Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Jael and Noa in the High Sierra

Expand Messages
  • Paul Fretheim
    What do you think of the composition in this shot? http://inyopro.com/jael_and_noa_in_high_sierra_meadow.html [13.6 mb] Paul Fretheim Inyo Pro
    Message 1 of 14 , Aug 3, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      What do you think of the composition in this shot?

      http://inyopro.com/jael_and_noa_in_high_sierra_meadow.html [13.6 mb]

      Paul Fretheim
      Inyo Pro
      >
    • Uri Cogan
      ... The clone of the woman (Yael?) appears too similar; it s pasting into the background is too obvious, and the scale of the pasted image relative to the
      Message 2 of 14 , Aug 3, 2008
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Paul Fretheim wrote:

        > What do you think of the composition in this shot?
        >
        > http://inyopro.com/jael_and_noa_in_high_sierra_meadow.html
        > <http://inyopro.com/jael_and_noa_in_high_sierra_meadow.html> [13.6 mb]
        >







        The clone of the woman (Yael?) appears too similar; it's pasting into
        the background is too obvious, and the scale of the pasted image
        relative to the image of the girl does not look "right" to me. I would
        have tried to flip it horizontally and position it on the other side of
        the girl, but the lighting of that subject would still be problematic,
        so it would have been best to use another image of the same person. This
        can easily be done while shooting the panorama - just re-position the
        subject that you want duplicated at the next shot in the series.

        Another problem with the composition is that there is not much in the
        way of special interest in the areas areas to the left or right of the
        two figures, or behind the initial point of view. This is a common
        problem with 360 degree coverage.

        For a good example of multiple shots of the same person in one panorama,
        see: http://tinyurl.com/6zns87

        Or for a full-screen of the same:

        http://geoimages.berkeley.edu/worldwidepanorama/wwp607/fullscreen/JanKurschewitz.html



        Note: file size of 13.6 mb is much too large for a panorama that is
        meant for web display, it's very slow loading with no benefit of
        quality. Try compressing it to something like 1.5 - 2 mb.


        Cheers, Uri.


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Howard Larson
        It looks like a fabricated photo.  Nothing one should aspire to.   -- Howard Larson mailto:hblarson43@yahoo.com ... From: Paul Fretheim
        Message 3 of 14 , Aug 3, 2008
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          It looks like a fabricated photo.  Nothing one should aspire to.
           
          --
          Howard Larson
          mailto:hblarson43@...



          ----- Original Message ----
          From: Paul Fretheim <paul@...>
          To: quicktime-vr@...; PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Sunday, August 3, 2008 5:04:08 PM
          Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Jael and Noa in the High Sierra


          What do you think of the composition in this shot?

          http://inyopro. com/jael_ and_noa_in_ high_sierra_ meadow.html [13.6 mb]

          Paul Fretheim
          Inyo Pro
          >






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Uri Cogan
          ... Fabricated, yes. But what s wrong with fabricated images? there is a lot of artistic potential there. See: http://tinyurl.com/6zns87 [Non-text portions of
          Message 4 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Howard Larson wrote:


            > It looks like a fabricated photo.
            >




            Fabricated, yes. But what's wrong with fabricated images? there is a lot
            of artistic potential there. See:
            http://tinyurl.com/6zns87




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Paul Fretheim
            Of course it s fabricated. No one exists as a large and smaller version simultaneously! The photo itself, however, is quite real. We were there last week.
            Message 5 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Of course it's "fabricated." No one exists as a large and smaller
              version simultaneously!

              The photo itself, however, is quite real. We were there last week. I
              was just messing around with the color of the part of the image with
              Jael in it and accidentally dropped in a smaller version of that part of
              the photo and it reminded me of the feel of the cover of an old Doors
              album (American rock band from the 60s). I just wondered if anybody
              else would find that look interesting. Apparently not . . .


              I don't think Jael liked it either. She hasn't said anything anyway. ;-)
              >
              >
              > Re: Jael and Noa in the High Sierra
              > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/message/21884;_ylc=X3oDMTJzYTRydm5zBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE4MjI3ODQ4BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTAwNjQ5NgRtc2dJZAMyMTg4NARzZWMDZG1zZwRzbGsDdm1zZwRzdGltZQMxMjE3ODQ3NTY1>
              >
              >
              >
              > Posted by: "Howard Larson" hblarson43@...
              > <mailto:hblarson43@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Jael%20and%20Noa%20in%20the%20High%20Sierra>
              > hblarson43 <http://profiles.yahoo.com/hblarson43>
              >
              >
              > Sun Aug 3, 2008 5:11 pm (PDT)
              >
              > It looks like a fabricated photo. Nothing one should aspire to.


              Posted by: "Uri Cogan"


              >
              > The clone of the woman (Yael?) appears too similar; it's pasting into
              > the background is too obvious, and the scale of the pasted image
              > relative to the image of the girl does not look "right" to me. I would
              > have tried to flip it horizontally and position it on the other side of
              > the girl, but the lighting of that subject would still be problematic,
              > so it would have been best to use another image of the same person. This
              > can easily be done while shooting the panorama - just re-position the
              > subject that you want duplicated at the next shot in the series.
              Sorry but that is the way my friend spells her name. She is from
              Berlin, Germany.

