minx

Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Fri 29/03/24 02:18:20 GMT

Translate page FROM gb -> TO de fr it nl es pt jp

Translate page TO gb <- FROM de fr it nl es pt jp

Wetlook-Online
Wetlook-Online

Message # 56946.6.1.1.1.1

Subject: Talking Re:To the producers - photographically qualities

Date: Sun 10/02/13 15:08:09 GMT

Name: MaK dk

Email:

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: Make Donation (you can change amount)

Previous Reply
Next New Message
Active List Archive

"We don't need blinkers to see a beautiful girl in nature. The brain works in an interesting way. Typically we do not see an entire scene all at once. We as humans are hardwired to see things in small fragments, which are quickly assembled in our brains so that we can recognize the object being viewed. If any part of the scene cannot be seen and the brain doesn't have all of the information to recognize things, we simply miss identify or not recognize objects at all."

 

Exactly, and this also what I wrote and the reason why it is no problem to focus on for example a girl - even if a lot of background is also shown.

 

"Don't confuse resolution with detail. A high resolution will offer greater detail, but no matter how much resolution your camera is capable of capturing, it all comes down to the quality of your optics, namely the lens. At greater distances, most lenses lose detail quality, it's a natural drawback to lens design."

 

Yes, but any modern SLR camera and lens can produce details enough for a resolution of 2160 pixels vertically, which is the standard for most 4k formats ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution ); but of course it is a completely different matter if the pictures are going to be printed. You are right that mobile devices are a big part of the future, but look at the screen resolution of the best mobile phones and devices - also 1080*1920. What is the purpose of for example a 4:3 or 3:2 picture in the future digital world?

 

Photography died with the AGFA chrome 200RS Professional and the introduction of f5.6 zoom objectives with autofocus, but a new future called 4k is beginning to show in the horizon.

 

Thanks for the chat. We may not completely agree, but I hope that maybe I have anyway given you and other producers something to consider.

In reply to Message (56946.6.1.1.1) None Re:To the producers - photographically qualities

By EdR - asplashofglamour@gmail.com uu Sat 09/02/13 01:24:57 GMT

Website: asplashofglamour.com


Hello MaK

 

     It's easy to link an image, all you need is to have your image somewhere, like a website and you can link the address as instructed in the "Autolink" section, when you are posting. The images I used to illustrate my points were linked from my website.

 

We don't need blinkers to see a beautiful girl in nature. The brain works in an interesting way. Typically we do not see an entire scene all at once. We as humans are hardwired to see things in small fragments, which are quickly assembled in our brains so that we can recognize the object being viewed. If any part of the scene cannot be seen and the brain doesn't have all of the information to recognize things, we simply miss identify or not recognize objects at all. Militaries around the world take advantage of how humans see to create effective camouflage techniques. Likewise photographers can also take advantage of the natural way we see by drawing attention with different techniques. As I mentioned before, the rule of thirds is an example of how we use asymmetry to draw the eye to it, the same thing occurs when we tilt an image. A blinking light is a bit unusual, but the same principal of attracting the eye applies.

 

 

The phenomena of using large screen images to trick the eye into seeing in 3D, isn't too difficult to understand. All you need to do is provide a view which encompasses peripheral vision. This can occur by viewing a large screen, up close so that your peripheral vision is also included. You're not actually seeing in 3D, but your brain, fooled into being given enough information to formulate a 3D image, can think it's seeing in 3D, even though the actual image is 2D. This is another aspect of how humans see and the fact that it can be deceived. Now looking at a tilted image, up close could cause you to get seasick, because you're including the peripheral vision and we as humans expect to see things in a predictable matter, in this case, upright and symmetrically. Sadly the only solution to this is to view the image from a slightly greater distance, enough to "disengage" the peripheral vision from viewing. This brings up an entirely different conversation of how we display images. Not everyone is going to view images up close on very wide screens. Although the future may suggest a move towards larger, higher resolution screens, the vast overwhelming majority of consumers view images on small mobil devices. Currently most devices do not contain enough memory to allow downloading large files to such devices, but I believe that will change in the future and the future of mobil devices is far more promising.

