We begin, more by coincidence, two day’s study in black-and-white street photography. First up: Martin Mutch, who is founder of IT consultancy Rocela and self-described “street and social photographer”. His candid captures using Leica Camera AG M Monochrom […]
Today, Rachel Whetstone, Google’s senior vice president of communications and policy, asks what has been on my mind since a stunning scoop set the Wall Street Journal against the Federal Trade Commission and the search and information giant. As I explained in an analysis of the news reporting, the story is flush with insinuation and veiled accusation, bereft of context.
Among my more serious concerns: Journal-parent News Corp’s ongoing tug-a-war with Google’s business model and its impact on paid content. Both entities likely would benefit by any means that trustbusters could crimp Google. The scoop’s timing and tone look like they intend to influence European Union public policy. Rachel’s response is brilliant, because it gets to the point: Conflict of interest taints the Journal’s credibility and impartiality. She rightly observes: “We understand you have a new found love of the regulatory process, especially in Europe”.
Among the best Angus Stewart photos are those this series cannot feature, because they are All Rights Reserved. “Double Dubious“, “Sneaky“, and “Three’s a Crowd” are examples. He shot today’s selection, self-titled “Broken Glasses”, on March 6, 2008, using the Leica D-LUX 3 compact. Vitals: f.4, ISO 100, 1/30 sec, 15.6mm.
More recently, Angus uses the Fujifilm X100S, although his newest, 2015 photo was shot with the Leica M rangefinder. That’s a big step up from the D-LUX seven years ago. He joined Flickr in April 2007. His hometown is Tumbleweed, Suffolk, United Kingdom, but Angus lives in London, where he works “with a range of performers including circus acrobats, clowns, burlesque, tumblers, this remains an ongoing personal project”.
Behind buying polls there are as many questions as answers, like: “How many people saying they will buy X, really will?” Oftentimes the number wanting something and actually getting it are usually much less than tallied results indicate. Considering those caveats, an Apple Watch buying poll I have running at BetaNews nevertheless illuminates how the device could be hugely successful even from a small number of sales. I do mean big.
Among the more than 1,100 respondents, as I write, 19 say they will buy Apple Watch Edition, which price ranges from $10,000 to $17,000. Assuming they all purchase and do so on the cheap, the math is easy: $190,000. Another 482 people want either of the other two models (Sport and standard Apple Watch). for $216,618 calculated at base prices of $349 and $549, respectively. The closeness of these two total dollar figures, possible profit margins behind them, and differences per-customer profits are ghastly.
Defining the photographic style of Davide Gabino is easy. Imitating it requires a discerning eye for composition with perspective. He presents point of view that draws the eye, often from foreground to background—or visa versa. […]
As Apple Watch hype increases and the preorder date (April 10) approaches, a question gnaws me: Why would anyone spend so much money on the device? A buying poll I posted on BetaNews now exceeds 1,000 responses, which is large enough sample-size to get some sense of the readership’s intentions. Two percent of respondents—that’s 14 people—plan to buy the Edition model, which price ranges from $10,000 to $17,000. No disrespect, but talk about money to burn! Forty-five percent of respondents plan to purchase any Apple Watch, while another 5 percent of you are undecided.
So I wonder: What could you buy instead of Apple Watch? I intentionally single out the big spenders, settling on $13,000 as mean between $10K and $17K, being it’s such a lucky number and Apple looks to make lots of luck—eh, money—from the smartwatch. Before continuing, an important reminder: Functionally, there is no difference between the cheapo timepiece ($349) and its massively-expensive sibling. The price difference is all bling.
How often do you see such a fine shot of a classic camera, and with X-Files mystery mixed in? Is that a UFO in the Polaroid snapshot? I surely can’t identify the thing. Beautiful bokeh, sharp detail at the focus point, and instacam subject, compelled me to choose today’s selection shot by Wen Zeng, who studies mechanical engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. Her hometown is Los Angeles suburb South Pasadena.
“I generally shoot with a Fuji X100, my cell phone (Moto X), or a Canon 6D”, she says. “On occasion I will shoot with an Olympus XA, Olympus Xa3, Pentax ME, Rolleicord, Olympus Trip 35, or a Polaroid OneStep. Did I mention I have a bit of a problem with film cameras?” Does she ever have a problem, which you can see at her photo website, Instagram, or blog. She develops any film she shoots.
‘This stream tells the recent story of my life”, the Italian going by moniker depinniped says. “Things that happen to me, but mostly people that I happen to know, that I love, that I live […]
When isn’t a cell phone too big? The Motorola-made, Google-branded phablet answers that question for me, and may very well for you. From Samsung’s introduction of the original Note, I scoffed at large-screen smartphones—and, honestly, the seemingly stereotypical gadget geeks using them. But big is better, and my arrogant attitude about phablets and the people buying them was unwarranted.
Simply stated: Nexus 6 is the best handset I have ever used. The experience is so fresh and delightful, the emotional reaction reminds of using the original iPhone that I purchased on launch day in June 2007. N6 shatters my negative preconception about phablets, particularly unwieldiness when used daily. That said, I made some lifestyle changes, including choice of clothing, to accommodate the mobile’s massive size.
Macro photography can be hugely satisfying and express something about the shooter’s inner self. Yesterday we saw how Kristina Alexanderson stages stormtrooper figurines to create familiar parent-child poses. Mark Seton uses the same camera and lens, Nikon D800 and 105mm prime, to shoot closeups. The two photographers’ styles and subjects couldn’t be more different.
Mark, who joined Flickr in December 2006, generally shoots things, which include landscapes and nature. I flip-flopped between choosing self-titled “Portrait of a Snail” and its companion, both captured on May 1, 2014. He is from Leeds, United Kingdom, but lives in Great Dunmow. I picked this pic because the colors are so vivid that they evoke rain forest more than an English homestead.
Mac apologist Daniel Eran Dilger posted one of his lopsided-advocacy stories around 8:30 p.m. PDT last night; I saw the ridiculous headline, “Google News buries news of Google’s FTC investigation under Daniel Lyons fluff”, about two hours later, when scanning my RSS feeds. The story within is even worse. Don’t bother rewarding the author with pageviews. Notice I don’t link to the story. (Since we have two Daniels here and out of friendliness I use first names, I choose for this story to refer to Mr. Dilger as DED.)
Here’s the quick recap: DED refers to a Daniel Lyons opinion that ran in an ongoing Washington Post series. I happened to see it last night: “Five myths about Google“. I could have picked better myths, but these aren’t bad. The Post story is dateline March 20, 2015. The previous night, the Wall Street Journal blew out a big scoop regarding the Federal Trade Commission antitrust investigation into Google that closed in January 2013, finding no case. The Journal asserts cause championed by staff but ignored by Commissioners. Blech! The WSJ report is suspicious as all bloody hell, as I explain in March 19 analysis: “What is Behind the Journal’s Big Google-FTC Scoop?”
Star Wars fans, have I got a treat for you. The stormtrooper collection from Kristina Alexanderson is to die for. She presents more than 1,300 photo poses in her main album of them, but I am partial […]