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

Re: [PanoToolsNG] Jael and Noa in the High Sierra

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 14 , Aug 3, 2008
    • 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 2 of 14 , Aug 3, 2008
      • 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 3 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
        • 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 4 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
          • 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 5 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
            • 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 6 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
              • 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 7 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                • 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 8 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                  • 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 9 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                    • 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 10 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                      • 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 11 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                        • 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 12 of 14 , Aug 4, 2008
                          • 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 13 of 14 , Aug 5, 2008
                            • 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.