Do watermarks protect your pictures?

The short answer is NO. 

 

Watermarks can provide some protection for your photos, but their effectiveness depends on your goals. Here’s a breakdown of their pros and cons:

Advantages of Using Watermarks

✅ Discourages Casual Theft – A visible watermark makes it harder for someone to pass off your work as their own.
✅ Branding & Recognition – If done subtly, a watermark can help people recognize your work and find your portfolio.
✅ Proof of Ownership – If a dispute arises, a watermark can serve as initial evidence that you are the original creator.

Limitations of Watermarks

❌ Easy to Remove – Anyone with basic editing skills can erase a watermark, especially if it's small or placed in a corner. An example of that is that Google's latest Gemini includes an AI feature to just do that.
❌ Can Distract from the Image – A poorly placed or overly large watermark can detract from the visual appeal of your photo.
❌ Might Not Stop Serious Theft – High-quality images are still vulnerable to unauthorized use, even with a watermark.

 Bottom Line

Watermarks provide a layer of deterrence but are not foolproof. If you mainly want credit and visibility, a subtle watermark may help. If preventing theft is your primary concern, combining multiple protection strategies is a better approach.

are Macs better for photo editing?

 

I asked this question to ChatGPT and carefully analyzed the response to ensure it aligns with my own thoughts and opinions. Here is ChatGPT response with some of my notes in Red:

 Macs are widely considered excellent for photo editing, but whether they are "better" depends on your needs, preferences, and budget. Here are some key reasons why many photographers prefer Macs for editing:

Advantages of Macs for Photo Editing

✅ Color Accuracy & Display Quality – Mac displays (especially Retina displays) are known for their color accuracy, which is crucial for photo editing. macOS also has excellent color management. Important point for Photographers.

✅ Optimization & Stability – macOS is highly optimized for creative software like Adobe Lightroom, Photoshop, and Capture One, leading to smooth performance and fewer crashes. In this point I need to add that in my Dell 7200 i7 Windows PC Lightroom crashes very often. I have been using it in my M3 Macbook Air and it has not crashed even one time.

✅ Hardware & Software Integration – Apple designs both the hardware and software, ensuring seamless performance and long-term stability. And this is to me a key point. Because Apple hardware is a "closed or controlled" system everything is optimized to perfection something that in Windows PC is hard to achieve. Apple devices just work.

✅ M1/M2/M3/M4 Chips – Apple's custom silicon (M-series chips) delivers impressive speed and efficiency, handling high-resolution RAW files smoothly while maintaining good battery life on laptops.

✅ Build Quality & Longevity – Macs tend to last a long time, making them a solid investment for many photographers. Another key point. It's true that in the last few years since Microsoft Surface machines were released the market has seen an improvement in quality but still, Apple is dominating the market in important aspect.

Potential Downsides of Macs

❌ Expensive – Macs generally cost more than equivalent Windows PCs with similar or better hardware specs. Here I have to say that I doubt that I can buy any Laptop for $759 with similar performance than the M3 MacBook Air.

❌ Limited Upgradability – Most newer Macs have non-upgradable RAM and storage, so you need to choose wisely at purchase.

❌ Software Compatibility – While most mainstream photo editing programs work fine, some niche software or plugins may be Windows-only.

Windows vs. Mac for Photo Editing

•     If budget is a concern, a well-built Windows PC can often deliver better performance for the price.
•     If you prioritize color accuracy, stability, and seamless workflow, a Mac is a solid choice.

As a photographer, do you find yourself editing a lot of RAW files? If so, from my experience the M-series Macs handle those quite efficiently.

To end this article here is a video that I recently found that summarizes my experience with MacOS. 

I'm not ready to dish my Windows PC yet, more than 30 years of using Windows have created a dependency that is hard to break specially if you are an IT person whose actual job is in some way supporting Windows Applications. But for sure I'm enjoying MacOS adventure. 

My M3 MacBook Air Experience

I have been using Windows since 1994 and never thought I would switch—until now. Recently, I read multiple articles and forum discussions about MacBooks, particularly how both the Air and Pro models have significantly improved performance with Apple’s new "M" series processors.

After extensive research, I decided to give it a try. I found a great deal on a refurbished MacBook Air from Apple, complete with a one-year warranty.

The Apple M3 MacBook Air, equipped with 16GB of RAM and a 256GB SSD, performs exceptionally well—far better than my Dell 7200 i7 with the same RAM and storage configuration.

