A recent revelation (Page 3): Ron, while I agree with you, it is still a little early in the morning for me for such truthfulness and factual obliviousness "(shift in color due to old...

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

Ron, while I agree with you, it is still a little early in the morning for me for such truthfulness and factual obliviousness "(shift in color due to old age by example)" on my part, grin. Have a great day shooting Ron, JimmyT sends

Rongnongno wrote:

What is new here? br As said by others: br - A cam... (show quote)

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

jackm1943 wrote:

Physically, the camera records (most cameras that is) like seeing thru just one eye, ie in two dimensions. That makes a huge difference.

Actually, the camera does not record anything like what one eye does. Close an eye. Hold a finger some inches from your eye and focus on it. Without changing what you are looking at, NOTICE that the background is blurry. Same with color, etc. That is one reason why post processing is valid if you want to convey an experience of what you saw. Not as much if you are photographing to record an event, which we have come to expect as a photograph that we have to interpret, not the photographer's experience.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

Linda, maybe I should have responded as you did, however, Ron adds a lot and he keeps me grounded with his responses, JimmyT sends.

Linda From Maine wrote:

UHH user MinnieV (aka Paula Van Every) translated ... (show quote)

Bob Locher Loc: Southwest Oregon

First, I am sorry to see the negative comments about a subject that interests me and at least some others.

Personally, I am sometimes rather slow to understand when I have seen something well out of the ordinary. I am in particular thinking of a small ship Alaskan cruise my wife and I took in June of this year. We went into the Tracy Arm - a long narrow true fjord. There were lots of ice chunks and small icebergs in the water which our ship negotiated its way around as we went up the channel. The weather was misty and overcast. The scenery was spectacular.

We went around a final bend and saw a massive glacier looming though the mists. We spent several hours in the vicinity, then began our trip back out. For me that day was the top highlight of the trip that had many.

But it was not until we got home and I began to study my pictures that I began to comprehend the power of what we had seen. It had been a trip into a different world, for me at least an apocalyptic journey and adventure. The ice, the bergs, seals in the water and on the flows, some with blood on them and of course the glacier partially obscured by the mists.

I knew it was special when we did it, but it took later reflection and the viewing of my pictures to come to a realization of how powerful and moving an experience it was. Thinking of it now still sends shivers down my spine.

I showed the pictures to a neighbor, and she remarked on one shot of a bald eagle sitting atom an ice flow - and made me realize that in apocalyptic fashion the eagle was bearing witness to what we had seen. Her very perceptive comment further added to my understanding.

I think of going back - and perhaps I will - but I know it will never be the same as the first time.

I am not expressing this very well. But the pictures I took immeasurably added to my understanding of the power and majesty of what we saw. Memory can be and indeed is transitory and imperfect. But photos, within their limitations, remain fixed and give us anchors in our minds.

Cheers

Bob Locher

clickety

Rich1939 wrote:

I'm sorry if you're bored but then again you're no... (show quote)

👍

anotherview Loc: California

Photography may become art in the right hands; mostly, it remains a craft demanding skill, patience, and experience to produce worthy photographs.

camerapapi wrote:

Photography is an art. I agree with you that we do... (show quote)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Jimmy T wrote:

Linda, maybe I should have responded as you did, however, Ron adds a lot and he keeps me grounded with his responses, JimmyT sends.

My comments were not a criticism of Ron, and they most certainly were not a "rant." My brain worked very hard to express in some sort of coherent collection of sentences what was merely my humble personal opinion.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

One difference between human vision and camera vision is the human vision is binocular while camera vision in monocular. Human vision senses depth which cameras can not.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

artBob wrote:

Actually, the camera does not record anything like what one eye does. Close an eye. Hold a finger some inches from your eye and focus on it. Without changing what you are looking at, NOTICE that the background is blurry. ....

Isn’t that exactly the way a camera records it?

srt101fan

Bob Locher wrote:

First, I am sorry to see the negative comments about a subject that interests me and at least some others.

Personally, I am sometimes rather slow to understand when I have seen something well out of the ordinary. I am in particular thinking of a small ship Alaskan cruise my wife and I took in June of this year. We went into the Tracy Arm - a long narrow true fjord. There were lots of ice chunks and small icebergs in the water which our ship negotiated its way around as we went up the channel. The weather was misty and overcast. The scenery was spectacular.

We went around a final bend and saw a massive glacier looming though the mists. We spent several hours in the vicinity, then began our trip back out. For me that day was the top highlight of the trip that had many.