 

 

Don't confuse resolution with detail. A high resolution will offer greater detail, but no matter how much resolution your camera is capable of capturing, it all comes down to the quality of your optics, namely the lens. At greater distances, most lenses lose detail quality, it's a natural drawback to lens design. So we try to avoid working where the lens is least capable. Which brings us back to how we display images. I could had shot the first image in landscape, it would had still been shot from a further distance and I could had defocused the background, still it would had been dominated by it's background, and when viewed on a mobil device, be extremely tiny. Sorry, as a producer, I have to appeal to as many as I can and thus a compromise has to be met.  

 

I do keep more than one file of each image, actually three;

The original RAW which I save like a "digital negative",

A very large full resolution jpg file, sufficient to print from,

And a smaller, lower resolution web ready jpg image which is what we display and what our customers purchase.

 

 

EdR

In reply to Message (56946.6.1.1) Talking Re:To the producers - photographically qualities

By MaK - dk Fri 08/02/13 16:14:49 GMT

Website:


Hi EdR

 

Thanks for your comments with examples. How do you add pictures? I would have liked to show what I mean with some examples too.

 

"If we shot a standing person, in landscape, the majority of the image will be nothing more than background. If it's mostly background, then the background dominates the scene. This maybe fine if your intent is to emphasize a location, but it does nothing to emphasize your subject and the model will appear much smaller in the scene. Another thing to consider is, if you shot a standing person in landscape, you'll have to capture it from a greater distance. The further away you shoot, the less detail you capture."

 

Do you also put blinkers on when you see a beautiful girl in the nature? This is not how the brain works. When you focus on an object, you actually only sees an extremely small area down to a single eye, so even if you show the entire background or could even show the entire surroundings in 3D, you will have no problems in focusing on the most interesting subject. As the computer monitors gets bigger and bigger - I use a 27" myself - you begin to fell that you are actually at that location - the reason why most gamers also prefer a big monitor. You don't do that if you crop the picture in the left and right side. In the future, we will get 4k pictures on TV, that is, with 4 times the pixels of 1920*1080. Which such quality, the brain begins to add 3D effects itself, which is actually as good as todays 3D-with-glasses technology.

 

The way the brain works is also why slanted camera looks ridiculous. Try to put your head on the slant. Does the picture change? No, it still looks upright. Now try to take the picture from the same angle as the head and show it on the monitor. You almost get sea sick :-)

 

Of course you must shoot the picture from a bigger distance if you want a landscape photo, and because you need to use at least a 85 mm objective to get the proportions right, you really need quite a big distance, but this is exactly what is needed to create photos, which tells a story. The photographer must be "a fly on the wall" so that the model can behave in a natural way. If you put a slanted camera right into her face and ask her to pose in silly, unnatural positions, you may think that you create "smart" pictures, but you seldom create photographic art.

 

A modern digital camera has quite a high resolution. If you want to create printed images, you need that and then there is perhaps not resolution enough for landscape, but then we are back to the subject - how are the pictures shown and used? If you only need a 1080 pixels vertical, any picture from a digital camera can be cropped without any loss of resolution. Perhaps you could have two types of download - landscape pictures intended for computer monitors and TV and the RAW format (I know it is big) for printing. If you really wants to print a picture, it may go through Photoshop, and even the standard JPEG conversion will destroy the contours and prevent good results.

 

The first picture from SOG466 you show is excellent. God composition and excellent lighting, but it would have been that too in landscape - still with the model approximately 1/3 from the side and perhaps some defuse (out of focus) foreground in the corners. Of course the model should not be centered as an amateur would do. I must admit, that I am not a big fan of the next two pictures, and the middle one begins to show the limitation of digital photography compared to earlier times high quality AGFA professional diapositive films (perhaps dias - not sure what they is called in English). Maybe it is time to forget the modern zoom objectives and go back to a descent aperture like f1.8?

