| |
| ▲ | its-summertime 6 days ago | parent [-] | | The claim is that the pose hasn't changed, but how the camera represents the pose has, due to distortion, perspective, et al. | | |
| ▲ | throwanem 6 days ago | parent [-] | | I understand that that's the claim, yes. The author does an unsatisfactory job of defending it, which is extremely strange considering on how many axes an image out of a dedicated camera is palpably preferable to that from a phone, with its physical constraints and computational compensations. I do shoot with both because I'm not foolish enough to think good work can't be forced from poor tools, but I know the difference between a camera that works with me, and a phone that mostly won't. This author appears not really to understand that difference clearly, identifying accurately some flaws and differences resulting from real constraints, and inventing others from accidents of poor test procedure such as obvious changes in pose between serially taken shots. It's a confusing way to advertise his "Candid9" service to photographers; as one of those it leaves me hoping he's better as a programmer, and as a programmer it leaves me wondering why I should trust someone with such a questionable grasp of my problem domain has produced software that will successfully serve my needs. I mean, when I do street work, I just get a phone number or email address and that works fine. What do I need with a QR code that requires a printer to produce? Good grief, I'm the only one I know who still runs on paper, I own three printers, and I haven't found a credible way to like QR codes! What does all this extra complication add for anyone involved, except some Michigander who wants a piece of what I'm doing for no good reason I can see? | | |
| ▲ | markhalonen 6 days ago | parent [-] | | most hn comment of all time. The whole point of the product is that giving someone a QR code ticket is easier than collecting email or phone number, which makes a big difference at high volume. | | |
| ▲ | throwanem 6 days ago | parent [-] | | What kind of volume are you doing? I see three examples. Hell, I get more people than that stopping me to ask for pictures or try to hire me for event work when they see how I use a camera, most days when I'm just out for a walk. Really, what it looks like to me is just that you have a product that costs ~nothing to operate and seems like it sort of makes sense for smallish wedding-and-anniversary party venues - but you've discovered too late what a nightmare that market is and that the fit's not actually that great, so you're pitching to people like me to try to salvage with a pivot, not realizing that the ask to add a Wal Mart style belt mounted printer to my kit in order to produce these QR code tickets is really just never going to happen. It's bizarre to me in what world you live where this constitutes "easier," but I also don't care. You want to intermediate and transactionalize a relationship so ephemeral it can already be nearly overlooked even to exist, and where your presence is unneeded and unwelcome - and mine is the most HN comment ever? But it does explain why no one in your sample shots is smiling. | | |
| ▲ | markhalonen 6 days ago | parent [-] | | > What kind of volume are you doing? Most I've done is 60 group photos in an hour at a trade show. > Really, what it looks like to me is just that you have a product that costs ~nothing to operate Correct > and seems like it sort of makes sense for smallish wedding-and-anniversary party venues I would say the intended use case is destination venues like a upscale golf course or hotel. > the ask to add a Wal Mart style belt mounted printer to my kit Not how it works. If you looked at the website, you'd see that you print and cut the tickets at home before hand on a normal printer. > It's bizarre to me in what world you live where this constitutes "easier," but I also don't care Handing someone a ticket is easier than collecting their email. > You want to intermediate and transactionalize a relationship so ephemeral it can already be nearly overlooked even to exist, and where your presence is unneeded and unwelcome - and mine is the most HN comment ever? I have unlimited confidence and patience. Hit me with the snarkiest rebuttal you can muster! | | |
| ▲ | throwanem 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I did look at the website, of course. How else could I have critiqued your comparison of phone and discrete cameras? At a rate of one a minute in a destination venue, sure, this makes sense, assuming you could land that kind of deal reliably. So why are you trying to sell it to street photographers like me, who do things differently, with different desiderata and different needs? And if you are going to try to do that, then don't you think you might be wise to listen when a putative customer explains how you have failed to earn their money? | |
| ▲ | markhalonen 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | @throwanem I think I hit the depth limit so replying here. I would be happy to chat about how a street photographer could use Candid9, but do know that I've made plenty of money in other businesses and this is a fun passion project for me, so I'm not begging on my knees for someone to use my side project. | | |
| ▲ | throwanem 6 days ago | parent [-] | | There's no depth limit, it's just that the reply link takes a few minutes to show up at depth. You can always reply from the comment view (click the timestamp) until the reply window (iirc 14 days) has closed. I don't care about Candid9; as I said, there's no place for it in anything I do. If it matters to you to pitch effectively to street photographers, I assume you would want to find out what we care about. If not, why pitch us at all? Unfortunately for me, it's too goddamned hot right now to go outside and live, and I'm bored of doing house chores. Good luck. | | |
| ▲ | markhalonen 6 days ago | parent [-] | | I don't really understand the current street photographers as I don't know how they would ever make money. Basically if you're already a street photographer, then you aren't motivated by money, which the pitch of Candid9 is that you'll make money. So pre-existing street photographers paradoxically are not the target market. | | |
| ▲ | throwanem 6 days ago | parent [-] | | Right, at which point I cease to understand why the "For independent photographers" tab reads as if trying to pitch me a gig-economy style addon to an existing practice. I can't speak for the market you are trying to target, but I would wonder whether you miss people like them by hitting people like me. I guess maybe it could be worth clarifying your copy, but who'd care? I do street work when I do it because I like meeting people and because it makes people smile. If I wanted money also out of it, I'd more likely just drop my hat on the sidewalk or something. I still don't see why the comparison page (the one originally linked here, the iPhone 16/mirrorless shootout) treats variations in pose and composition as equivalent with those caused by camera physics, which was what originally caught my interest in any case. | | |
| ▲ | markhalonen 6 days ago | parent [-] | | Yes one use-case is a gig-economy street photography practice, which does already exist in places like the Brooklyn Bridge, Candid9 makes that easier. Another use-case perhaps in your case is to do it for free and do higher volume and market your money-making services? I agree that it is fun and mood-lifting to take portraits, but also it would be cool to make it sustainable. but yeah overall Candid9 is a hammer looking for a nail right now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
