Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DPReview.com to close

dpreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 387 posts

Re: DPReview.com to close

#291

Post by myalphabet »

PaulHoule wrote: post #27
haunter wrote: post #18

Amazon is the worst

After 2 day delivery became 5 day delivery I canceled my Prime. (I get deliveries from Japan faster than I get them from a warehouse in the next state.) I am in the middle of cancelling all my recurring bills from AMZN (Pillpack, AWS) and I recommend that you do the same. I can't wait to hear them say on CNBC that Prime cancellations exceeded additions.

>After 2 day delivery became 5 day delivery

Where do you live? I hear this repeated on HN a lot, but every person I know IRL doesn't have this problem (ie family spread across multiple states). Hell, in the last ~2 years, other than high-demand stuff in the pandemic like Clorox wipes, most of my orders have been _next_ day delivery, nevermind 5 days.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#293

Post by mrelectric »

valarauko wrote: post #114

Lots of people here saying they used to visit this site regularly. I'm curious as to what they got out of it (some people say they used to visit the site daily). I can see the value when you're looking to buy a camera, and reading reviews makes sense to me in that very narrow context. Besides that, why visit a camera review site daily? How frequently were people buying cameras? Professional photographers, sure, I can…

I enjoyed photography and camera handling tips, explored and troubleshooted my cameras and their countless options, as well as the general discussions as on any forum.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#294

Post by macintux »

haunter wrote: post #18

Amazon is the worst

Agreed. If I'm buying anything of value online, I want to buy from someone who actually understands and cares about what they're selling.

I'll happily pay a bit more for the ability to shop and learn and get product support.

Re: DPReview.com to close

#296

Post by pabs3 »

superkuh wrote: post #175
TheRealPomax wrote: post #94

I assume a full site mirror will be submitted to the @internetarchive? Because it would be insane to pull 25 years of detailed information that cannot easily be found elsewhere off the internet just because your dad doesn't want you living at home anymore.

Not them. But the archive team have been made aware and are gathering in #dprived on hackint IRC.

https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/DPReview

Re: DPReview.com to close

#297

Post by pabs3 »

Ikatza wrote: post #223
mobilene wrote: post #220

What bums me out about this is that the site will disappear. For people like me who collect cameras and review them online, DPReview is a gold mine of info on cameras from the digital age.

No Internet Archive mirror?

ArchiveTeam are planning on working on one, they probably welcome help:

https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/DPReview

Re: DPReview.com to close

#298

Post by STELLANOVA »

Hope there is someone inside current DPreview web team who is going to put complete site (codebase, db, storage) on torrent... That would be really nice (run DPreview locally in docker). :)

Re: DPReview.com to close

#299

Post by redindian75 »

sunflowerfly wrote: post #266
redindian75 wrote: post #172

Phil Askey's Photo Review (DPReview's old name) was a pioneer in camera reviews even in back 1998/99 when I first encountered it. I remember it was run from Singapore with the url philaskey.net/~photo or something. He used to review cameras in such clarity and detail that it was so popular among digital camera nerds. Huge loss!

I was trying to remember the old name. I believe it was just Phil running a blog solo? Content was slow to appear but incredible quality when it did. It would be great if someone took it back to its roots.

Found Phil's interview -

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/5323285840/phil-askey-fo...

http://photo.askey.net/

Re: DPReview.com to close

#300

Post by midoridensha »

digitallyfree wrote: post #205
radicaldreamer wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of software tricks make it easy to take low light photos on phones today but require quite a bit of manual tweaking on a DSLR.

The thing about this is that the manual tweaking allows you to take the picture you're envisioning. Whereas the processing on the phone provides a clear picture in poor conditions, but it's not necessarily the picture I want . For instance a phone can do a great job in a backlit scenario by intelligently cutting the highlights and boosting the shadows. The resulting image shows both the subject and background clearly…

>For instance a phone can do a great job in a backlit scenario by intelligently cutting the highlights and boosting the shadows. The resulting image shows both the subject and background clearly but it doesn't represent the real-word lighting conditions. As a result it's great for a quick snapshot but is less useful in an artistic sense.

This seems completely backwards to me. Artistic photography isn't about representing real-world lighting conditions as perceived by humans. Just putting a polarizing filter on a camera changes how the image looks from the way the scene actually appears to humans. Artistic photography routinely does very bizarre stuff with colors to achieve an artistic effect. Even Ansel Adams experimented with solarization, one of the earliest photographic effects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solarization_(photography)

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that photography has never been about accurately showing real-world lighting conditions, but rather either an artistic or at least idealized version of a scene or subject.

Post reply on HN