In reply to Message (56946.6.1) Wink Smile Re:To the producers - photographically qualities

By EdR - asplashofglamour@gmail.com uu Thu 07/02/13 15:01:38 GMT

Website: asplashofglamour.com


"Have you ever considered how your pictures are shown - are they printed out or shown on a computer monitor or on a TV set? If the answer is almost entirely on a computer monitor or TV, why use formats, which does not fit with todays monitors and TV, which is mostly 1920*1080 pixels - just look in a computer store? What is the purpose of two black stripes in the left and right side? It looks like you watch the pictures through a door. The late Sam Haskins was a master of putting a girl into landscape pictures and of course he ensured that there were a perfect match between all colors (clothing, surroundings, lighting etc.). Expanding the pictures to a wide format like 16:9 can really enhance them."

 

     

 

 

        

 

 

          Yes we have considered how photos are shown. The problem isn't as easily resolved as following the style and technique of another photographer. Rather, the problems are with how images are taken and how they are displayed. Most cameras do not shoot with a square frame. They are biased towards a more rectangular frame. TV's computer monitors and even magazines aren't square either. Well ok it should be simple right? Just shoot images so that the frame matches a TV or Computer monitor, in landscape (wider rather than taller) but it's not as easy as that. If you happen to shoot models, the basic human form when standing, is an object which is tall and thin. To capture this, it's necessary to turn the camera on it's side, shooting portrait (taller rather than wider)

Why do we do this? It's simple. If we shot a standing person, in landscape, the majority of the image will be nothing more than background. If it's mostly background, then the background dominates the scene. This maybe fine if your intent is to emphasize a location, but it does nothing to emphasize your subject and the model will appear much smaller in the scene. Another thing to consider is, if you shot a standing person in landscape, you'll have to capture it from a greater distance. The further away you shoot, the less detail you capture. Unless you're photographing people laying down, or horizontal, most shots of people tend to be shot in portrait, (camera turned on it's side) so that the background is minimized and the subject becomes the dominate feature in the scene. Of course when you display an image in the portrait, your TV or monitor shows the image slightly smaller with space on either side, or you have to scroll the image to see the entire scene, but the subject, the person in the photo, will appear larger within a portrait frame than if the subject was shot in the landscape frame, and with greater detail. Until the shape of your TV screen (which is now offered in wide screen) or computer monitor changes to fit photography, we are generally stuck with dead space.

 

TVs and computer monitors do not have anywhere near the resolution that a typical digital camera can produce. If we were to display an image as captured, the size of the file as well as how it was displayed would be difficult, but further we purposely turn down the resolution partly to save space and to prevent those from printing the images without our permission. If they attempted to print an image, they would get a pixelated image back.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"By the way - what is the purpose of slanted camera? If the photographer is not good enough to create something outstanding, but nevertheless wants something special, he can of course always slant the camera, but to me it looks absolutely crazy."

 

 

 

 

 

 

What makes for great photography is the ability to compose an image, rather than to just take a snap shot. Most people simply take pictures, centering the subject in the frame. This is ok if you don't care about the quality of your work, but if you want your images to stand out, you need to compose each shot. The classic technique is to use the "rule of thirds" method to capture your image. Here is an example (from SOG466);

 

 

The model isn't located at the center of the image, she is offset to one side of the frame. The purpose of this is to attract the eye. Things that are symmetrical are expected, and therefore do not generate enough interest to capture attention, but we notice things that are asymmetrical. The rule of thirds is we compose images by offsetting the subject or elements we intend to highlight within the image to draw the eye to it. Likewise tilting the camera is another simple technique to capture your eye. In the absence of the rule of thirds, the diagonal frame, a form of composition, has the same effect on the viewer as does the rule of thirds.

 

 

In this image, (from set SOG457) the horizon isn't discernible so the diagonal frame isn't unusual.

In this image where the horizon is discernible the only advantage of the diagonal frame, is to capture attention to the image as this example from set SOG191 shows;

 

 

The most basic of professional photographers is understanding the concept of capturing the interest of your audience. Look at the ads in high end fashion magazines. Although the ads are to highlight a product they use a wide variety of techniques and a ton of creativity to highlight the subject of the ad. BTW, the same holds true for videography, but unlike photography, it's far more difficult to pull off a portrait frame (turned on it's side) video. TVs and computer monitors are far more ideal to vids than photos.

