Static Photography
Nov 30, 2023 11:48:19 #
So, I have never heard the term used as it relates to photography, but it is probably out there, and I just haven't seen it; it's called, static photography. As I see it, it would incorporate Landscape, Architecture, and other immovable objects that are stationary just waiting to be photographed. Nothing moves...they are static. In real estate it is called fixity of location. So, this title (static photography) just groups know entities into a category that covers several well established labels. I'm not quite sure how the term would be used other than as a conversation starter, but even then it has some value and utility. Just my thought of the day.
Nov 30, 2023 12:07:11 #
For breakfast I finished off some leftover potatoes from Thanksgiving.
Nov 30, 2023 12:35:23 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
For breakfast I finished off some leftover potatoes from Thanksgiving.
This explodes the pandora box of "Is breakfast really necessary?"
You really need to elaborate. Was it the potatoes, or food in general???
We need pages and pages of responses.
Thanks to you CHG_CANNON for being brave enough to raise this issue.
We really need some charts and definitions to begin.
Nov 30, 2023 12:48:51 #
Indiana wrote:
So, I have never heard the term used as it relates... (show quote)
I really am more drawn to Chg. Canon's reply but to give some credit to your post I feel the need to be fair and answer.
No I have never heard the term, static photography. I have heard and it is completely appropriate and enough, to say landscape photography, architectural photography and so on. Do we really need some cockamamie other name just to suit a small contingent of people?
Dennis
Nov 30, 2023 13:01:11 #
The "value and utility" you've left to us to discover and describe. You see how well that's worked so far in this thread 
What immovable subjects have in common would seem to be the ability to use slower shutter speeds and a tripod. But then you have wind affecting landscapes and having to deal with keystoning effect in photography of tall buildings (or tall trees).
IMO best to not attempt to group static subjects under their own label, at least until you share your suggestions for why we should.
What immovable subjects have in common would seem to be the ability to use slower shutter speeds and a tripod. But then you have wind affecting landscapes and having to deal with keystoning effect in photography of tall buildings (or tall trees).
IMO best to not attempt to group static subjects under their own label, at least until you share your suggestions for why we should.
Nov 30, 2023 13:51:28 #
It's actually the sounds you hear when listening to in-laws.
Also sometimes expresses how a camera should be held.
Also sometimes expresses how a camera should be held.
Nov 30, 2023 13:54:09 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
Linda From Maine wrote:
The "value and utility" you've left to u... (show quote)
I'm not sure...the examples if problems that you give are pretty interesting. Wildlife (and probably sports) photographers would not, I think, usually even think about keystoning. Wind might be an issue in some cases. I am interested right now in communicating scale. I think most of our standard techniques can be pretty weak in some important cases (like the Grand Canyon or the redwood forests). And I'm pretty sure that static photographers don't care much about global shutter.
Maybe there's more value than is immediately obvious...
Nov 30, 2023 13:57:26 #
larryepage wrote:
Remember the OP is about "static" photography. Occasionally you can photo a non-moving animal or bird, but I wouldn't count on it. Sports? I suppose some consider baseball pretty static I'm not sure...the examples if problems that you give are pretty interesting. Wildlife (and probably sports) photographers would not, I think, usually even think about keystoning...
Nov 30, 2023 13:58:37 #
dennis2146 wrote:
I really am more drawn to Chg. Canon's reply but to give some credit to your post I feel the need to be fair and answer.
No I have never heard the term, static photography. I have heard and it is completely appropriate and enough, to say landscape photography, architectural photography and so on. Do we really need some cockamamie other name just to suit a small contingent of people?
Dennis
No I have never heard the term, static photography. I have heard and it is completely appropriate and enough, to say landscape photography, architectural photography and so on. Do we really need some cockamamie other name just to suit a small contingent of people?
Dennis
I don't see how any single Landscape photographer would ever be willing to be lumped together under a single heading that includes Architecture.
Moreover, if I shoot a Farris wheel, is that 'static' even if it's moving, such as at night with the lights blurred in a long exposure. Or, is that a long-exposure? Or, just not 'static', even if that wheel never rolls, just rotates in place?
Really ... this just seems like another jobs program for new deputies in the Internet Police Force. We have enough of those already ...
Nov 30, 2023 14:00:34 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
Linda From Maine wrote:
Remember the OP is about "static" photography. Occasionally you can photo a non-moving animal or bird, but I wouldn't count on it. Sports? I suppose some consider baseball pretty static
I agree. Cheetah photos (and antelopes) might benefit from global shutter in some cases. But there are whole classes of photography in which nothing moves. Bybthe way...I've not seen very many photos of cheetahs at speed...
Nov 30, 2023 14:01:26 #
larryepage wrote:
I agree. Cheetah photos (and antelopes) might benefit from global shutter in some cases. But there are whole classes of photography in which nothing moves.
But, they could move, so what is the rule? Just ask the 1:1 macro photographers, who guard their rules like the queen's jewels.
Nov 30, 2023 14:03:08 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
CHG_CANON wrote:
But, they could move, so what is the rule?
Not necessarily thinking about rules yet. Needs first, guiding principles maybe next. I'm sure plenty of other folks are chomping at the bits with rules. Not me.
Nov 30, 2023 14:04:16 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
CHG_CANON wrote:
But, they could move, so what is the rule? Just ask the 1:1 macro photographers, who guard their rules like the queen's jewels.
I used to like to do macro photography, but quit when the rules became more important than the pictures.
Nov 30, 2023 14:08:48 #
larryepage wrote:
I used to like to do macro photography, but quit when the rules became more important than the pictures.
The real beauty of photography is found in all the unwritten rules.
Nov 30, 2023 14:11:38 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
CHG_CANON wrote:
The real beauty of photography is found in all the unwritten rules.
Plus, you need to know that I really enjoy talking to Linda. It's way more interesting when we are seeing something from slightly different angles.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.