Re: Lines are not easy draw sometimes

[Devendra Bansal <indphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I beg to differ with you I am sure anybody who can shoot pictures (single Frames
covering a min. of 100 deg diagonal ) is a panaromist.Whatever others say if its
not min. 100 deg any wide angle lens will be able to be called a panaromist
Devendra

CraigClint@xxxxxxx wrote:

> virt360@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> << Lets draw a line
>
> Everybody that covers 80 degrees and over with their camera are
> panoramist.(Is that the case of 99% of this list?)>>
>
> Let's not draw a line. Yes, my camera covers more than 80 degrees, but I'm
> getting new lenses that cover 52 and 32 degrees. The format will be 1:3 so
> the viewer will not be aware of what the angle of coverage is, and shouldn't
> care.
>
> <<  At my idea a panoramic picture  has to cover, not a wide angle  of view
> but a very wide angle of view.(like 24mm focal length for a 35mm format)
> But in reality, i think it’s the caracteristic format of presentation (ratio
> 1:3 and over) that  reveals the panoramic picture >>
>
> Your last point is the important one. It is the presentation and the feeling
> one gets from looking at photograph in a "panoramic" format. It is the sense
> of a wide view, even if the lens used is of telephoto proportions. You can't
> always get close enough to use a wide angle, and if you insist on using a
> wide angle for purist reasons it can be really boring.
>
> While some insist that you must cover a very wide swath of territory with a
> swing lens or a rotational mechanism, and that is fine for them, most folks,
> including most of the purchasers of panoramic stock photography, seem to want
> a 1:3 ratio and don't really care what angle of view was used to capture the
> image. And that is the bottom line as far as I'm concerned.
>
> Craig Sheumaker
>
> http://members.aol.com/cspanoramx