Monday, October 29, 2007
Local view
Comments:
Interesting. Exactly what I wouldn't have done and now I see it works a treat :-)
I mean the barrier normally bothers me because I don't see it as part of the landscape. But here it gives your context and frames the lake between it and the gray sky.
The fact that you focused sharply on the barrier also makes it clear this is deliberate and makes us accept it s as a part of what you saw and want to show us. Probably on an 8x10 print one can read what written on the brass plate and this could be interesting too.
I also like the grass coming up the barrier. It makes the whole landscape a background. But then I wonder what is the subject? The barrier, not quite or you would have shown maybe more of it. The landscape? Yes, but than this barrier... Hmmm interesting, really interesting.
Probably on an 8x10 print...
The balance of this photo changes as it gets bigger, because the out-of-focus-effect becomes more noticeable.
I think what you are seeing as a brass plate is a slot in the barrier. Now you have said brass plate I can see it like that too. An interesting optical illusion.
The hues on the barrier compliment so well with its background. Given that, the barrier is a part of the whole rather than being an extra. The tufts of grass are a softening element. The barrier is the picture - landscapes such as these have to be viewed safely... The slot is sublime.
And of course now I see it for what it is and I need to concentrate to see it again as a brass plate. Much better as a slot, by the way.
What you say about the scale changing the perception is interesting. Would it be possible to allow the pictures posted here to be links to larger samples that would open in a separate window?
I suppose it would not be too difficult to do it in the HTML in the posting box, but then, would it be desirable for others? Maybe we can define another max dimension for that usage?
The normal feeling with a landscape is to feel 'invited in'. The armco gives a 'keep out' feeling. That message is very strong.
Image size.
I have put in links in the comments area to larger images so it can be done easily.
I post here at <650*<650, I post elsewhere at <900*<675. I wonder as you increase the image size you bias the comment toward technical points. At <650*<650 technical issues are not normally apparent and the 'art' comments prevail.
I think that Rex is right about the tendency to pixel peep as image sizes get larger. However, I'd be happy to see a minor increase in size here - say to 700 or 750 pixels - depending on what others think.
And, of course, whether the template would take it.
A text link to a very much larger image version, or an extract or whatever seems to suffice if you have server space elsewhere. Alternatively, Blogger gives some options for putting up larger files and including a thumbnail in the body of the entry - but I've forgotten how that works :-)
Anybody care to experiment?
Matt was going to look at the template - but I think work intervened.
Hmm, I am not sure there is any risk of pixel peeping at, say 800x1200. And in the case of this image, we learn that the meaning (or content ;-) ) is changed by the small size, which I find relevant from an 'art' point of vue. On the other hand, I don't think my Helmet picture loses anything by being small. It really depends on the picture.
The idea of going to 700 or 7500 is interesting. It could very well be all we need.
Some time back Colin sent me this:
"750 would break the template for any screen not bigger than 1024 wide.
What I suggest is that you use the picture load functionality. Make a version of the picture say 1000 wide, and then load it using the picture icon instead of the file upload icon.
What this will do is give you a smaller version on the face of the site (I suggest trying the 'medium' option first), which becomes a link to the larger version.
See how this looks. If it isn't very good, then I'll try to think of something better. I suggest making it clear in text that we need to click on the image to see a full size version."
I don't know whether it is still relevant.
I started looking at the template a couple of weeks back, but as Colin mentioned, work intervened. I'll try to get back to it this week. It sounds like we would like to at least have the option of posting wider images. If anyone has other feature requests, let me know.
The title is important, isn't it? This is what one sees in one's own backyard, one lives with the man-made addition to the landscape each journey one makes.
One can say that this is about the barrier but really it is about all the human marks there such as the houses and the road by the loch and the plantation conifers.
I can't photograph in any direction from our smallholding without encountering features such as pylons, sheds and cables.
On first viewing it's the contrast between the soft color palette and the hard barrier that makes this work. But as I look at it, the anodized finish of the barrier echoes the the texture of the grass and trees.
I know what it is, but the illusions of what it could be are interesting. The barrier has so much depth and detail that it seems to flatten the scene behind it -- like a metal shade is being rolled down to reveal a photograph beneath.
The color really seems key to this one -- and some fine color it is. I love the subtlety of it.
Post a Comment
I mean the barrier normally bothers me because I don't see it as part of the landscape. But here it gives your context and frames the lake between it and the gray sky.
The fact that you focused sharply on the barrier also makes it clear this is deliberate and makes us accept it s as a part of what you saw and want to show us. Probably on an 8x10 print one can read what written on the brass plate and this could be interesting too.
I also like the grass coming up the barrier. It makes the whole landscape a background. But then I wonder what is the subject? The barrier, not quite or you would have shown maybe more of it. The landscape? Yes, but than this barrier... Hmmm interesting, really interesting.
The balance of this photo changes as it gets bigger, because the out-of-focus-effect becomes more noticeable.
I think what you are seeing as a brass plate is a slot in the barrier. Now you have said brass plate I can see it like that too. An interesting optical illusion.
What you say about the scale changing the perception is interesting. Would it be possible to allow the pictures posted here to be links to larger samples that would open in a separate window?
I suppose it would not be too difficult to do it in the HTML in the posting box, but then, would it be desirable for others? Maybe we can define another max dimension for that usage?
I have put in links in the comments area to larger images so it can be done easily.
I post here at <650*<650, I post elsewhere at <900*<675. I wonder as you increase the image size you bias the comment toward technical points. At <650*<650 technical issues are not normally apparent and the 'art' comments prevail.
And, of course, whether the template would take it.
A text link to a very much larger image version, or an extract or whatever seems to suffice if you have server space elsewhere. Alternatively, Blogger gives some options for putting up larger files and including a thumbnail in the body of the entry - but I've forgotten how that works :-)
Anybody care to experiment?
Matt was going to look at the template - but I think work intervened.
The idea of going to 700 or 7500 is interesting. It could very well be all we need.
"750 would break the template for any screen not bigger than 1024 wide.
What I suggest is that you use the picture load functionality. Make a version of the picture say 1000 wide, and then load it using the picture icon instead of the file upload icon.
What this will do is give you a smaller version on the face of the site (I suggest trying the 'medium' option first), which becomes a link to the larger version.
See how this looks. If it isn't very good, then I'll try to think of something better. I suggest making it clear in text that we need to click on the image to see a full size version."
I don't know whether it is still relevant.
One can say that this is about the barrier but really it is about all the human marks there such as the houses and the road by the loch and the plantation conifers.
I can't photograph in any direction from our smallholding without encountering features such as pylons, sheds and cables.
The color really seems key to this one -- and some fine color it is. I love the subtlety of it.