5 ms·

Similarly whenever I take photos in the forest they come out looking like complete garbage. It occurred to me it’s the image compression completely falling apar

• kqr 4y ago
  It's also that a forest is incredibly three-dimensional and layered, which contributes a lot to how you experience it. A photograph shows only a 2D projection of this, obviously. Capturing depth in a satisfying way in a photograph is a skill that can be learned, but often it's impossible. (The skill is really about learning to see the small set of perspectives that do translate meaningfully to a 2D projection.)
  • bayindirh 4y ago
    > Capturing depth in a satisfying way in a photograph is a skill that can be learned, but often it's impossible. My photography teacher told us "If you can't see the same thing (that you see with your eyes) via the viewfinder, don't take that photo". It took me a decade to completely understand what she meant. One day it clicked at a very mundane moment, but it was pure enlightenment.
    • kqr 4y ago
      But even the viewfinder is forgiving in this respect, because parallax allow you to sense depth through small perturbations of the position of the camera! So eventually, you will learn to imagine in your head what a scene looks like when projected onto a sheet of still paper. (Bonus: the parallax effect can be exploited to convey depth also on a print, actually. A comparatively long exposure time will, depending on light levels, emphasise or de-emphasise motion closer to the camera in motion blur effects, that vary in size and intensity depending on the two things above.)
• getcrunk 4y ago
  Try avif?