To put this into perspective:

• DXO PureRaw 3 processes 10 pictures in just 2 minutes on the MacBook, whereas my Intel-based PC takes about 6.6 minutes for the same task.
• Lightroom Classic (LrC) Denoise takes 50 seconds to process a 24MB CR3 file on the M3 MacBook Air, compared to 5 minutes on the Intel PC.
• For years, I hesitated to test Lightroom Classic’s Slideshow feature because, on my Intel PC, rendering a video with my photos took hours. However, on the M3 MacBook Air, I created a slideshow with over 300 pictures in just 15 minutes!

 

This switch has been a game-changer for my workflow, and I can confidently say I’m glad I made the move.

Note: It seems that this deal was really good because the model that I bought is now Out of Stock. 

Why I love Back-Button Focus

I could explain back-button focus and why I love this method, but I don't think I could do it better than David Bergman does in this video.

I have personally mapped two buttons for this function—one for subject tracking with eye detection and another for single-point focusing without tracking or eye detection, as explained by David. In my experience, this setup ensures that your subject stays in focus, no matter how challenging the situation becomes.

The Cruel Reality of Mirrorless Cameras

For me, the harsh reality of mirrorless cameras is that they were supposed to be smaller and lighter than their DSLR predecessors. However, since their introduction, they have steadily grown in size and weight. Today, some mirrorless models are as large—or even larger—than DSLRs.

 

R5 vs R5 Mk II: the honest opinion of a wildlife photography

 I liked this video because it's not a technical comparison between the two cameras but a highlight of things that may impact you when switching from a Canon R5 to a Canon R5 Mk II. 

An iconic picture and the debate

 Some photographs have become iconic symbols, and Napalm Girl is one of them.

I doubt there is anyone in the world who doesn’t associate this picture with the horrors of the Vietnam War.

Recently, a documentary was released claiming that this iconic photograph was not taken by Nick Ut—who won a Pulitzer Prize for it—but rather by Nguyen Thanh Nghe, a local stringer who was paid $20 and left uncredited. You can read more about the debate here.

This picture was taken 53 years ago. So why is this debate emerging now? Why wasn’t it raised long ago, when more evidence and firsthand testimonies might have been available to clarify the truth?

While I understand that it’s never too late for justice, this particular case presents a unique challenge. The authenticity of the photograph cannot be definitively proven at this point, and many of the key figures involved are either no longer alive or are nearing the end of their lives. This makes verifying claims even more difficult and increases the risk of rewriting history based on incomplete or conflicting accounts.

Furthermore, reopening this debate now could have broader implications. It may not only cast doubt on a photograph that has become an enduring symbol of war’s brutality but also risk overshadowing the powerful message it has conveyed for decades. The Napalm Girl image has played a crucial role in shaping public perception of the Vietnam War, influencing anti-war movements and highlighting the suffering of innocent civilians. If the controversy remains unresolved, it could diminish the impact of the photo itself, shifting the focus from its historical significance to an endless debate over authorship.

Of course, if there is concrete evidence to support these claims, it should be examined. But if the discussion is based purely on speculation or unverifiable accounts, one has to question whether opening this Pandora’s box serves justice—or simply fuels controversy without resolution.

R1: 3 out of 5!

3 out of 5, that's the score given by The Photographer to Canon R1, a camera that was or is supposed to be Canon's flag ship. 

While the camera certainly delivered on knocking wildlife, specifically birding, out of the park, the biggest gripes we’ve had with this camera and other Canon cameras is their inability to recognize people of color. This, along with the lowered megapixel count and price, is why we’re giving the Canon EOS R1 three out of five stars.

The Canon R1 has faced criticism from many experts in the field. The main issue, in my view, is that Canon already had an excellent camera—the Canon R3. Compared to the R3, the R1 feels more like an incremental upgrade rather than a truly new model. 

According to The Photographer Review, the R1 is an excellent choice for wildlife and bird photography. However, I doubt that this market is willing to pay the nearly $6,300 price tag. Sports photographers are more likely to justify such an investment. Other fields, such as event photography, can achieve great results with more affordable cameras—including Canon's lower-cost options.