But it was not until we got home and I began to study my pictures that I began to comprehend the power of what we had seen. It had been a trip into a different world, for me at least an apocalyptic journey and adventure. The ice, the bergs, seals in the water and on the flows, some with blood on them and of course the glacier partially obscured by the mists.

I knew it was special when we did it, but it took later reflection and the viewing of my pictures to come to a realization of how powerful and moving an experience it was. Thinking of it now still sends shivers down my spine.

I showed the pictures to a neighbor, and she remarked on one shot of a bald eagle sitting atom an ice flow - and made me realize that in apocalyptic fashion the eagle was bearing witness to what we had seen. Her very perceptive comment further added to my understanding.

I think of going back - and perhaps I will - but I know it will never be the same as the first time.

I am not expressing this very well. But the pictures I took immeasurably added to my understanding of the power and majesty of what we saw. Memory can be and indeed is transitory and imperfect. But photos, within their limitations, remain fixed and give us anchors in our minds.

Cheers

Bob Locher

First, I am sorry to see the negative comments abo... (show quote)

You expressed it very well indeed. Thoughtful and meaningful comments.

Leitz Loc: Solms

gvarner wrote:

We don't physically see and record a scene the way the camera does. There, I've said it. I hadn't thought about this until last night's "aha" moment. It speaks to the difficulty I have in translating what I see into what I want the photo to show, this thing called artistic vision. Photography, in a way, is like viewing a scene with part of your vision cut off, then adding the various pieces back through falible technology. The challenge is real.

How recent is "recent"? This has been the case for about 190 years.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

gvarner wrote:

We don't physically see and record a scene the way the camera does. There, I've said it. I hadn't thought about this until last night's "aha" moment. It speaks to the difficulty I have in translating what I see into what I want the photo to show, this thing called artistic vision. Photography, in a way, is like viewing a scene with part of your vision cut off, then adding the various pieces back through falible technology. The challenge is real.

Throw this into the mix.
Do we see the same as any other person does?
Are the colors we see the same as what any other person sees?
Does culture, experience or other factors determine how and what we see?
The cloud in the sky looks like a horse or a cow, who knows?
So do you see what others see?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

John_F wrote:

One difference between human vision and camera vision is the human vision is binocular while camera vision in monocular. Human vision senses depth which cameras can not.

Have you ever seen a one-eyed frog? They can't catch insects so they die. A one eyed ping pong champion? Billiard champion?

Yet there are many successful one-eyed photographers. Even though they can't see in 3D, they probably understand depth of field from personal experience.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Bob Locher wrote:

First, I am sorry to see the negative comments about a subject that interests me and at least some others.

Personally, I am sometimes rather slow to understand when I have seen something well out of the ordinary. I am in particular thinking of a small ship Alaskan cruise my wife and I took in June of this year. We went into the Tracy Arm - a long narrow true fjord. There were lots of ice chunks and small icebergs in the water which our ship negotiated its way around as we went up the channel. The weather was misty and overcast. The scenery was spectacular.

We went around a final bend and saw a massive glacier looming though the mists. We spent several hours in the vicinity, then began our trip back out. For me that day was the top highlight of the trip that had many.

But it was not until we got home and I began to study my pictures that I began to comprehend the power of what we had seen. It had been a trip into a different world, for me at least an apocalyptic journey and adventure. The ice, the bergs, seals in the water and on the flows, some with blood on them and of course the glacier partially obscured by the mists.

I knew it was special when we did it, but it took later reflection and the viewing of my pictures to come to a realization of how powerful and moving an experience it was. Thinking of it now still sends shivers down my spine.

I showed the pictures to a neighbor, and she remarked on one shot of a bald eagle sitting atom an ice flow - and made me realize that in apocalyptic fashion the eagle was bearing witness to what we had seen. Her very perceptive comment further added to my understanding.

I think of going back - and perhaps I will - but I know it will never be the same as the first time.

I am not expressing this very well. But the pictures I took immeasurably added to my understanding of the power and majesty of what we saw. Memory can be and indeed is transitory and imperfect. But photos, within their limitations, remain fixed and give us anchors in our minds.

Cheers

Bob Locher

First, I am sorry to see the negative comments abo... (show quote)

You expressed it quite well for me. I have had similar experiences, so know the feeling. How about posting the eagle on ice shot?
In the photos, I am looking at the glacier as our ship navigates towards it, a shot of the glacier, and my favorite shot of the fjord. None of these are manipulated beyond the usual dodging and burning, cropping, and tonal adjustment to show what I saw but the camera didn't see as clearly.

(Download)

dborengasser

This is the best and worst topic I have yet to come across on UHH.