04:02:48 -0000

Now you're just being picky and defensive because your work seems pretty lazy. You're welcome to look at my portfolio, it's in my profile.

What I'm saying is that approaching wedding photography differently, with a different mindset, will increase the likelihood of getting stronger images, whether that means being more technically perfect. Imagine getting 25% of your images really strong, rather than 5-7%.

Re: Street Focus 60: Weddings and Street with Kevin Mullins

mmmarc — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 03:56:12 -0000

I'm actually a full-time wedding photographer.

Re: Street Focus 60: Weddings and Street with Kevin Mullins

mmmarc — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 03:31:57 -0000

Take a look at WPJA and Fearless photographers. You'll find a ton of talent there, where weddings are approached more like street/documentary/fine art photography than traditional, posed photography. Really inspiring stuff.

Re: Street Focus 60: Weddings and Street with Kevin Mullins

mmmarc — Sat, 14 Nov 2015 03:25:33 -0000

I'd say the story *almost* always wins. If a photo is so technically bad or there are too many distracting elements, the story is obscured. I don't like the fact that he takes pride in how technically bad the photos are on his site (he mentions this in the podcast).

Of course, we are going to be wired to respond to strong moments and emotions, but that shouldn't be an excuse for lazy photography. Why hire a professional? I think one needs to push harder than being just an "observer" at weddings. Sure, that's what wedding photographers do, but is that all we do? We should constantly be looking for the best light and the composition we could find, so that when those moments happen, we're in a better position to capture them *and* make them look good. A great moment, albeit fleeting and difficult to capture, can be made better with great light and solid composition, and that just isn't going to happen as a passive, casual observer.

Moreover, he gave off the impression that taking group/family portraits and formals is a little cheesy, unimportant, or that it's not his thing. I think to be a complete wedding photographer, one has to make the traditional photos (formals, portraits, details, etc.) look just as great as the photojournalistic/documentary aspect of the day.

Re: Street Focus 60: Weddings and Street with Kevin Mullins

mmmarc — Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:46:42 -0000

I kinda feel the whole thing about lacking technical execution is an excuse, and a bad one, too. Sure, if you're constantly striving for technical perfection, you might miss out on important moments, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try. That's achieved by preparation -- seeing the light and positioning yourself in a way that will clean up your composition and anticipating that moment, so when it happens, you'll be better poised for capturing the moment along with good light and in a solid composition. And of course, you should through the moment, rather than taking one or two frames and crossing your fingers.

Re: TWiP Family 025: Martin Bailey on Making Great Prints

mmmarc — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:06:32 -0000

But is ETTR still necessary? That made sense maybe for film or the very early days of digital, where shadows were hard to recover. Now, digital sensors have incredible dynamic range, and you can recover shadows and underexposed images without much noise. If you expose to the right with digital, it is much harder to recover highlights.

Re: Samsung NX500 Review – the TARDIS of cameras

mmmarc — Thu, 21 May 2015 03:06:05 -0000

What size is the sensor?

Re: When Instagram Success Leads To Advertising Assignments: Lauren Lemon

mmmarc — Mon, 03 Nov 2014 14:13:14 -0000

That's because you're a novice photographer. Do you know how I can tell? You purposely looked for something that could be remotely distracting and that was the best you could find and it didn't even work out.

The two people standing in the background are faint, in the distance and not even in focus.

On the other hand, the light on the girl's face is great, she's the brightest subject that is in focus in the photo and she takes up a great deal of space in the photo--not to mention she is making eye contact and has an expression on her face that makes you connect with her immediately.

But no. You, the consummate amateur, had to go and find something to criticize because someone out there is more successful than you are. And in the process of your criticism, the only thing you achieved is to show how little you actually know about photography. Because if you were smart, and you're not, you would have mentioned that her head isn't in a clean space, that the light fixture and the round, star-shaped doily thing behind her both merge with her head and shoulders. That the highlights on the curtain by her face take away from the shape and form of her head and profile. Or that there is a strange hotspot/light streaking across her thigh. Or that the bottom of her foot is cut off.