 Camera autofocus systems primarily rely on contrast detection, phase detection, or a combination of both to achieve sharp focus. In low-light conditions, these systems face significant challenges, particularly when photographing people with darker skin tones. Here’s why:

Contrast Detection and Low-Light Challenges

Contrast-detection autofocus (CDAF) works by analyzing the difference in light intensity between adjacent pixels. It continuously adjusts the focus until it finds the point of highest contrast. However, in low-light environments, overall contrast is reduced, making it harder for the system to detect clear edges and fine details.

For individuals with darker skin tones, the challenge is even greater because:

• Lower Reflectance – Darker skin absorbs more light compared to lighter skin, which reflects more. This means that in dim lighting, a camera might struggle to differentiate between the subject and the background due to reduced contrast.    
• Less Edge Definition – Autofocus systems look for contrast between light and dark areas. If a person's skin tone is closer in brightness to the surrounding environment, the system may have difficulty locking focus accurately.

 Phase-detection autofocus (PDAF), which is common in DSLRs and high-end mirrorless cameras, works by splitting incoming light into two images and aligning them. While it is generally faster than CDAF, it still struggles in low-light conditions where there is minimal light to work with.

For subjects with darker skin in dim environments, PDAF may also have difficulty due to:

• Lack of Strong Highlights – Many phase-detection systems are optimized for high-contrast areas such as eyes, sharp edges, or bright surfaces. If the available lighting is insufficient to create highlights on the skin, the system may misfocus or hunt for focus longer.
• Artificial Light Sources – Some cameras compensate for low light by using infrared or other artificial light sources. However, these systems can be less effective for darker skin tones, as some infrared sensors may not reflect as strongly from melanin-rich skin.

So, what are the solutions to this issue?  Camera manufacturers have made significant progress in improving autofocus accuracy across different skin tones, particularly with advancements in AI-based subject recognition and machine-learning autofocus algorithms. Some potential solutions include:

• Face and Eye Detection Algorithms – Modern cameras now use AI-trained models to recognize facial features rather than just relying on contrast. This helps lock focus on subjects regardless of lighting conditions.
• Better Low-Light Sensors – Cameras with backside-illuminated (BSI) sensors and higher ISO capabilities perform better in dim environments, reducing autofocus struggles.
• On-Camera Lighting Assistance – Some cameras feature AF assist beams or infrared illuminators to help focus in dark settings.

The challenge is that any solution relying on improved AI-based algorithms will require more processing power, which generates additional heat. This, in turn, increases costs due to the high price of processors and the need for effective heat dissipation solutions—all while maintaining a camera size that remains appealing to the market.

As you can see, this is no easy task.

Going back to The Photographer review, they illustrate how the camera focus fails using this picture. 

As you can see, this is an extreme scenario for me—a dark-skinned person in front of a dark background. The lack of contrast is evident, and in this situation, not just Canon's cameras will struggle; most cameras would face difficulties.

The benefits of photography...

I have been doing nature photography as a hobby for almost 10 years now. Some people who know me might say I'm addicted to it—and honestly, they might be right. Photography helps me release the stress that builds up during the workweek. When I'm out shooting, my mind drifts away from worries and negative thoughts, which is incredibly beneficial.

The sense of gratification when you come back home, review your shots, and start editing them is another powerful factor in maintaining mental well-being.

 

Aesthetical appealing

Sometimes, camera manufacturers overlook an important point, which can be summed up by a slogan from a popular TV show: "If it looks good, eat it!" In other words, if a camera looks good, people will buy it—even if it's not the best on the market.

This article from The Photographer provides a great example.

Photo courtesy of The Photographer.

By today’s standards, the Nikon Df is far from one of the best cameras available, yet its design is so appealing that if you're looking to buy one on the used market, you should be prepared to pay around $2,000. Keep in mind that this camera was released in 2013 and it's a 16 MP camera. 

...what made the Nikon Df so interesting was that it was a camera purely for photographers. Today, you see cameras that are hybrid devices, offering up to 8K video functions and pushing aside the need for image-makers. The Df did not do that. In fact, it had a lack of video functions, which was initially seen as a drawback. However, in 2025, this has become one of the most appealing cameras 2025.

Collaborative Spirit

Dani Connor recently published a video answering questions, and she mentioned a few points that caught my attention.

The first is the lack of a collaborative spirit within the wildlife photography community. This is something that has affected me personally—both when I started wildlife photography in South Florida and now after moving to a new place in Central Florida. It’s difficult to find people willing to share information about where to see and photograph certain animals and birds. While I understand the need to protect wildlife, I wish there were more trust within the community. After all, not everyone is out there with a heavy camera and a zoom lens.

