Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,916   Posts: 1,521,840   Online: 1078
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    692
    Best to visit the Large Format Photography Forum. 5x7 definitely counts. Very open minded and very helpful group.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,885
    ^^ Thank you... will do. ^^

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Or... maybe I should jus lie... not tell anyone I'm stitching. Anyone else doing that? Please... no one take offense. I'm just messing with you a little. No harm intended.

  4. #14
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1234 View Post
    Or... maybe I should jus lie... not tell anyone I'm stitching. Anyone else doing that? Please... no one take offense. I'm just messing with you a little. No harm intended.
    Your conscience would eat you from within.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Your conscience would eat you from within.
    Yeah, I know...

  6. #16
    arigram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Crete, Greece
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,474
    Images
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Your conscience would eat you from within.
    Really! I wonder how those evil, corrupt people that do fake tricks in photographs sleep at night... What's next? Photographing and eating babies?
    aristotelis grammatikakis
    www.arigram.gr
    Real photographs, created in camera, 100% organic,
    no digital additives and shit




  7. #17
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by arigram View Post
    Really! I wonder how those evil, corrupt people that do fake tricks in photographs sleep at night... What's next? Photographing and eating babies?
    Let me rephrase:

    If you have a conscience... then it would eat you from within.

    :rolleyes:
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,885
    I have a conscience. I don't eat babies. No need to flame each other... I'll go away now because I'm unintentionally causing some tension here. It was nice corresponding with you nice folks. I do appreciate your kind advice. Everyone take care and happy shooting.

  9. #19
    arigram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Crete, Greece
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,474
    Images
    69
    Seriously though, I consider four kinds of panoramic photography:

    a) The camera panoramic which is done on a camera with a wide angle lens and panoramic film back. Its main effect is that of the wide angle distortion and otherworldly perspective.
    b) The digital panoramic stitching that creates a more "normal" viewpoint as it does not have the perspective distortion of the panoramic camera. It needs the most work to be successful and can't be done in one frame, thus they never include people unless even more post-processing collage techniques are applied.
    c) A panorama made by putting normal rectangular photos next to each other. Apart from the visible seams or borders, the photographs themselves don't have to match and as such it is a creative decision of its own.
    d) By cropping. It has the perspective of the lens used, but the main problem is the loss of resolution when enlarged as it is only a smaller part of a larger photograph. Also, more difficult to compose in camera unless a mask is used.

    All are very different in artistic potential and meaning.

    Also, I personally, do not like "fake tricks" as I call them, that is, post-processing that remains hidden from the audience and in digital often mimics analogue processes and characteristics and other visual media as well. In this case I feel that the creator is fooling the audience and is not being truthful to himself and may have moved to a medium different from photography but has not realised or telling.
    aristotelis grammatikakis
    www.arigram.gr
    Real photographs, created in camera, 100% organic,
    no digital additives and shit




  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,885
    arigram...

    I must have misconveyed my intentions. I am shooting a true panoramic image but on two sheets of film. The camera, front/rear standards, everything... stays in one place during the two exposures except the first exposure is made with the rear standard slid far to the left and the second exposure with the rear standard slid all the way to the right. This is really no different than sliding two pieces of 5x7 film into a single 5x14 cut film holder. The only difference is that I'm stitching digitally instead of using nasty old tape.

    I replied with the above only to clarify why I am interested in this forum.

    Again though, I have brought something here that is inappropriate to this forum... digital manipulation. I'm sorry for the interruption. There are many friendly/helpful members here and I will visit to pick "bits" from your minds and share "non-digital" experiences.

    I appreciate that you are a purist at heart, arigram. However, I do not call digital manipulation "fake trickery" nor do I think anyone has the right to be scornful of it. After all how do you think "true artists" felt when photography was first invented? Wasn't photography considered "fake" and "trashy" by them? Some even believed it was some sort of evil sorcery. Perhaps the first flute whittled by ancient man was an evil magical thing because it didn't sound like a drum or two sticks slapping together? This is evolution and I'm trying to keep up with it.

    Again, this is only in response to a couple of comments I don't agree with. Again too, I realize I'm in the wrong place. I intended no harm or disruption.
    Last edited by Mike1234; 07-14-2009 at 03:43 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin