Re: Panorama debate

["Larry J. Clark" <ljclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It was enlightening, and a little sad, to observe the, uh, 
intensity of the XPan "debate".  I'd like to applaud Curt 
Miller's observations on the "what" of panoramic photography.  
If I read his comments correctly, he acknowledges a wider than 
"normal" format ratio, but somehow prefers to avoid the 
quicksand of a locked-in ratio.  (Panoramic photography's
revealed 
truth?  The Holy Ratio!)  

One leap further along his logic path (and it may be my leap 
alone) is that an important factor is the _intent_ of the 
photographer.  For some, the inclusion of that intent (such an 
uncertain, non-quantitative factor) into the definition will be 
very unsatisfying.  What a shame. 

A few years ago, I picked a Horizon.  I've had zero problems with
it, but I know there are some things it, like any other swing
lens camera, will never be able to do.  I've handled the XPan, 
and it might be something I'd consider.  But the most important
factor for me, when I set out to take panoramic photos, is my
mindset.  I have to mentally switch gears, rethink composition
and the placement of objects/subjects within the frame, and look 
for that feeling of drama that is part of so many good panoramic
photos.

The various types of cameras, and their relative merits, are 
important, because they provide the mechanical/optical pathway 
for our efforts.  But they will never be the most important 
element.

"Curt Miller,EMW" wrote:
> 
> It was a glorious and cold winter afternoon here in the Berkshires so I went
> out with my 4x5 to make a landscape image in the waning afternoon sun down
> in Stockbridge...sort of a Christmas present to myself.  While I was doing
> this, it dawned on me that a definition for "panoramic" did indeed exist.
> 
> I don't remember where I read it or to whom an attribution should be made
> but the definition becomes clear when the reasoning is spelled out.  It goes
> something like this:  a panoramic is an image where the aspect ratio is
> greater than a certain factor (I think between 1:2 and 1:3).  The reason is
> that the brain requires us to "read" or scan the image from one side to the
> other (or top to bottom) because, unlike with an image which aspect ratio is
> below this threshold, we can't capture all the information in one look.
> With a "regular" picture, we can.
> 
> This said, any camera which produces an extreme aspect ratio (relative to
> the above) is a panoramic camera and the image it produces is a panoramic
> image.  This includes cameras and images made with those $8 disposables.
> I'm very comfortable with this.  Even though the image I made today with
> fine grain film will have 30 times the information as the negative produced
> by the disposable, it's not necessarily a more valuable image (or, if you
> must make parallels, if I had made the image with a 4x10, I'd have 60x the
> information...).  I think this is what irks people: that the quality of the
> image must somehow be directly proportional to all of the inputs, economic
> or other.
> 
> It really doesn't bother me in the least that some other guy with his EOS
> Rebel and $89 zoom lens considers himself my peer as a photographer
> (...could be he's even better, huh?).  What counts is the finished product,
> the judgement of which will be amazingling subjective (assuming a certain
> base level of technique is applied to its creation).  I really enjoy the
> work of some contemporary 35mm photographers, David Alan Harvey and Ralph
> Gibson to name two.  I've talked with both recently about technique and
> feeling for an image and it really comes clear to me that it's really about
> capturing on film that which is seen in the mind's eye.  We might like the
> results or not but we can't criticize the equipment with which they were made.
> 
> I've got to go develop some sheet film.

Larry Clark 
===================================================
 Paradigm Associates...
  "Providing Complex Solutions for Simple Problems"  
     Visit our web site at:
         http://www.twodimes.org
     or set your navigation system to:
         38-46.883N  77-15.818W
===================================================