              I have several other shots from that moment that I could have used. As
              I wrote above, that composition happened by accident when I was trying
              to do something else, and I just wanted to see what others thought of it.

              I like that pano with the multiple images of the little boy in the blue
              t-shirt. To his parents by 4 in the afternoon it probably feels like
              there are six of him running around!

              Thanks for the feedback!

              Paul Fretheim
            • Howard Larson
              ... Wrong? Not *wrong*. It is a matter of opinion, asked for and given if, perhaps, a little tersely. I prefer straight photography with a minimum of
              Message 6 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Uri Cogan <uri@...> wrote:
                >
                > Howard Larson wrote:
                >
                >
                > > It looks like a fabricated photo.
                > >
                > Fabricated, yes. But what's wrong with fabricated images? there is a
                lot of artistic potential there. See:
                > http://tinyurl.com/6zns87
                >
                >
                Wrong? Not *wrong*. It is a matter of opinion, asked for and given
                if, perhaps, a little tersely.

                I prefer straight photography with a minimum of manipulation. Found
                objects as opposed to arrangements. Technically good (I am no fan of
                the Krappy Kamera contest or prints of Polaroids with the adhesive
                marks showing).
              • paul womack
                ... Are you in the right forum ;-) BugBear
                Message 7 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Howard Larson wrote:
                  > I prefer straight photography with a minimum of manipulation.

                  Are you in the right forum ;-)

                  BugBear
                • Howard Larson
                  ... Abosolutely! :-) I don t consider using panotools a deviation from straight photography. In fact, I use panotools not for panoramas but to get
                  Message 8 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, paul womack <pwomack@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Howard Larson wrote:
                    > > I prefer straight photography with a minimum of manipulation.
                    >
                    > Are you in the right forum ;-)
                    >
                    > BugBear
                    >
                    Abosolutely! :-)

                    I don't consider using panotools a deviation from straight
                    photography. In fact, I use panotools not for panoramas but to get
                    large-format images from a small-format camera.
                  • Uri Cogan
                    ... This business of straight vs. fabricated images is not too clear to me. The only kind of photography that in my opinion, ought not to be manipulated at
                    Message 9 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Howard Larson wrote:


                      > I don't consider using panotools a deviation from straight
                      > photography. In fact, I use panotools not for panoramas but to get
                      > large-format images from a small-format camera.
                      >







                      This business of "straight" vs. "fabricated" images is not too clear to me.

                      The only kind of photography that in my opinion, ought not to be
                      manipulated at all, appears to be journalistic, and (hopefully, hah...)
                      commercial advertising.

                      Everything else, it seems to me, is fair game and is more a matter of
                      taste than of integrity.

                      The above may be too simple... my own experience in photojournalism
                      tells me that the mere choice of lens, exposure, composition, and
                      processing "manipulates" the final image to some degree, so in a certain
                      sense, all photos are "fabricated".

                      Cheers, Uri.




                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Chris Thomas
                      That s certainly not what we re talking about here.. This medium is not going to be confined by the traditional photography boomers like myself grew up
                      Message 10 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        That's certainly not what we're talking about here..

                        This medium is not going to be confined by the "traditional" photography
                        "boomers" like myself grew up with!



                        There's a place for everyone..

                        Hopefully artistic endevours will continue to push into new directions, as
                        materials and tools permit.





                        Chris Thomas

                        Photographer

                        cell... 604-649-5352

                        In North America

                        call... 1-800-870-5110

                        <http://www.christhomas.com/> http://www.christhomas.com



                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
                        Behalf Of Howard Larson
                        Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:31 AM
                        To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Jael and Noa in the High Sierra



                        --- In PanoToolsNG@ <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com,
                        Uri Cogan <uri@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Howard Larson wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        > > It looks like a fabricated photo.
                        > >
                        > Fabricated, yes. But what's wrong with fabricated images? there is a
                        lot of artistic potential there. See:
                        > http://tinyurl. <http://tinyurl.com/6zns87> com/6zns87
                        >
                        >
                        Wrong? Not *wrong*. It is a matter of opinion, asked for and given
                        if, perhaps, a little tersely.

                        I prefer straight photography with a minimum of manipulation. Found
                        objects as opposed to arrangements. Technically good (I am no fan of
                        the Krappy Kamera contest or prints of Polaroids with the adhesive
                        marks showing).





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Howard Larson
                        ... clear to me. ... hah...) commercial advertising. ... of taste than of integrity. ... certain sense, all photos are fabricated . ... In my mind, *straight*
                        Message 11 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Uri Cogan <uri@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Howard Larson wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > > I don't consider using panotools a deviation from straight
                          > > photography. In fact, I use panotools not for panoramas but to get
                          > > large-format images from a small-format camera.
                          > >
                          >
                          > This business of "straight" vs. "fabricated" images is not too
                          clear to me.
                          >
                          > The only kind of photography that in my opinion, ought not to be
                          > manipulated at all, appears to be journalistic, and (hopefully,
                          hah...) commercial advertising.
                          >
                          > Everything else, it seems to me, is fair game and is more a matter
                          of taste than of integrity.
                          >
                          > The above may be too simple... my own experience in photojournalism
                          > tells me that the mere choice of lens, exposure, composition, and
                          > processing "manipulates" the final image to some degree, so in a
                          certain sense, all photos are "fabricated".
                          >
                          > Cheers, Uri.
                          >
                          In my mind, *straight* photography documents an object as it is.
                          *Fabricated* images are arrangements created by the photographer, not
                          objects *as found*.

                          And, yes, your definition of photojournalism is a form of
                          manipulation--the photographer's interpretation of the object if you
                          will--but still encompassed within the idea of straight photography
                          as anyone could encounter the same object as it naturally exists.

                          You are correct in that is a matter of taste. And, given an option,
                          there are people that will line up on one side or the other.
                        • Howard Larson
                          And, I would hope, there is room for the voice of the traditionalist like myself who is using these tools in a *traditionalist* manner. ... photography
                          Message 12 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            And, I would hope, there is room for the voice of the traditionalist
                            like myself who is using these tools in a *traditionalist* manner.

                            --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Thomas" <chris@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > That's certainly not what we're talking about here..
                            >
                            > This medium is not going to be confined by the "traditional"
                            photography "boomers" like myself grew up with!
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > There's a place for everyone..
                            >
                            > Hopefully artistic endevours will continue to push into new
                            directions, as
                            > materials and tools permit.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Chris Thomas
                            >
                            > Photographer
                            >
                            > cell... 604-649-5352
                            >
                            > In North America
                            >
                            > call... 1-800-870-5110
                            >
                            > <http://www.christhomas.com/> http://www.christhomas.com
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > -----Original Message-----
                            > From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                            [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
                            > Behalf Of Howard Larson
                            > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:31 AM
                            > To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
                            > Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Jael and Noa in the High Sierra
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > --- In PanoToolsNG@ <mailto:PanoToolsNG%40yahoogroups.com>
                            yahoogroups.com,
                            > Uri Cogan <uri@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Howard Larson wrote:
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > > It looks like a fabricated photo.
                            > > >
                            > > Fabricated, yes. But what's wrong with fabricated images? there
                            is a
                            > lot of artistic potential there. See:
                            > > http://tinyurl. <http://tinyurl.com/6zns87> com/6zns87
                            > >
                            > >
                            > Wrong? Not *wrong*. It is a matter of opinion, asked for and given
                            > if, perhaps, a little tersely.
                            >
                            > I prefer straight photography with a minimum of manipulation. Found
                            > objects as opposed to arrangements. Technically good (I am no fan
                            of
                            > the Krappy Kamera contest or prints of Polaroids with the adhesive
                            > marks showing).
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            >
                          • Uri Cogan
                            ... Absolutely yes; the freedom to adhere to whatever traditionalist values or techniques is all yours, and yet the very notion of photographing anything as
                            Message 13 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Howard Larson wrote:

                              > And, I would hope, there is room for the voice of the traditionalist
                              > like myself who is using these tools in a *traditionalist* manner.
                              >






                              Absolutely yes; the freedom to adhere to whatever "traditionalist"
                              values or techniques is all yours, and yet the very notion of
                              photographing anything "as it is" eludes me.

                              Again, as a journalist I've discovered that my very presence at certain
                              events had modified the event, and my choice of what appeared to me as
                              worthy of a photo was likely to be influenced by my own biases; on top
                              of that, I could easily make a person appear "sinister" or "benevolent"
                              by mere choice of lighting and careful timing. So much for "objectivity".

                              To sum up - I no longer know what anything "is" though I certainly do
                              know how it *appears to me*.

                              Uri
                              http://www.uricogan.com


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • paul womack
                              ... You underestimate the power of the photographer. By choosing viewpoints, cropping (or lens length) time of day, weather conditions, the thoughtful
                              Message 14 of 14 , Aug 5, 2008
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Howard Larson wrote:
                                > In my mind, *straight* photography documents an object as it is.
                                > *Fabricated* images are arrangements created by the photographer, not
                                > objects *as found*.
                                >
                                > And, yes, your definition of photojournalism is a form of
                                > manipulation--the photographer's interpretation of the object if you
                                > will--but still encompassed within the idea of straight photography
                                > as anyone could encounter the same object as it naturally exists.

                                You underestimate the power of the photographer.

                                By choosing viewpoints, cropping (or lens length)
                                time of day, weather conditions, the thoughtful
                                photographer can go a rather long way towards
                                "creating" the photograph.

                                Given enough variation, an act of selection
                                becomes an act of creation.

                                e.g. the famous million monkeys with typewriters.

                                BugBear
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.