* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #846 / Revived #066 on 2024 07 03 *

A photo that raises questions I can't answer. Am I looking at this image as a slice of history? Am I thinking critically about it as a photo? Should the viewer be doing both or is it a distinction that shouldn't be made anyway?
Yes it is a revealing slice of history ("slice" is the perfect word.) The brickwork looks like an Imperial Roman wall at the end of the street. Add a collection of buidings from different periods. The dominating pine is curious because it isn't a traditional Roman umbrella shaped pine. If you know Rome, it's kind of unusual. We have a little time capsule of a city that builds on its changes.
As a photo? The framing, the window and wall shapes and especially the pine, all give extended vertical lines. Even the collection of street-lights does the same. The photographer has deliberately chosen to include the very thin pencil of building that extends up the complete side on the right. We can conclude that it's the narrow verticality of the scene that is the point of the image. Then there is the pine. It's vertical as well but it looks out of place and too big for the surroundings. As a solitary image, it doesn't feel right to me. However. If the shot was within a series showing unexpected and unknown corners of Rome where each spot had quirky content, I'd enjoy this as part of the series. It's similar to the way I feel about Rich42's studies of bits of roofs. Having a collection gives weight to the concept. The sum of the pieces would be greater than the individual components.

No problem Sagittarius 🙂

Yes, I could make out the eyes in your posted image as well but just not enough for my personal liking.

That's why I said I was being a bit picky because it was according to a personal taste which is of course subjective in nature.

Looking at this image at large size completely changed my response. Until then I was looking at a glorious mountain scene and hiking trail. Seen large, we are aware of the smile on the face of the young lady as she knocks. The intro from Fireplace kicks in. She's knowingly playing a role from the classic stories of our childhood. The photo brings childhood memories to the surface.
There are many clever touches here. The chosen DOF allows us to study both the close up grassess and flowers and the distant mountain. There is beautiful control of light that takes the viewer from the lower edge along a subtle band of light and line of flowers that develops into the far mountain side. On the way, it branches slightly to include the young lady. She can't be missed. The peak on the cabin roof suggests the mountain top we cannot see in the clouds. The patches of light and shade on the land continue up into areas of light and shade that cover the sky.
A photo that shares a magnificent place and fires the imagination.

Your interpretation certainly contributes to the artistic licence Fireplace mentions.

The title sums it up.
I lost track of the number of parallel, converging lines here. Likewise, there are too many repeating shapes to try to name them all. The angle and framing ensures there is no confusion about the message. It's a statement about the pleasure derived from repetition.
Well caught. An impressive building too.

I doubt we are certain of what the message is.

Your opinion might be correct or the message could be more related to perspective.

Thanks David.

We have to take what we can get. The sun hadn't broken through the trees so I was stuck with a slower ss and fstop without raising ISO into noisy territory. It would appear the focus is on the top of his head. I have been blessed with this lens. Normally I don't need to sharpen a well taken pic at all. In this case I broke my rule with just a little to sharpen the eye a bit.

[Edit] You are correct about DoF. He was only about 5 mtrs away and filled the frame quite well. The version shown has only a small crop of the edges to centre him.

From a knowledge of optics and experience.

Unlike Bryan's, your bird is sideways on, so it's much easier to get it all in focus, if that is what you want. There is nothing to complain about concerning the focus on Bryan's bird.

So? Bryan either used a tripod or steady hands. What is the problem here? It's a well-taken photo: end of story.

David

I don't have a good enough wider angle lens to take a shot like this. I'm not even sure m43 is capable enough - maybe with 20 MP. But I have seen numerous FF shots like this that capture so much detail that I am impressed and really like it. Maybe one day I will be able to justify a FF for scenery...

Another option is to set the widest aperture that gives the dof you need and the slowest shutter speed that meets your blur requirement, let ISO float and then set the final image lightness in post.

This maximises the exposure within the dof and blur requirements resulting in minimising visible noise.

Removing visible noise in post is very much easier and effective than trying to recover blurry images as you have here.

The easiest way for me to achieve that is using manual mode with auto iso or when pointing and shooting use aperture priority with a minimum shutter speed set and auto iso. The minimum shutter speed being the slowest shutter speed I can hand hold at for the focal length to eliminate blur.

I love symmetry and order. This one has both in spades. I like the far off vanishing point and the reflections in the polished floor tiles adds a touch of abstract and extra colour. Nice capture.

It's an interesting effect from a faulty stitch. I may not have been brave enough to post it. I can ignore the others, but the egg looks quite futuristic - like some space pod - especially as we see the reflection in the mirror tiles as well.

In that case what input values did you use to calculate the DOF?

Since the top of the head is on the same vertical plane as the front of the body why is the top of the head in focus and the front of the body blurry?

Then since the top of the head is on the same vertical plane as the front of the body why are they not both blurry or both in focus?

Why in your opinion is it easier?

In Bryan's photo if focus was on the top of the head or on the front of the body then since they are both in the same vertical plane then they should both be in focus but clearly are not in this case.

The top of the head is sharp while the rest of the bird is blurry.

I don't know if he used a tripod or not. If he did, I don't see why all of the bird except for the top of the head is blurry.

All of the bird except the top of the head is blurry suggesting to me that a tripod wasn't used and that 1/160s was too slow to hand hold to eliminate blur at that focal length.

We clearly disagree because I do not see it as a well taken photo because all of the bird except the top of the head is blurry when it didn't need to be.

Clearly your threshold for a well taken photo is lower than mine 😊

Very, very, impressive specimen. Viewed full screen, I wondered if he looked a bit sombre, but up close I think he's very calm and peaceful - even a touch of humility. I like the way his eyes appear to be looking at the ground in front of the photographer. And we are left wondering if the human presence is having an impact on his thought...

I was wondering the same thing.

Another option could be to take a sequence of overlapping photos to stitch into a nice looking panorama.

That also gives the option to use a longer focal length (giving more details) than trying to capture the whole scene in a single shot.

Yes, the first image was an accident. Leaving it uncorrected wasn't an accident. As some were quick enough to pick up.