Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Exclusive 25% off Affinity Photo: Professional photo editing with no subscription!

Activity : All Comments


Welcome to my portfolio. I primarily photograph cars and upload photos onto ePHOTOzine to show my progress and get more advice on improving my photography.
...Read More
  • Hi Everyone,

    I'd like to let everyone know that today is my last day working here at ePHOTOzine. I'm moving on to pastures new in a position with a different company in Sheffiled. It's been great working here for the past 10 years and i've learned alot along the way, including a bit of photography (although there is still plenty of room to improve). I've had a great time interacting with all you guys as well and building the greatest photography website! Keep on ePzing!

  • I suppose I can't explain it. I can only make a judgement from my own experiences. Smile In my opinion, if you put the hard work in and have some common sense, things generally work out. Yes sometimes it is really really difficult and you will have to make some rather tough decisions and it can be a nightmare at times, but things work out. Don't give up. When one door shuts, look for another door to knock on.

    My first experience of the job centre in this country over 10 years ago is a prime example of what I think was wrong and may be wrong. It may be an isolated indecent, but I personally thought it was wrong. I walked in to find a job. I had my CV ready and I booked an appointment with one of the workers there to get things started. First on their agenda was getting me signed up for benefits I might be eligible for.....surely we should talk about jobs i'm looking for? My experience? What I can do? Not what financial support I can get.
  • Fair enough, some disabilities can make things difficult to change. But that isn't exclusive to the 'poor'.

    Yes, families from wealthy backgrounds can afford expensive schooling and mingle with a certain set of society. But, i'm a strong believer that anyone can make it as long as they put the hard work in and drive their own destiny. Maybe it's the 'American Dream' and positive outlook on life that was drilled into my mind at an early age Wink

    All to often I see people who settle for less than what they are capable of. Some people appear lack ambition and drive to make something more of themselves than what they are already. And then they blame it on 'the system'. Nor am I saying that's exclusive to 'poor'. It's the case from any background. It's as if we've started becoming a culture of wanting everything to be handed on a plate and fed to us, even those who are perfectly capable doing it themselves.

    Anyone can make it, I imagine there are wealthy people who come from deprived backgrounds in this country and I doubt they made it through handouts or by chance.
  • What if someone earns 500,000/year, but is 10,000,000 in debt. Are they rich or poor?

    Similarly, if someone earns 15,000/year, but has no outgoings, debt, mortgage, etc. Are they rich or poor?
  • Call me insensitive, but I always find it quite humorous when people fixate on the idea that the 'rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer'. It's like they think that people with more financial wealth just woke up one day with millions. Similarly, people don't just become poor over night. In my personal opinion, somewhere down the line, in both situations, both types of individuals have made life decisions and choices which have landed them in the situation they are in. Furthermore, at anytime, the 'poor' can change things to start on the road of becoming 'rich' which could be down to changes in lifestyle, etc. Similarly, the 'rich' can change things which can start them on the road of becoming 'poor' in the exact same way.

    I'm not saying I necessarily disagree that some things are easier for the 'rich', but at the same time...what's stopping any of the 'poor' doing something to be in the same situation?

    Well, at least that's what i think...or maybe I'm from a different planet Tongue

    As for Trump and Hilary, at least it makes for some interesting debate Smile
  • CB is likely to have hit the nail on the head. Most off topic debate these days is discussed on off-topic sites like facebook. There isn't anything stopping anyone starting a healthy debate forum, as long as it's healthy and not a heated argument which eventually turns into personal attacks (which has occurred in the past).
  • You can stay up-to-date with what's happening and being announced at Photokina 2016 by checking out our round-up which we update on a regular basis throughout the day:

  • 5 minutes using a mask technique stated on https://www.ephotozine.com/article/how-to-remove-backgrounds-from-your-images-in-photoshop-15615

    Good thing about this method is it also allows you to remove the stray hairs and it's non-destructive.

  • I think it depends on how the subject (person with phone) is used. Take this photo for instance:


    The message this photo portrays to me is that life is passing by or she is stuck in her own world.

  • Have a look at our Top 10 for waterproof/tough cameras:

  • I think once blocker users become more aware of the feature to turn off the ads that are allowed through by the blocker, the blocker will introduce a update removing this feature and thus their ads will display. They are clearly in the business to make money off advertising now...ironically.
  • From my experience, I've seen alot of ads come and go on ePHOTOzine.I would say probably 4-5 years ago, animations/flashy advertising was the norm. IMO, I think there was a point in which design agencies who design these ads started designing for clarity and usability realising that users were developing 'ad blindness'.

