carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.323 #3 · ZE/ZF/ZM Images (Official Thread!) | |
I am re-reading these threads, in an attempt to try to quantify what I am seeing with the 50MP and 50P, and I came across the quote below, which I had missed at the time.
(Samuli, I was not missing from the forum because of the vigorous discussions, but because I switched to Leica M8 exclusively for some years, and at the time FM was quite hostile towards Leica, with the term fanboy always coming up in discussions, and oh, how I hate that term, and anyone who uses it, so I left for some years, until I bought a Nikon D3 in addition to my Leica.)
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Plasticity or whatever it's called if caused by camera system needs always (DISCLAIMER: I DO KNOW THERE IS NO CONSENSUS WHAT IS 3D ETC. SO STOP READING IF THIS BOTHERS YOU!!!!!) 3 things (best definition by Carstens in here):
Anyway, I think my use of the word 3D for only one part of a whole is confusing, so I have decided to modify my terms, and adopt the word volume from Samuli instead. I also use the benefit of time to re-word a couple of sentences for clarity. This leaves my definitions as follows:
- The feeling of seeing objects in a photo at different distances I describe as having Depth, and any lens could do that under the right circumstances. In particular, Leica and Zeiss lenses can do that equally well. This can be achieved with boke, with perspective, and so on, or with a combination of these. Samuli's forest photos have lots of this.
- What I describe as Volume is the feeling of being able to imagine reaching into a photo and feeling the shape of some non-flat object in it. Charles' Phi Phi full-body portrait is one example, Luka's snail is another, and Martin's Volvo is a third.
- A third concept is that of Texture. An example would be imagining being able to reach into a shot and feel the roughness of a wall, or of stubble, and so on. Mike's photo of El Capitan is one example, Vladi's leather handbag another.
The combination of one or more of these sometimes results in a photo which gives the feeling of looking at the original scene, rather than a photo of it, exactly what Samuli's holy grail is (and Luka's, IIRC). This would be 3D.
Notes:
1) Not all these parts are required. Specifically, boke is not required to produce depth, and is thus not needed for 3D.
2) When people disagree with these terms, it is usually because they use the word 3D to describe what I call Depth, only, especially as produced by boke.
3) I think the ability to imagine Volume is strongly related to experience and memories. I would have no idea what I would feel when touching Martin's Volvo, for example, if I had not already felt the body of a car like that, but now that I have, it is very vivid.
4) The size of a web image is strongly related to its ability to show 3D. Only large images show 3D well, I believe. When photos get too small, they lose something. This is the reason my image size has crept up to 1100x733 in recent times. This is still comfortable on a 15" laptop, which I think is a reasonable compromise.
|
