↓

Archive for November, 2010

Enthusiast Compact Camera Reviews

The folks over at Digital Photography Review put up a group review of the Canon PowerShot S95, the Nikon Coolpix P7000, and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5. They liked all three of the cameras, but preferred the S95 and the LX5 while at the same time noting that each of the three have unique strengths and weaknesses.

I was very tempted to replace my Canon PowerShot S90 with either the S95 or the LX5. In the end, I decided to stick with my S90 for my on the go shots for a couple of reasons. While the S95 adds a lot of very nice features, the core of the features are exactly the same as the S90 equating to just a very minor upgrade.

I actually got to try out the LX5 for a week or so and was very pleased with the image quality. I was even more impressed by its 1cm minimum focusing distance. What stopped me from keeping the LX5 and selling off my S90 was the physical lens cap, the non-intuitive user interface, and the camera’s slight bulkiness. Out of those three complaints, I’d have to go with the bulkiness to be the main reason why I didn’t keep the LX5.

Carrying around the S90 is real easy, as it’s super pocketable. The same can be said about the S95. And while I say the LX5 is bulky, I do so when comparing it to the S90/S95. The LX5 is still a very compact camera – it’s just not as easily pocketable as the S90/S95.

No matter which of these cameras you choose, you can’t go wrong. They all provide excellent image quality given their size and portability. For a more in-depth review, I highly recommend reading Digital Photography Review’s group review.

[Digital Photography Review]

Read More »

Know Your Rights

Lifehacker put up another interesting article regarding some of your rights as a photographer. Depending on what you photograph, parts of the article may or may not be relevant, however it’s generally a good idea to know anyway.

I think the most relevant piece of the article concerns copyright:

Copyright exists in your photographs at the moment you click the shutter. While you do not have to register your photos with the U.S. Copyright Office for them to be protected by copyright, there are many reasons to register them. When a photo is not registered with the U.S. Copyright Office prior to an infringement (or within three months of the first publication of the photo), a copyright owner may recover only “actual damages” for the infringement (pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 504 (b)), instead of statutory damages. Courts usually calculate actual damages based on your normal license fees and/or standard licensing fees, plus profits derived from the infringement, if not too speculative.

A lot of people will put watermarks over their images or, as I have done, put a copyright notice on each image. Either practice is unnecessary according to the law, and is only done to help make it more difficult to steal an image.

Hopefully you’ll never have to worry about being sued for your photos or having your art stolen by someone else.

[Lifehacker] & [Lifehacker]

Of course, when in doubt, ask a lawyer for legal advice.

Read More »