    90% of the ads I see these days don't even have any animations on them. Possibly because of the move to more user friendly design and as well as disabling Adobe Flash Player.

    As for relevancy, in most cases, ads I see are relevant. Clearing cookies will remove the tracking data which prevents relevancy from working. But I can understand that in some cases, having an advert 'follow you' isn't ideal either.

    I don't have a problem at all with advertising, in fact, I think it's essentially. Imagine owning an old camera lens which you love, but something about it just isn't that great. Then lets say the manufacturer has come out with a new version which fixes what was wrong. Without advertising, you may never know the new version has come out and that there is an improved version of the lens you love.


    As for the adblockers delivering ads, I feel they are simply showing their master plan. You have ask, how does an adblocker make money? It's by getting paid by ad networks to allow ads to come through. They are simply taking another cut of the revenue and the website which you are visiting is the one which loses out even more.

    It sounds like adblockers aren't fit for purpose anymore. If you don't mind ads, but hate flashy/animated ones, Disable flash player, you won't need an adblocker then which does add additional processing time on page loads. I can honestly say that I can't remember the last time an direct advertiser has sent us flash ads to deliver. In most cases they are non-animated jpeg files these days.

    As for 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable', personally I think ads should have almost no animation. Animation should only be used if helps assist in understanding the product that is being advertised. Furthermore, colour and design should be considered to avoid being intrusive. Yes, get the users attention, but don't blind them with bright clashing colours. Respect the user.

  • This may potentially open a can of worms....

    As many may already know, a percentage of web users have adblockers installed on their browsers which block ads from displaying on websites. Obviously, this affects the website's ability to make revenue through traditional online banner advertising.

    A twist to this situation was announced yesterday. A very well known (and possibly the most popular) ad blocking software has announced that they are launching an advertising platform/network which will deliver banner ads to adblocker users in place of the blocked ads. The claim is that their ad network will only deliver 'acceptable' ads based on criteria they see acceptable. Websites simply need to ad additional code to their website to allow the adblocker to replace the ads with the 'acceptable' ad network.

    For those who don't understand how ad networks work, a website joins an ad network to generate revenue from delivering ads the ad network displays. The ad network then sells advertising space (in bulk) to advertisers through the ad network. The ad network takes a large cut of the advertising sales and then gives the websites a smaller percentage of the revenue.

    From my perspective, this setup allows the adblocker to almost become advertising hijack software, software which is usually maliciously installed on a users computer to hijack an ad slot and display their own ads thus generating revenue for the software. However, the adblocker ad network isn't malicious because a) the adblocker software has been given consent by the user to be installed on their computer (and the user has agreed to T&Cs) and b) websites have to give the software consent to display ads on their site.

    Because they can 100% guarantee their ads will deliver, the adblocker's ad network will be in high demand to advertisers, other ad networks as well as website owners to generate revenue from users using ad blockers. Therefore, it sounds like to me that adblock users are about to get a whole lot of ads on a whole lot of sites.

    How do you feel about adblocking software now deciding to deliver ads in place of the blocked ads?

    What would you consider 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' when it comes to banner advertising?
  • Welcome Back! Looking forward to your contributions in the gallery and forum again, as i'm sure others are too.
  • Here's one that I experienced over the weekend:

    Don't make your subject pose long while you take a number of shots without first asking.

    I think a 'Can I take your photo' is usually interpreted as 'Can I take one photo of you'. If you want to take a few shots, say so, maybe just after your first shot. 'Do you mind if I take a few more shots?' That way the subject can decide if they want to stick around a few more minutes with you or move on with what they were doing before you decided to take their photo.
  • If we, as a photographic community, were to put together 'Basic Etiquette for Photographing in Public Places', what would everyone think should be included?
  • I think what everyone is trying to say is that in this case, showing a bit more respect for the lady could have prevented the entire experience and you would have probably enjoyed your day more too.

    When she asked you to please stop taking photos, rather than ignoring her and continuing, which would have provoked her, kindly explain what you are taking a photo of and even consider complimenting her on her work.

    If it was me, I would have done this and if she still wanted me to stop, I would have. It's simply not worth spoiling your day (or her's). Instead, she tracked you down, you persisted with your 'it's my right' which escalated the issue and involved other people and no doubt more aggravation from all parties.