The second point is how difficult it is to make money—or even a living—solely from wildlife photography. Many people assume that if you have a camera, you must be making money from your photography, but that’s far from reality. Of all the photography genres, wildlife photography is probably one of the hardest and least profitable.

 

Wildlife Photography vs Environmental Photography

 

Wildlife Photography and Environmental Photography overlap in some ways but have distinct focuses:

Wildlife Photography

• Focuses on animals in their natural habitat.
• The subject is the animal itself—its behavior, movements, and interactions.
• Photographers often use telephoto lenses to capture distant or elusive subjects.
• Examples: A close-up of a bird in flight, a lion hunting, or a macro shot of an insect.

Environmental Photography

• Broader category that includes nature, landscapes, and human impact on the environment.
• May feature wildlife, but the emphasis is often on the ecosystem, conservation, or the relationship between nature and human influence.
• Can include landscapes, pollution, deforestation, and climate change documentation.
• Examples: A photo of a forest recovering from a wildfire, a polluted river, or a wide-angle shot of animals within their changing habitat.

If you’re shooting a Carolina Wren perched on a branch, that’s wildlife photography. If you frame the wren against a deforested background to highlight habitat loss, that’s environmental photography.

Is photography an Art?

That’s the subject of a recent article published by The Photographer.

Conquering the top of the world!

 According to Google AI: "Art is a creative expression that can be a physical object, experience, or skill. It can be beautiful, thought-provoking, or emotional. Art can be created through a variety of media, including painting, sculpture, music, dance, and photography."

Google AI goes deeper by saying that photography is an art because:

It's a creative endeavor that uses skill and imagination

It can evoke feelings and memories

It can be used to express thoughts and emotions

It can be used to research the world and our place in it

Do I think that photography is an art?

Putting modesty aside, yes, I do. What do you think?

Are you an opportunistic shooter?

 In photography, an opportunistic shooter refers to a photographer who captures images spontaneously rather than planning shots in advance. They take advantage of unexpected moments, interesting lighting conditions, or fleeting subjects as they arise.

This approach is common in wildlife, street, and documentary photography, where conditions change rapidly, and the best shots often come from being observant and ready rather than staging or anticipating specific scenes.

For example, in bird photography, an opportunistic shooter might capture a hawk diving for prey simply because they were prepared with their camera at the right time, even if they originally set out to photograph songbirds.

Am I an opportunistic shooter? Yes I'm!

Sony vs Canon

 At one point, I was a Sony shooter, but I eventually switched to Canon. Why? Seven years ago, Sony mirrorless cameras were packed with features that Canon simply didn’t offer. So why did I switch to Canon? The answer is simple: Canon's mirrorless cameras now come with features that would have cost me a fortune to get in a Sony setup. But there’s more to the story—this video is about a similar journey.

Crop mode, should you use it?

I've often seen YouTube influencers advise against using crop mode, but I completely disagree. As long as you understand a few key points—crop mode does not increase your lens's focal length, it reduces the resolution of your photos, and you might end anyway cropping the image when editing on your computer—there's no reason to avoid it. It does not make any difference in the image quality if you crop in your camera or in your computer. 

Here is a nice video talking about this. 

All about camera modes

If you're just starting your photography journey, you might believe that reaching a professional level means mastering Manual Mode. After all, it offers full control over your camera settings and unlocks creative possibilities.

While this is partly true, it's important to consider whether Manual Mode is actually the best fit for your photography style. In many cases, other modes may be easier to use and can help you achieve better results more efficiently.

This video can help you in the process of understanding the camera modes and to pick which one is the best configuration for you. 

 

New camera for Bird Watchers

Nikon will be releasing by the end of February a new camera specially designed for bird watchers: the Coolpix P1100. According to news posted at PetaPixel: 'Nikon announced the Coolpix P1100, the latest member of its series of super-zoom bridge cameras. It features a massive 125x optical zoom lens that the company describes as the “gold standard” of its class.'

This camera offers an impressive 3000mm equivalent optical zoom and up to 12,000mm digital zoom. For those unfamiliar with the difference, optical zoom is achieved through the physical movement of the lens elements, while digital zoom is created by processing or cropping the image within the camera.

Naturally, the image quality at 12,000mm will be significantly degraded due to the limitations of digital zoom. Photos captured using optical zoom will be sharper, but even then, don't expect miracles. Once you exceed 1000mm, additional factors such as atmospheric haze can further impact image quality.