 

 

 

 

 

"I have been photographing all my life and definitely prefer quality to quantity. To me a good picture is a picture, which tells a story, and a picture, which you can hang on your wall and look at every day for more years without being tired of it. Ask yourself if this is the case for your pictures or it perhaps is worth spending a little more time on planing and photographically qualities - and perhaps on model and clothing selection."

 

 

 

 

 

 

As one whose been photographing most of my life I can say that, yes while a good picture tells a good story, I never rest on my laurels. I do get tired of looking at my own images. Not for any reason other than I'm never really content, always feeling that I could had done it better. It's my nature. Besides my work in wetlook photography, I have other "more professional" works which I display. These two disciplines require a different method and style to my work flow. With wetlook photography, my goal is to shoot more than enough content material to appeal to my customer base. I don't spend much time in post production because the sheer number of images I create, would consume much of my life. With my artistic stuff, I'm not shooting for content. For that, all I'm looking for is that one perfect shot and I'll spend a far greater amount of time working that image until I'm satisfied with it, but even then, I'm always looking to out-do the last image.

 

Wetlook photography is something I love and we have a great time doing it. I know there is conversation about posed vs natural wetlook and many of you concern yourselves with things you can't possibly know, during a production. The bottom line is that there are tons of sites to choose from, all having their own unique look and style. Its just a matter of finding the one that best suits your desires. For us, I try to produce images at the best quality possible, with as many variables possible, but I do know that not everyone will be attracted to it, likewise, this is a fact for every producer.

 

EdR

 

In reply to Message (56946.6) Talking To the producers - photographically qualities

By MaK - dk Wed 06/02/13 10:05:38 GMT

Website:


Have you ever considered how your pictures are shown - are they printed out or shown on a computer monitor or on a TV set? If the answer is almost entirely on a computer monitor or TV, why use formats, which does not fit with todays monitors and TV, which is mostly 1920*1080 pixels - just look in a computer store? What is the purpose of two black stripes in the left and right side? It looks like you watch the pictures through a door. The late Sam Haskins was a master of putting a girl into landscape pictures and of course he ensured that there were a perfect match between all colors (clothing, surroundings, lighting etc.). Expanding the pictures to a wide format like 16:9 can really enhance them.

 

By the way - what is the purpose of slanted camera? If the photographer is not good enough to create something outstanding, but nevertheless wants something special, he can of course always slant the camera, but to me it looks absolutely crazy.

 

I have been photographing all my life and definitely prefer quality to quantity. To me a good picture is a picture, which tells a story, and a picture, which you can hang on your wall and look at every day for more years without being tired of it. Ask yourself if this is the case for your pictures or it perhaps is worth spending a little more time on planing and photographically qualities - and perhaps on model and clothing selection.

 

When the number of wetlook pictures on your hard disk begins to exceed several thousand, you find that you never look at them again or scroll through them at high speed, and then you may begin to sort out the really good ones, which is worth a second look. For the same reason I also prefer pay-peer-view to subscription. In this way I can sort out the (few) really good sets.

 

In reply to Message (56946) Pictures Movie & images 2 girls in pool in skirts/leggings html

By Erik Elsas-EE Wetlook-Unedited - nl Tue 05/02/13 13:53:19 GMT

Website: http://www.eewetlook-hq.com/index-unedited.html




2 girls in the pool in denim skirts and leggings: one of them with socks (no shoes) and the other with sandals.

6:19 min. movie and 3 series of images (made simultaneously): 105, 143 and 160 images.

Enjoy, Erik.































Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: Make Donation (you can change amount)

All WAM Drunk Sex Orgy WetLooker.com
WetlookPOV.com

Minx Movies - M12 - Dressed in Wet is now in the Download Store
Download Store

Minx Movies - M15 - Wet Me Now is now in the Download Store
Download Store

Minx Movies - M14 - Get Wet With Me is now in the Download Store
2ipmd65.jpg2ipmdg2.jpgckfbj77.jpgjapgs25.jpgzgjbt99.jpg Download Store 2fpbs94.jpgkijws74.jpgrlsps97.jpglasbjg7.jpg2fptg96.jpg2gpdde7.jpg


Minx Movies - M8 - Mask Of Wetness is now in the Download Store
Download Store



[ This page took 0.037 seconds to generate ]