Re: turn, turn, turn

[ks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Karl Snyder)]

On Mon, 03 Jan 2000 22:56:59 -0500, Jan arranged some electrons so they looked
like this:
>	What is there to say about panoramic photography which cannot be said
>in a photograph? How should pano photos be different from others? I
>don't understand how you can discuss the cameras and not what they take?
>Is this really the object of this group?
>	If so, this is why the list mostly consists of dead air. Under normal
>circumstances, weeks or months go by without so much as a peep and now
>all of a sudden somebody mentions the inner workings of images rather
>than the machines which take them and all hell breaks loose?
>	Where have you been Karl -- you live out there in the mountains and you
>can't even talk about your panos? Wow! And why haven't you been out with
>a model up against those wind-blasted bristlecone pines on Mount Evans?
>Bummer -- such great trees and nobody to pose with them. Show us some or
>your panos Karl, so we can get the picture.
Jan,
I from the school that believes that panos is a way of presenting a subject
rather than a particular # of degrees, film size, or camera type.  If a picture
is a pano it exhibits a unique feature that sets it apart from a similar picture
in the classic (3x4) format.  That feature is that no matter how close or far
from a pano picture you are, you can not see all of the objects at the same
time.  I've seen this phenomenon in both photographs as well as paintings.  It
also has something to do with the pano rule of 1/3, which I believe, differs
from the classic (3x4) rule of 1/3.  The classic rule of 1/3s is typically
defined as 1/3 foreground, 1/3 middle ground and, you guess it, 1/3 background.
In panos, the 1/3 rule is 1/3 on the right, 1/3 in the middle and, you guess it
again, 1/3 on the right.  This gives the photograph 3 subjects that the eye
(mind) has trouble seeing when the eye is looking at one point.  This is the
beauty of pano photography that caused the viewer to move his/her eye back and
forth to see the picture.  I have observed people at exhibits view a class
photograph and quickly move on while pausing several moments to view a pano.  It
changes the viewer!

I have trouble with most 180/360-degree pictures as they are typically of ones
street or man made objects.  I have nothing against them, I do not find man made
object exciting and believe that there are very few places where 360 photographs
yield truly exciting views. As you pointed out, I do live in some of the most
photogenic land in the country and I have found only 2 spots where 360 might
yield an exceptional photograph.  I also find the distortion caused by
non-moving camera very distracting from 180-degree photographs.   

I also believe that the panorama format is ideal for the Internet. A
300x740-pixel photo on an 800x600-video monitor is perfect match compared to
trying to get the classic (2x3) format in a browser's viewing area.  If you
would take the time to view either my Rocky Mountain Nation Park or Mount Evan
site (URLs below), you would see that most of the pictures on the site are in
this format.  

I do not have any of the "preferred" pano camera that you all are discussing on
this list, but am currently limited to my 3 Minolta 650s that have a pano switch
on this side.  I do use a tripod and almost always take photo in both classic
and pano formats with anything from 18mm to 600mm lenses so I have many
opportunities to view both formats with the same subject.

At the risk of getting some members dandruff up, I typically recognize a pano
photo as having two requirements to be successful: 1> a format ratio of at least
1:2 and 2> a subject that can be divided into thirds.  A ratio of more than 1:3
looses a viewer interest by having too many subjects or having a subject spread
out too far for viewer to see it at once.  

I know this list is very hardware oriented and discussions typically are about
technical procedures rather than composition and style.  I believe that we can
not neglect the latter in favor of the former if we are to be successful.  It is
only when we combine both that we become artist rather than just photographers.
We need more discussion of the art of panoramic photography to make this list a
success.

This is my opinion, your mileage may vary,





Karl Snyder
Boulder, Colorado
http://www.RockyMountainNP.Com/  
http://www.BlackHornRanch.Com/
http://www.MtEvans.Com/