Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,716   Posts: 1,514,787   Online: 843
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Ukraine
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektagraphic View Post
    Hello-
    My dad has longed to see a picture "exactly as the eye sees it". What lens would do this. Is it possable to have a lens that is just the same mm as the eye? Thanks
    First, define what you mean by 'exactly as the eye sees it'. Do you mean how a person looks at things/focuses/pays attention, or do you mean a 1:1 apparent size relationship between the print and the object in the photo?

    If it is the first, then Ian's spot on. I tend to stare at a screen all day, and my vision - what I tend to look at has narrowed up over the years. It used to be that an 85mm lens equalled what I 'saw'. Now, 105mm - sometimes 135mm (yeah, I ought to get out more often).

    But if you want the objects in the print in your hand to have the same apparent size as a landscape, Nicholas' comments would be your key.
    The Kiev 88: Mamiya's key to success in Ukraine.

    Photography without film is like Macroeconomics without reading goat entrails, and look at the mess that got us into.

  2. #12
    jp80874's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bath, OH 44210 USA
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,374
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektagraphic View Post
    Hello-
    My dad has longed to see a picture "exactly as the eye sees it". What lens would do this. Is it possable to have a lens that is just the same mm as the eye? Thanks

    Is it possible that he means more than mm, for instance Ansel Adams' "visualization", seeing the final print in all its detail, magnification, tone, dodge & burn, light and shadow, contrast, texture, dof, etc?

    John Powers

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Central NC
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektagraphic View Post
    My dad has longed to see a picture "exactly as the eye sees it".
    An interesting idea, but not even remotely possible. A camera lens and the human eye/brain visual system are quite different animals. The camera takes in the entire scene at once, with a fixed focus, a fixed aperture, and a fixed "white point".

    The human eye scans the scene, varies focus as required, and varies aperture more or less continuously, again as required. Resolution varies markedly across the visual field, from amazingly sharp at the fovea to a dull blur at the periphery -- which is why the eye scans the scene continuously -- unlike a camera it can't take in the whole scene at once but instead has to build a "map" by tracing out the interesting bits.

    The effect is that much of the scene isn't looked at closely with the human visual system -- just the high points (whatever the brain decides them to be and that's highly subjective from person to person). The stuff deemed of less import is often just a blur.

    When it comes to color processing, again the human visual system has tricks that film / digital capture lack. For example, the human visual system has a rapidly movable white balance point. When film looks at snow in a shadow under an open sky, it sees a bluish tint. The human visual system shifts it's white balance for the shadows and sees the snow as white, or perhaps a light gray.

    I could go on (do we even need to discuss stereo vision?), but I think I've made my point. Cameras and human eye/brain systems see the world very differently. No photograph can look "exactly as the eye sees it".
    Bruce Watson
    AchromaticArts.com

  4. #14
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,239
    Add variable human color sensitivity and acuity. Some see no color. Some are blue/yellow colorblind, some are red/green colorblind. For others color makes or breaks a photograph.

    You can match some parameters of "how the eye sees", but can't duplicate the eye/brain perception entirely, as Bruce points out.

    I think the best photographers are often those who have some intuitive or developed sense of how the photographic materials they use respond.

    Others, are like Garry Winogrand; "I photograph to see what the world looks like in photographs."

    Lee

  5. #15
    eddym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,927
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Watson View Post
    I could go on (do we even need to discuss stereo vision?), but I think I've made my point. Cameras and human eye/brain systems see the world very differently. No photograph can look "exactly as the eye sees it".
    I would agree with everything Bruce said and only add, "...and it's a good thing!" The point of photography is not to merely record the world as our eyes see it (even if it could), but to provide a creative interpretation of it, using the tools of the photographic perspective and the imagination of the photographer. Would you want a painting to look "exactly as the eye sees it"? No artist would want to be limited in that way.
    Eddy McDonald
    www.fotoartes.com
    Eschew defenestration!

  6. #16
    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 Ektagraphic View Post
    Hello-
    My dad has longed to see a picture "exactly as the eye sees it".
    Not sure I'd want to do that; with my nose, I guess my result would be something like Ernst Mach's...

    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  7. #17
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,097
    To match the depth of field of the human eye, you not only have to take into account the aperture size (which is easily duplicated with just about any lens in any format) you have to account for the relative distance your subject is from the film in film-format-diagonals. So, you can stop a 300mm lens on an 8x10 camera down to 4.5mm but, for objects closer than 10 feet or so, you will have somewhat less depth of field with the 8x10 camera at 4.5mm aperture than your eye at 4.5mm aperture. (http://www.bobwheeler.com/photo/ViewCam.pdf section 9.6 covers this indirectly)

    Also remember the eye functions kind of like a 'scan back' in that there is one narrow-angle-of-view (fovea) that scans around the scene, giving the impression of a large field of view.

  8. #18
    Maris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Noosa, Queensland, Australia.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    705
    We see with our brains not with our eyes.

    The mind constructs a picture of the world from various sources. The contribution of the eye is a tiny, shifting, blurry, scanning, optical input that the brain integrates and stitches into a "world view". The brain also adds bits of what we remember and what what we "know" is there. On top of that the brain mixes bright and dark images acquired at different moments to generate a "high dynamic range" picture of what seems to be "out there".

    Until photography was invented the only pictures available were transcriptions of mental images. The realist painter is the traditional epitome of getting the "picture in the mind" in front of an audience as a "picture on canvas".

    It is one of the greatest attractions of digital picture making that it again offers the possibility of getting a private "mind picture", assembled from several sources, scanned, stitched, edited, tweaked, and HDR'ed, into someone else's consciousness. And all of this without having to learn how to paint.

    Photography is different. It offers a chance of making pictures of the way things look independent of how the eye/mind/brain system chooses to confect reality.
    Photography, the word itself, invented and defined by its author Sir John.F.W.Herschel, 14 March 1839 at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London. Quote "...Photography or the application of the Chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation,..". unquote.

  9. #19
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19
    Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

    There. Maris has got it. No matter what we see our brains try to associate memories with visual input. You can live in Jackson Hole and look at AA's 'overlook' and say "I have a dozen like that at home.". On further inspection you may find that the perspective is different, undoubtedly that the sky isn't as threatening, there may b only caps or the Snake River is a comparable trickle in comparison.

    Our brains take visual input and attempt to make its meaning pertinent, try and make us fit in with our surroundings. This is why one viewer will see 'Pepper #32' and admire it greatly and another will think KPepper, great' and move on.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  10. #20
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Ektagraphic, was your question about field of view, or was it about the theory of seeing??
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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