Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Moonrise over Manaslu - Nepal  (Read 10988 times)
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1967


Editing Allowed


« Reply #80 on: April 27, 2012, 08:18:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Having been a high school teacher for longer than I would like to admit to, I learned two important things when it came to arguments or disagreements among students, or among students and faculty. The first and foremost lesson was:

“When you pee in the wind, everyone gets wet.”

No one can win a disagreement. One can either accept or reject the tents of another. In either case, once one has made their statement, listened to the view of another and countered one additional time (sort of like a real debate), their moment should be finished.

Beating the proverbial dead horse does nothing more than create animosity, cause unintended ill-feelings, and/or, causing the cessation of friendly discussions among those who once were friends.

I do not know anyone on here well enough to comment on the current issue as to whether the image at hand is worthy of an art critique, is overly cliché-ish, trite, or a very well-produced photograph by this forum’s standards. I’ve seen similar on 500px which were highly lauded. Who knows? As to whether this is a place for critique as opposed to the section lower down in the forum menu, for me the description is too ambiguous to make a clear-cut decision. I’d say yes and no.

Was I the moderator/originator of this forum, I’d clarify the parameters of what should take place in this section and go from there. For those already deeply entrenched in a “he said, she said” dialogue, shake hands, agree to disagree and  let the squabbling go to the wayside. This is far too good a forum to lose membership over something which no one will ever agree on…I only offer my simple words because it was my comment of “Simply freakin’ awesome,” which seemed to start this avalanche of badly applied discourse.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1875


WWW
« Reply #81 on: April 27, 2012, 09:59:56 AM »
ReplyReply

I have an idea, and while it is a cliché, it has a history of being productive: Rather than trying to re-define what up until now has been a completely functional forum, perhaps the participants can agree to disagree and try to behave in a civil and respectful manner. . .
Logged

Enda Cavanagh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 539



WWW
« Reply #82 on: April 27, 2012, 10:35:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi all
I'm in agreement with a lot of what you say Slobodan. My "interpretation" is like you said all of the above. I hope I'm not regarded as a beginner but I am also very open to comments positive and critical. You mentioned that the images shouldn't be improved or altered but sometimes for example I missed some haloing so for obvious reasons that wasn't something subjective and I made the change. It was an emphatic error on my part and I tweaked the image. I would rather that someone point it out to me rather than sit there and say nothing just so as not to piss off the few, irrespective of what the rules are. Smiley

I think some people are pissed off here that they now think they are not allowed to say what they feel is wrong with the photo. I think the point on the other side of the fence was that some felt that some comments were a bit cut throat in delivery rather than that they were comments criticizing the photos. Of course that's also subjective!!

Keith I don't think anyone here just wants nice things said about a photo. Heaven forbid if that is the case. I never said that and you seem to be very upset because you seem to think that is what I feel. I don't know why you feel that way. Shadowblade also didn't say anything to that affect. He countered arguments but he doesn't have to agree with anyone. Just because someone feels there is something wrong with the photo doesn't mean they are right.

And I can confirm that pissing in the wind does make me wet Cheesy
Logged

Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2777


« Reply #83 on: April 27, 2012, 11:33:39 AM »
ReplyReply

... some completely contextless bird images
iirc Glenn Bartley posts nothing but excellent bird images (also PhotoEcosse.)
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2777


« Reply #84 on: April 27, 2012, 11:48:43 AM »
ReplyReply

I would rather that someone point it out to me rather than sit there and say nothing just so as not to piss off the few, irrespective of what the rules are. Smiley
Me too, but those are our personal preferences.
You say the "the few" but that's just another assumption - people who find the criticism upsetting may also be those most reluctant to speak against it.


Rather than trying to re-define what up until now has been a completely functional forum...
Isn't it clear by now that no support is being voiced for trying to change this discussion forum? If there is support for trying to re-define this forum, it's silent.
Terry has repeatedly voiced his wish for more encouragement and less criticism, but Terry hasn't shown up to push for that.


