3 ms·

From the blog post, it looks like this could be done by anybody with a good SLR, lens, robot mount, and lots of time. Also, let the "wtf am I looking at" hunt

From the blog post, it looks like this could be done by anybody with a good SLR, lens, robot mount, and lots of time. Also, let the "wtf am I looking at" hunt begin: http://i.imgur.com/Ibmo5.jpg http://i.imgur.com/Ibmo5.jpg http://i.imgur.com/Tjxfd.jpg http://i.imgur.com/Tjxfd.jpg

2rs1 17y ago
http://www.imagebam.com/image/d30d0360346732 http://www.imagebam.com/image/d30d0360346732
Semiapies 17y ago
She's trying to tan and apparently really ambivalent about the height and weather?
KirinDave 17y ago
A lot of "shock" photography is like that. I don't mean shock in the "shockumentary" sense but rather in the sense that you cannot easily reproduce the photograph without gear and access. HDRs are similar. Sadly, shock photography does very well on the internets. Photos like this, while of value as reference and of some interest, are ultimately devoid of any artistic content and basically show off a process and a location, not a photographer's ability.
- lutorm 17y ago
  I take pictures to "show off locations", not to toot my own horn... Besides, taking these are not trivial, so it does show some "ability". It's difficult to get the lighting consistent, for example. But maybe you only value artistic ability?
  - KirinDave 17y ago
    > Besides, taking these are not trivial, so it does show some "ability". Technical ability. As in, the ability to operate devices to their specifications. There can be insights in this which have yet to be widely learned. For example, the recent rise in popularity of high speed cameras as a form of motion-still photography (http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2009/10/13/a-new-kind-of-photography/ http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2009/10/13/a-new-kind-of-photo...) is a good example. But panoramas? While there have been a lot of advances in panorama stitching software, but as for technique, the only real recent change has been an increase in the use of the technique for gathering ultra-high res images (or ultra-shallow depth of field) for more conventional shots. > But maybe you only value artistic ability? To be honest? In this age of pushbutton HDR, cameras that can recover from 2 stop underexposures in post, and a digital darkroom that can completely change your photo infinitely... Artistic talent is one of the few techniques that cannot be bought, it has to be learned. And this piece, while worthy of praise as a difficult shot is not of particular artistic value. To me, anyways.
lutorm 17y ago
Actually, it's not that easy (to do well, at least). 18Gpix with a 9Mpix camera means 2000 exposures. Steady-state shooting rate for most digital cameras once the buffer is full is about 1 shot/s, so that means it would take at least half an hour. (And it's doubtful a robot mount could move that fast.) During that time, the Sun will move significantly and unless you have a completely clear sky some clouds will likely move in front of the Sun. You'll never get a good stitch.
- borism 17y ago
  simple: many professional cameras (20+ mpix) used by many photographers to take pictures of their appropriate sections

2rs1 17y ago

http://www.imagebam.com/image/d30d0360346732 http://www.imagebam.com/image/d30d0360346732

Semiapies 17y ago

She's trying to tan and apparently really ambivalent about the height and weather?

KirinDave 17y ago

A lot of "shock" photography is like that. I don't mean shock in the "shockumentary" sense but rather in the sense that you cannot easily reproduce the photograph without gear and access. HDRs are similar. Sadly, shock photography does very well on the internets. Photos like this, while of value as reference and of some interest, are ultimately devoid of any artistic content and basically show off a process and a location, not a photographer's ability.

lutorm 17y ago
I take pictures to "show off locations", not to toot my own horn... Besides, taking these are not trivial, so it does show some "ability". It's difficult to get the lighting consistent, for example. But maybe you only value artistic ability?
- KirinDave 17y ago
  > Besides, taking these are not trivial, so it does show some "ability". Technical ability. As in, the ability to operate devices to their specifications. There can be insights in this which have yet to be widely learned. For example, the recent rise in popularity of high speed cameras as a form of motion-still photography (http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2009/10/13/a-new-kind-of-photography/ http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2009/10/13/a-new-kind-of-photo...) is a good example. But panoramas? While there have been a lot of advances in panorama stitching software, but as for technique, the only real recent change has been an increase in the use of the technique for gathering ultra-high res images (or ultra-shallow depth of field) for more conventional shots. > But maybe you only value artistic ability? To be honest? In this age of pushbutton HDR, cameras that can recover from 2 stop underexposures in post, and a digital darkroom that can completely change your photo infinitely... Artistic talent is one of the few techniques that cannot be bought, it has to be learned. And this piece, while worthy of praise as a difficult shot is not of particular artistic value. To me, anyways.

lutorm 17y ago

Actually, it's not that easy (to do well, at least). 18Gpix with a 9Mpix camera means 2000 exposures. Steady-state shooting rate for most digital cameras once the buffer is full is about 1 shot/s, so that means it would take at least half an hour. (And it's doubtful a robot mount could move that fast.) During that time, the Sun will move significantly and unless you have a completely clear sky some clouds will likely move in front of the Sun. You'll never get a good stitch.

borism 17y ago
simple: many professional cameras (20+ mpix) used by many photographers to take pictures of their appropriate sections