Another foot of snow that is, last night. Here's what things looked like as the sun was coming up around 7:30 this morning. There's another snowfall predicted for Friday or Saturday.
this image got me thinking about panoramas...most that I have seen (and those I have made) go to great lengths to keep the frame parallel to the horizon line or foreground line. here, the frame nicely follows the curve of your backyard which is a nice emphasis. some theories of photography stress how important the frame is and I guess we just figure that means 'frame, like in your view finder frame'. why not just let the frame go where the photo takes it? very nice, Carl.
Lyle, when I first played with panoramas from spliced digital captures, I automatically tried to make them look "normal." But I've been thinking about that a bit.
There's no single correct look for a pan. After all, in traditional work, the look of a pan made with a revolving lens camera (Circuit, Widelux, etc) is very different from a pan made with a flat-back panoramic view camera like my 7x17-inch Korona, or the various 6x17cm options.
Then I saw a few pans done without squaring things up, and thought, well, *that's* interesting. Next step was to see some pictures where the photographer seemed to be "chasing" the subject matter with the series of captures that were then blended irregularly. So that's something I've been playing with while snowed in.
Technically, all I'm doing is selecting "circular" for the Photomerge instead of "auto." I'm also "breaking rules" for pano production to make this work. I do shut off AF so image magnification is constant, but I leave AE on. Then I bring the 3-7 captures up together in ACR, set a WB for all of them, but then individually adjust the tonal scale. Then drop from ACR back to Bridge, then invoke Photomerge.
I'm quite intrigued by the results, but if I'm going to keep exploring this I've got to scrape up the cash to upgrade the iMac from 4 gigs of RAM to 16...
3 comments:
Very nice, like the coposition
this image got me thinking about panoramas...most that I have seen (and those I have made) go to great lengths to keep the frame parallel to the horizon line or foreground line. here, the frame nicely follows the curve of your backyard which is a nice emphasis. some theories of photography stress how important the frame is and I guess we just figure that means 'frame, like in your view finder frame'. why not just let the frame go where the photo takes it? very nice, Carl.
Thanks, Don.
Lyle, when I first played with panoramas from spliced digital captures, I automatically tried to make them look "normal." But I've been thinking about that a bit.
There's no single correct look for a pan. After all, in traditional work, the look of a pan made with a revolving lens camera (Circuit, Widelux, etc) is very different from a pan made with a flat-back panoramic view camera like my 7x17-inch Korona, or the various 6x17cm options.
Then I saw a few pans done without squaring things up, and thought, well, *that's* interesting. Next step was to see some pictures where the photographer seemed to be "chasing" the subject matter with the series of captures that were then blended irregularly. So that's something I've been playing with while snowed in.
Technically, all I'm doing is selecting "circular" for the Photomerge instead of "auto." I'm also "breaking rules" for pano production to make this work. I do shut off AF so image magnification is constant, but I leave AE on. Then I bring the 3-7 captures up together in ACR, set a WB for all of them, but then individually adjust the tonal scale. Then drop from ACR back to Bridge, then invoke Photomerge.
I'm quite intrigued by the results, but if I'm going to keep exploring this I've got to scrape up the cash to upgrade the iMac from 4 gigs of RAM to 16...
Post a Comment