But no, you picked the one thing in the photo that no one could possibly care about and you called it a distraction.

Re: Winners of the 2014 Sony World Photography Awards, Part I

mmmarc — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 18:04:57 -0000

Agreed. Anyone who says photography is lost on you, or that you don't know what you're talking about, is WRONG.

Photo manipulation is as old as photography itself. The most iconic photos of our time are processed and dodged and burned. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't know shit about photography.

Re: Make Your Photo Feeds Real With Book-Sized Smart Printer

mmmarc — Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:15:20 -0000

http://www.lg.com/us/cell-p...

Re: The Color Run Responds in Regards to Suing College Photographer

mmmarc — Sat, 15 Feb 2014 01:15:47 -0000

"About a year later, Max first initiated questions about the use of some of the Miami photos. We sat down and genuinely tried to reach an amicable solution, including offering financial compensation and exposure through our networks."

Hmm. So when Max asked what on earth Color Run was doing with his images without permission, Color Run tried to shut him up by offering some kind of "financial compensation." Did you guys offer the kid $500 to shut up or something?

Way to gloss over this. The overall tone of the letter is just smug and obnoxious. Playing victim by saying, "Oh, boo-hoo, we just had to defend ourselves from this crazy kid," isn't going to fool anyone.

Re: This Guy Stole Photography From The Wrong Person… Me

mmmarc — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:59:25 -0000

You're a class act for not outing this guy and riling up photographers with their pitchforks.

Re: The Fstoppers Nikon DF Camera Hipster Review

mmmarc — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 19:59:48 -0000

It was an iPhone in a mophie battery case.

Re: How Instagram Brought Me Business After Only One Week Using It

mmmarc — Sun, 24 Nov 2013 00:40:16 -0000

Lol. What world do you live in? I've worked in online media for six years now and I've yet to meet a "headline writer" that isn't also the author of the article.

It's called sensationalism, and eventually all bloggers learn how to do it.

Re: A Fast and Efficient Workflow for the Traveling Photographer

mmmarc — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 02:58:17 -0000

Photo Mechanic is soooo much better than Lightroom for ingesting, metadata, culling, etc. before the first pass in Lightroom.

Re: Reverse Microwave Chills Beer In 45 Seconds

mmmarc — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 21:38:56 -0000

Yep, and "reverse microwave" is the wrong term for this thing, too.

Re: Teenage Photographer Discovered by Maroon 5…On Flickr!

mmmarc — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 19:25:36 -0000

Seems like Fstoppers has a thing recently for female photographers who screw up by plagiarizing and publicly apologize for it http://www.flickr.com/photo...

Re: Nikon Unveils the Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G Lens

mmmarc — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 18:12:11 -0000

"Also, when used with DX-format cameras it provides a 35mm equivalent focal length of 87mm, ideal for portraits."

Wrong. It still has the 58mm perspective, which isn't ideal for portraits, but CROPPED to have a field of view equivalent to 87mm on full frame (not "equivalent focal length"). Huge difference.

Re: Great Tips For Walking Into Your First Photoshoot

mmmarc — Wed, 16 Oct 2013 00:51:13 -0000

BS. You all knew the potential repercussions and the greater potential for traffic. It's bait.

Re: Great Tips For Walking Into Your First Photoshoot

mmmarc — Wed, 16 Oct 2013 00:50:04 -0000

Yes, for some. For others, a marketer and "educator" like Jasmine Star is more than just a photographer--perhaps she's more the other two than she is technically a photographer.

The only reason she has recognition of any kind is because of her brand--not her technical prowess as a photographer. And because she is little more than her actual brand, she shouldn't have tarnished it the way she did.

Now Fstoppers has given her a forum for her weak apology, but they're now quickly promoting her, too.

She's popular, right? She gets visitors to her blog, right? Why didn't she just apologize there and do it sooner than later?

Re: Great Tips For Walking Into Your First Photoshoot

mmmarc — Wed, 16 Oct 2013 00:45:37 -0000

TOO SOON, FSTOPPERS. TOO SOON.