The camera is priced at $1,099.95.

For birders who prefer a convenient, all-in-one setup without the hassle of changing lenses and aren't concerned with top-tier image quality, this camera is a viable option. However, for photographers who are passionate about capturing high-quality bird images, this may not be the right choice.

Using EF lenses in your R Series camera?

 

The choice between EF and RF lenses on Canon mirrorless cameras depends on a few factors, including your budget, existing gear, and what you're shooting. Here's a breakdown to help you decide:

EF Lenses on Canon Mirrorless

Canon’s EF lenses are designed for their DSLR lineup but can be used on RF-mount mirrorless cameras with the Canon EF-EOS R adapter (or third-party equivalents).

Pros of EF Lenses:

1. Wide Selection: Canon has been making EF lenses for decades, offering a massive range of options at different price points.
2. Affordable Used Market: EF lenses are readily available on the used market, often at lower prices than RF lenses.
3. Compatibility: Many EF lenses work flawlessly on RF-mount cameras when using the adapter, retaining image quality, autofocus and image stabilization.
4. Long Reach for Wildlife: Telephoto EF lenses, like the 100-400mm or 600mm primes, are popular among wildlife photographers.

Cons of EF Lenses:

1. Bulky Setup: The adapter adds extra length and weight, which might feel less balanced on smaller mirrorless bodies.
2. Not Fully Optimized: While EF lenses work well, RF lenses are designed to take full advantage of mirrorless technology. My recommendation is to stick to "L" EF lenses. 3rd party lenses from Tamron or Sigma may look attractive with a low price but they may not work properly in the R Series Camera.
   

---

RF Lenses on Canon Mirrorless

RF lenses are specifically built for Canon’s mirrorless R-series cameras, like the R3, R5 Mk I or II and the  R6 Mark I or II.

Pros of RF Lenses:

1. Better Image Quality: RF lenses are optimized for mirrorless, often delivering sharper images, better edge-to-edge sharpness, and improved bokeh.
   
2. Advanced Features: Many RF lenses include advanced optical technologies like faster autofocus, customizable control rings, and superior stabilization.
3. Compact Designs: Certain RF lenses (e.g., the RF 50mm f/1.8 or RF 70-200mm f/2.8) are more compact than their EF counterparts.
4. Future-Proof: Canon is heavily investing in the RF system, so you’ll be better positioned for future upgrades.

Cons of RF Lenses:

1. Higher Cost: RF lenses are generally more expensive than EF lenses.
2. Limited Budget Options: While the RF lens lineup is growing, there are fewer affordable choices compared to EF.
3. No Third-Party Autofocus Lenses (Mostly): Until recently, third-party lens manufacturers couldn’t produce autofocus RF lenses, though this is starting to change.

---

Which Should You Choose?

1. If you already own EF lenses: Stick with them and use an adapter. Canon’s EF lenses are still excellent, especially for wildlife photography with telephoto lenses like the EF 100-400mm.
2. If you’re starting fresh: Consider RF lenses for their better compatibility and future-proof design. You could start with versatile lenses like the RF 24-105mm f/4L or RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L if you shoot wildlife.
3. Budget Constraints: Use EF lenses with an adapter to save money, especially since the adapter maintains great performance.

EF 1.4x extender performance

I’ve read numerous reviews and opinions about extenders—some people love them, while others hate them. This note focuses on the Canon EF 1.4x Mark III extender, and it’s worth specifying that most of the negative opinions about extenders often refer to other brands.

The reality is that extenders require more light for autofocus to function properly. When it comes to sharpness, if you pair an extender with a high-quality lens and use a full-frame camera with good dynamic range, you likely won’t notice a significant loss in image quality.

A while back, I bought the Canon EF 1.4x Mark III to use with my Canon R7. Unfortunately, my experience with that combination was disappointing. The performance issues were so frustrating that I stashed the extender in my backpack and didn’t touch it for nearly two years.

Recently, after reading some new reviews, I decided to give the extender another chance—this time pairing it with my Canon R6 and EF 100-400mm Mark II lens. WOW! The results were incredible. Not only does this combination work exceptionally well, but it might even deliver sharper results than using the lens alone!

Here are some pictures taken this weekend in a very cloudy day using this setup.

ISO 12800 and after denoising the level of details is great.

The sharpness of this photo is just incredible.