    Most everyone here knows their rights when it comes to taking photos in public places, but just because you have the right, doesn't mean you should or dis-respect other peoples wishes. Treat others like you'd like to be treated. If at any point you didn't want your photo taken, wouldn't you be annoyed if some photographer continued to take your photo?
  • Hi Everyone,

    I think its about time we give everyone an update on the progress of the gallery speed update.

    Over the past month we have been preparing the site for a gradual transfer over of all the images in the gallery over to the new gallery image loading code.

    All the photos from Aug 2016 and next month will now use the new code for everyone. We have also started gradually going through the oldest photos and moving them over.
  • Hi Alan,

    Answers to a few questions can help locate what might be the problem:

    1. What web browser (and version) are you using?
    2. What Add-ons/Plugins/Extensions do you have enabled on your web browser?
    3. Does the problem occur when you disable these add-ons?
    4. What security software are you running?
    5. Do you get the same problem when using a different web browser?
    6. Can you provide a screenshot of the message?
    7. Are there particular pages or actions where you get this message?

  • I'd just like to mention, for legal reasons, we cannot allow any replies which suggest treatment (as we can be held liable). All we can recommend is for you to see your GP.
  • I think the funniest thing about Win10, is the public's reaction to updates as if it's something new. If I recall correctly, XP, Vista and 7 all had the same auto-update feature turned on by default and would sometimes cause problems too. Remember SP1, SP2 and SP3 and the media swarm around problems and bugs with them? Why is it all of a sudden Win10's auto-update feature is the worse thing ever?

    Yes, I've heard horror stories about the upcoming update, but no different the the horror stories i've heard about previous updates on previous versions of windows. Things break sometimes because of the gazillion different hardware/software configuration possibilities. I can only imagine the amount of time that has to be dedicated to the testing phase for operating systems.

    Probably not the most constructive of responses, but up to now, apart from a couple of hiccups with the initial upgrade, I can confirm 12 out of 12 computers which i'm aware of which run 10 just fine. All running different hardware from different ages and different software.

  • Please check your support ticket you submitted. I replied to it this morning with instructions to activate your free Plus Membership voucher code.
  • "Can I ask you a question?"......you just did.
  • Everyone loves a good fight in the forums Wink All friendly debate here
  • If you are referring to my comment and views, that is possibly the first time I have ever been called 'left wing'. I mostly agree with the right-wing parties on many topics (again, my personal views and opinions).

    I simply respect and am tolerant of other people, their views and beliefs and simply ask that these people are of mine Smile

    The problem is the minority of the human race who allow their differences to become such a conflict that they feel the need to act out violently.
  • Personally, I respect whatever people want to believe or not believe. It's your own choice. I've known and know people from both sides. I've met people who have found that believing (or not believing) as a relief/comfort/support/improvement to their life in which things may have turned out much worse. From my experience, all religious (and non religious) people I have known are friendly individuals who simply just want to carry on with their lives and try to be a good citizen and wouldn't want to actively hurt anyone else.

    I think the problem isn't religion, it's people who are sick in the head and really need mental help. I'm sure not all killers believe in a religion. Nor do I believe all killers who do believe in a religion are religiously fuelled. Removing religion from the world won't end killings of innocent people. Yes, I will admit that religion can fuel some of the killings. But often times, there are plenty of cases where it's been fuelled by others things which have nothing to do with religion such as hatred for race, hate for an individual, money, personal opinions, political, drugs, alcohol, the list goes on. Religion is just one portion of a much larger pie of reasons why these people do sick things.

    Religion or not, hate is hate.
  • @Chris64

    You can hide the topics from Healthy Debate by following these steps:

    1. Go to the Forums page: http://www.ephotozine.com/forums
    2. Click 'manage forums' under the 'browse' page on the right
    3. Select 'Hide' for Healthy Debate and press 'Save Changes'

    In regards to Nikon Nation, please see this topic:

  • And we're back in the room. Our apologies for the inconvenience and thank you for your patience.

  • We're not 100% yet guys. some photos may be displayed incorrectly while we resolve the issue.

  • Hi Everyone,

    We are currently looking into the situation. It appears to be a configuration problem with the recent gallery update. We have turned off the update for now, but you will notice that images are displayed greyed out and small for now. Our server admins are on the case and are working on resolving the issue as swiftly as possible.