... for me the description is too ambiguous ... I’d clarify the parameters of what should take place in this section and go from there.
At least we can try to forewarn - we can try to make it clear that sometimes people will make very negative comments about submitted photos.


...  because it was my comment of “Simply freakin’ awesome,” which seemed to start this avalanche of badly applied discourse.
Why do people keep wanting to claim credit? ;-)
« Last Edit: April 27, 2012, 01:44:31 PM by Isaac » Logged
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1967


Editing Allowed


« Reply #85 on: April 27, 2012, 02:27:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Why do people keep wanting to claim credit? ;-)

Because we all want our own 15 seconds of fame... Grin
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1069



WWW
« Reply #86 on: April 27, 2012, 10:18:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Isn't it clear by now that no support is being voiced for trying to change this discussion forum? If there is support for trying to re-define this forum, it's silent.
Terry has repeatedly voiced his wish for more encouragement and less criticism, but Terry hasn't shown up to push for that.

I'm here and do check back from time to time to see where this endless bickering is going. I made my point earlier and don't feel it necessary to show up again to push it. However, rather than being mis-quoted, I would like to point out that I originally said that this forum should not become a mutual admiration society, but rather one which encourages photographers with constructive criticism.
Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2777


« Reply #87 on: April 28, 2012, 10:51:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I made my point earlier and don't feel it necessary to show up again to push it.
You're right, there's no need to show up and push it, if your concern was simply to repeat the same academic point about what you think this forum should be.

However, if your concern is that this forum becomes one which encourages photographers with constructive criticism, then I think you need to push.

Of course, there'd be the risk that you might discover too many other people place a higher value on their freedom to say whatever they like (within the "civilized" but not necessarily polite bounds) than on encouragement.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2012, 12:00:12 PM by Isaac » Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878


« Reply #88 on: April 29, 2012, 02:20:15 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm rather amazed at the squabbling and bickering over the type of comment that may or may not be appropriate in relation to Shadowblade's clearly spectacular photo of the moonrise over Manaslu. Well done, Shadowblade! That shows real dedication lying in the snow for an hour or more in freezing temperatures.

Perhaps I should attempt to lead some of you out of this morass of confusion you've descended into. (On the other hand, perhaps I shouldn't.  Grin )

The subtitle of this section of the forum clearly states, "Nature Photography - technical and esthetic issues".

I see no reason why it would not be in order for someone to comment that they would prefer to see stationary stars, just as the eye sees them in the natural environment, rather than this exaggerated movement of the earth in relation to the stars. This is a legitimate esthetic issue.

On the other hand, that apparent movement of the stars, which is really a movement of the earth, is fascinating in its own right. Galileo would have been delighted to see such an image. It's also very eye-catching from an esthetic point of view.

On the technical side, it's also appropriate to ask why Shadowblade did not bracket exposures in order to capture the stars as the eye sees them, with a shorter exposure.

His reply was, that this wouldn't have been possible because of the short exposure time required, which would presumably have generated an awful lot of noise. Now I'm not sure if that is the case, but I'm no expert in photographing the starry night. Perhaps using a camera with a high DR like the Nikon D7000 or D800, it might be possible to take an exposure of, say, 5 seconds, which would freeze the stars as the eye sees them, without generating too much background noise.

I searched my data base for an example of any shot I'd taken of a starry night, and found a shot also taken in Nepal, but in a different region of Nepal, at the Machapuchare Base Camp (or MBC). This is a 30 second exposure taken with the Nikon D700 and 14-24/2.8 zoom at 14mm.

It was a moonlit night and I was scheduled to get up early to begin the trek to the ABC camp. I got up earlier than the others to take a few shots about 3.30am. The lodge is eerily deserted as you can see. Unfortunately, the stars look a bit pathetic. They have lost their twinkle and look a bit smudged. The fainter ones have got lost entirely.

I would have preferred the effect that Shadowblade has achieved with his 45 minute exposure.



Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2100


« Reply #89 on: April 29, 2012, 04:00:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Ray

No criticism of shadowblade's work (see my earlier post).

It is possible to take shortish (eg 2min) exposures as close together as possible for as long as ones battery lasts or memory card can hold.
Stacking the images in PS will give an excellent star trail - with no discernable gaps - and no noise.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878


« Reply #90 on: April 29, 2012, 04:21:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Ray

No criticism of shadowblade's work (see my earlier post).

It is possible to take shortish (eg 2min) exposures as close together as possible for as long as ones battery lasts or memory card can hold.
Stacking the images in PS will give an excellent star trail - with no discernable gaps - and no noise.

Regards

Tony Jay

I must try it some time. No stars tonight though, in Brisbane. However, I was really addressing the difficulty of capturing the stars as the eye sees them, twinkling and bright.
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2100


« Reply #91 on: April 29, 2012, 04:46:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I must try it some time. No stars tonight though, in Brisbane. However, I was really addressing the difficulty of capturing the stars as the eye sees them, twinkling and bright.

Don't I know it - spent the day in D'Aguilar National Park in the mist and drizzle today.

Apologies about missing the point though.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878


« Reply #92 on: April 29, 2012, 05:07:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Don't I know it - spent the day in D'Aguilar National Park in the mist and drizzle today.

Apologies about missing the point though.

Regards

Tony Jay

I don't believe I've ever been there, unless I've forgotten about it. Perhaps I should have, since it's not too far from Brisbane. I've been to O'Reilly's, or Lamington National Park a few times. That's quite impressive, especially the Antarctic Beach Trees that are still growing in the same location, on the same patch of earth, as they did in Gondwanaland about 200 million years ago.

Cheers!
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2100


« Reply #93 on: April 29, 2012, 05:20:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Yup, those Antarctic Beeches are still on my list - yet to get a really good image of them.
Rainforest photography in general has proven to be much more difficult than I thought.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
LesPalenik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 434


WWW
« Reply #94 on: April 29, 2012, 07:52:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I mean it was really cool to see it, like, 30-40 years ago, when it was a rare sight, but after a gazillion versions in the digital and internet age, it lost its luster.
There also many photographs taken on a sunny day. Should we now ban them?

Although, there are many star trail photographs which should be safely stored in the nearest drawer, and shouldn't be displayed on public forum, this one is a rare and beautifully lit capture of a seldom seen Himalayan peak. I don't think I'll ever climb there but wouldn't hesitate to hang it on my wall. The star trails add nice background.


Logged

Kerry L
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


« Reply #95 on: April 29, 2012, 07:53:59 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm sad to hear how this thread has ended up. The OP made a stunning photo and others agree. But then Slobodan rained on the parade, which although is unfortunate, is not entirely without precedence on these forums. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Good for you lux....... I have been avoiding or perhaps I should say that I don't participate in these forums because of all the negativism. And as you point out it does seem that it comes from certaim quarters.
Logged

"Try and let your mind see further than your eyes.”
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2777


« Reply #96 on: April 30, 2012, 12:15:27 PM »
ReplyReply

There also many photographs taken on a sunny day. Should we now ban them?
A better analogy would be - there are also many photographs that show  a sun star effect, should we call someone names if they dare to say they think that's become a cliché?

(No one suggested banning photos that show star trails.)
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2777


« Reply #97 on: April 30, 2012, 12:38:37 PM »
ReplyReply

... I don't participate in these forums because of all the negativism.
That's a coincidence! I don't participate because of all the positivism. I think that's a failure for both you and me.
Logged
tom b
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 869


WWW
« Reply #98 on: April 30, 2012, 04:12:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Time to close this thread.

Cheers,
Logged

Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878


« Reply #99 on: May 01, 2012, 01:34:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Time to close this thread.

Cheers,

Why? Someone may come up with a technique of capturing twinkling stars. Why so negative?
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad