Pulling Strings With The 70-200 VR2!!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Things are getting a bit spotty with the 500/4 Nikkor!!
Next: But will MS's overheat in the sun, like the Crapple iPad?
From: tony cooper on 5 Aug 2010 20:20 On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 18:49:57 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:oscm5657lbhviiime5n7l2hne5b9r8krde(a)4ax.com... > > >> Defining terms and rules is essential for communication. What you >> have described as "Pictorial" is what we enter as "Creative" in my >> camera club. You can add the cat to the dog photo if you enter it in >> the "Creative" group. >> >> Flopping an image horizontally would be perfectly acceptable in any >> category. I think this has been discussed here before, but a figure >> gazing off into space with leading space on one side, could be >> flopped. Some say that the empty space should be to the viewer's >> right. I'm not sure this is a big deal, but I do it that way. > >I cannot agree that flopping the image is OK in any category. If I am >presenting a lighthouse at sunrise, it certainly would be misleading to >shoot >the lighthouse from the South and invert it so that the ocean is on the >left. I think that's really in a different category than what's being discussed. When there's something in the image that doesn't make sense if you flop it horizontally, then you don't do it because it doesn't make sense. You don't not do it because of the rules; you don't do it because the result doesn't make sense. You have a cat sitting on a sidewalk, a toddler taking his/her first steps, or something where there's no landmark of direction, then flopping doesn't change anything. Of course, there'd have to be a reason to flop the image. Flop a flower photo and no blood, no foul. > If I am presenting the same image as what you call creative, then I >have no problem with an image reversal. Similarly, as I understand the PSA >rules on nature photography, image reversal is not permitted. I am not >saying I agree, I am simply stating my understanding of them: > >http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1306/is_6_75/ai_n31978458/ > I don't see what that has to do with it. Those are PSA's rules for photos submitted for competitions or exhibitions. My club has a rule that photos submitted for competition must be no larger than 1400 pixels on the longest side and the Shoot-In says no larger than 1024 on the longest side. Different groups, different rules. If the image isn't for any particular group or publication, then only ethics and common sense applies. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Peter on 5 Aug 2010 21:09 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:3ekm561ud8vjqblj89m6j1nk996c08v71r(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 18:49:57 -0400, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>news:oscm5657lbhviiime5n7l2hne5b9r8krde(a)4ax.com... >> >> >>> Defining terms and rules is essential for communication. What you >>> have described as "Pictorial" is what we enter as "Creative" in my >>> camera club. You can add the cat to the dog photo if you enter it in >>> the "Creative" group. >>> >>> Flopping an image horizontally would be perfectly acceptable in any >>> category. I think this has been discussed here before, but a figure >>> gazing off into space with leading space on one side, could be >>> flopped. Some say that the empty space should be to the viewer's >>> right. I'm not sure this is a big deal, but I do it that way. >> >>I cannot agree that flopping the image is OK in any category. If I am >>presenting a lighthouse at sunrise, it certainly would be misleading to >>shoot >>the lighthouse from the South and invert it so that the ocean is on the >>left. > > I think that's really in a different category than what's being > discussed. When there's something in the image that doesn't make > sense if you flop it horizontally, then you don't do it because it > doesn't make sense. You don't not do it because of the rules; you > don't do it because the result doesn't make sense. > > You have a cat sitting on a sidewalk, a toddler taking his/her first > steps, or something where there's no landmark of direction, then > flopping doesn't change anything. Of course, there'd have to be a > reason to flop the image. > > Flop a flower photo and no blood, no foul. > > >> If I am presenting the same image as what you call creative, then I >>have no problem with an image reversal. Similarly, as I understand the PSA >>rules on nature photography, image reversal is not permitted. I am not >>saying I agree, I am simply stating my understanding of them: >> >>http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1306/is_6_75/ai_n31978458/ >> > I don't see what that has to do with it. Those are PSA's rules for > photos submitted for competitions or exhibitions. My club has a rule > that photos submitted for competition must be no larger than 1400 > pixels on the longest side and the Shoot-In says no larger than 1024 > on the longest side. Different groups, different rules. If the image > isn't for any particular group or publication, then only ethics and > common sense applies. Your last sentence is exactly what I have been saying. My objection was to your statement that "Flopping an image horizontally would be perfectly acceptable in any category." I was simply giving some examples of categories to which your above statement is inapplicable. Locally we are having a big debate over whether to add a nature category that will be governed by PSA rules, which are pretty much the standard in what I would guess is the vast majority of competitions and exhibitions. Yet, just as in golf, there are local rules, that differ. In your gin games, local rules may differ and need to be understood, prior to commencing play. I have had modest success playing poker and blackjack. I will not play until I know all the local rules. If I do not like them I do not play. -- Peter
From: Crapshooter's Education 101 on 5 Aug 2010 21:12 On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:20:20 -0400, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 18:49:57 -0400, "Peter" ><peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>news:oscm5657lbhviiime5n7l2hne5b9r8krde(a)4ax.com... >> >> >>> Defining terms and rules is essential for communication. What you >>> have described as "Pictorial" is what we enter as "Creative" in my >>> camera club. You can add the cat to the dog photo if you enter it in >>> the "Creative" group. >>> >>> Flopping an image horizontally would be perfectly acceptable in any >>> category. I think this has been discussed here before, but a figure >>> gazing off into space with leading space on one side, could be >>> flopped. Some say that the empty space should be to the viewer's >>> right. I'm not sure this is a big deal, but I do it that way. >> >>I cannot agree that flopping the image is OK in any category. If I am >>presenting a lighthouse at sunrise, it certainly would be misleading to >>shoot >>the lighthouse from the South and invert it so that the ocean is on the >>left. > >I think that's really in a different category than what's being >discussed. When there's something in the image that doesn't make >sense if you flop it horizontally, then you don't do it because it >doesn't make sense. You don't not do it because of the rules; you >don't do it because the result doesn't make sense. > >You have a cat sitting on a sidewalk, a toddler taking his/her first >steps, or something where there's no landmark of direction, then >flopping doesn't change anything. Of course, there'd have to be a >reason to flop the image. > >Flop a flower photo and no blood, no foul. You don't know much about portrait photography, do you. (duh, like that's any surprise) Flipping a face left/right can drastically alter the appearance of someone. The face someone sees in a mirror is very different than the one they'll see in a photograph. Few faces are perfectly symmetric. Take a photo of anyone, split it 50/50 down the middle. Now duplicate each half, so you have one face comprised of two right sides, another comprised of two left sides. You'll see just how very different the left and right sides truly are.
From: tony cooper on 5 Aug 2010 22:09 On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 21:09:55 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:3ekm561ud8vjqblj89m6j1nk996c08v71r(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 18:49:57 -0400, "Peter" >> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>news:oscm5657lbhviiime5n7l2hne5b9r8krde(a)4ax.com... >>> >>> >>>> Defining terms and rules is essential for communication. What you >>>> have described as "Pictorial" is what we enter as "Creative" in my >>>> camera club. You can add the cat to the dog photo if you enter it in >>>> the "Creative" group. >>>> >>>> Flopping an image horizontally would be perfectly acceptable in any >>>> category. I think this has been discussed here before, but a figure >>>> gazing off into space with leading space on one side, could be >>>> flopped. Some say that the empty space should be to the viewer's >>>> right. I'm not sure this is a big deal, but I do it that way. >>> >>>I cannot agree that flopping the image is OK in any category. If I am >>>presenting a lighthouse at sunrise, it certainly would be misleading to >>>shoot >>>the lighthouse from the South and invert it so that the ocean is on the >>>left. >> >> I think that's really in a different category than what's being >> discussed. When there's something in the image that doesn't make >> sense if you flop it horizontally, then you don't do it because it >> doesn't make sense. You don't not do it because of the rules; you >> don't do it because the result doesn't make sense. >> >> You have a cat sitting on a sidewalk, a toddler taking his/her first >> steps, or something where there's no landmark of direction, then >> flopping doesn't change anything. Of course, there'd have to be a >> reason to flop the image. >> >> Flop a flower photo and no blood, no foul. >> >> >>> If I am presenting the same image as what you call creative, then I >>>have no problem with an image reversal. Similarly, as I understand the PSA >>>rules on nature photography, image reversal is not permitted. I am not >>>saying I agree, I am simply stating my understanding of them: >>> >>>http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1306/is_6_75/ai_n31978458/ >>> >> I don't see what that has to do with it. Those are PSA's rules for >> photos submitted for competitions or exhibitions. My club has a rule >> that photos submitted for competition must be no larger than 1400 >> pixels on the longest side and the Shoot-In says no larger than 1024 >> on the longest side. Different groups, different rules. If the image >> isn't for any particular group or publication, then only ethics and >> common sense applies. > > >Your last sentence is exactly what I have been saying. My objection was to >your statement that >"Flopping an image horizontally would be perfectly acceptable in any >category." >I was simply giving some examples of categories to which your above >statement is inapplicable. It would only inapplicable in certain categories *within* certain groups if the group has categories. In the group PSA, it seems that the prohibition is across the board, although someone might argue that horizontal flopping is not rearranging elements since the elements of the photo remain in the exact same relationship to the other elements in the photo. An element is a part, and flopping affects the whole. Be an interesting question to bring up to PSA, but not one to bring up in your club. Never a good idea to start a debate in your own club. > -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Crapshooter's Education 101 on 5 Aug 2010 22:32
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:20:20 -0400, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 18:49:57 -0400, "Peter" ><peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>news:oscm5657lbhviiime5n7l2hne5b9r8krde(a)4ax.com... >> >> >>> Defining terms and rules is essential for communication. What you >>> have described as "Pictorial" is what we enter as "Creative" in my >>> camera club. You can add the cat to the dog photo if you enter it in >>> the "Creative" group. >>> >>> Flopping an image horizontally would be perfectly acceptable in any >>> category. I think this has been discussed here before, but a figure >>> gazing off into space with leading space on one side, could be >>> flopped. Some say that the empty space should be to the viewer's >>> right. I'm not sure this is a big deal, but I do it that way. >> >>I cannot agree that flopping the image is OK in any category. If I am >>presenting a lighthouse at sunrise, it certainly would be misleading to >>shoot >>the lighthouse from the South and invert it so that the ocean is on the >>left. > >I think that's really in a different category than what's being >discussed. When there's something in the image that doesn't make >sense if you flop it horizontally, then you don't do it because it >doesn't make sense. You don't not do it because of the rules; you >don't do it because the result doesn't make sense. > >You have a cat sitting on a sidewalk, a toddler taking his/her first >steps, or something where there's no landmark of direction, then >flopping doesn't change anything. Of course, there'd have to be a >reason to flop the image. > >Flop a flower photo and no blood, no foul. You don't know much about portrait photography, do you. (duh, like that's any surprise) Flipping a face left/right can drastically alter the appearance of someone. The face someone sees in a mirror is very different than the one they'll see in a photograph. Few faces are perfectly symmetric. Take a photo of anyone, split it 50/50 down the middle. Now duplicate and horizontally flip each half, so that in the end you have one face comprised of two right sides (right side + right-mirrored), another comprised of two left sides (left side + left-mirrored). You'll see just how very different the left and right sides truly are. |