All Forum Comments
Is that all or just K-mount - they only list 43 K-mount on the Ricoh site.
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Does Pentax need a CHEAP DSLR......?? at 31/03/2018 - 10:13
Do people pay for phones, or get them as part of their mobile phone contract?
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Does Pentax need a CHEAP DSLR......?? at 31/03/2018 - 09:10
No "I haven't got one and won't be getting one" option?
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Pentax K-1 user? at 20/03/2018 - 19:03
Yeah, that's what TWiS is compiled from.
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Just been published at 12/03/2018 - 18:10
Is this site (This Week in Steam) of any use?
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Just been published at 12/03/2018 - 16:01
Gwyn wrote:
I am right-handed, and right eyed, and prefer the non flipped image.
My left-handed, right eyed son agreed. My right handed left eyed husband disagreed.
My Chinese sister-in-law liked them both equally. My brother wondered what I was on about.
Buy your brother a drink and tell him not to worry. I am right-handed, and right eyed, and prefer the non flipped image.
My left-handed, right eyed son agreed. My right handed left eyed husband disagreed.
My Chinese sister-in-law liked them both equally. My brother wondered what I was on about.
The Chinese sister-in-law point is interesting, especially if her first written language is traditional Chinese - written top to bottom and right to left.
You know, with a large enough sample size and considering all the variables, somebody could probably get a PhD out of womble's picture!
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Composition Question(s) at 11/03/2018 - 11:50
davidtrout wrote:
I was going to comment on this but most of the things I intended to express have now already been said so I'll simply say that Kris's wintery lane photograph works either way for me.
As for rules of composition just ask yourself when you view an image, painting or photograph: Does it look right, has it balance, or does it seem awkward?
David
And why. You need to know why so that you can avoid making the same mistake again. Assuming it's one of your own pictures.I was going to comment on this but most of the things I intended to express have now already been said so I'll simply say that Kris's wintery lane photograph works either way for me.
As for rules of composition just ask yourself when you view an image, painting or photograph: Does it look right, has it balance, or does it seem awkward?
David
Which is, I suppose, why I asked the original questions.
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Composition Question(s) at 05/03/2018 - 11:35
I think I prefer it in colour, but with the blue cast removed.
Still look bl**dy cold though.
Still look bl**dy cold though.
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Welsh Coastal Path at 04/03/2018 - 10:40
John. In general you make a couple of good points. However, couple of thoughts…
iirc, there is a woman photographer, one of whose projects is to reproduce old masters as photographs. Why? The old masters already exist. I suspect in that case it’s just novelty. Plus of course, with some of the art being made these days, you stand the chance of producing some right ropey images.
Then there is the ‘LOMO Philosophy’ explained in a book I got free with some magazine or other. Producing ropey pictures with second-rate equipment is apparently an homage to the early photographers who couldn’t produce the sort of high IQ quality images we have today due to the primitiveness of their gear. You can probably guess how I feel about that idea! And how the early photographers would probably feel too.
A further question would be where does ‘art’ get these basics from? Are they built into the human brain in some way? Derived/evolved from some ingrained survival instinct?
Unless Bailey OKed the prints as what he wanted them to look like?
Sorry for going on at length a bit. And the delay in replying – real life intervened. Including a very slow and careful walk via Staines bridge to Sainsbury’s!
johnriley wrote:
Basically because the inspiration for photographic composition starts with paintings. Art is art.
Yes, photography, in the area of composition, derives a lot from paintings. It is, after all, another branch of the arts. However, it has developed in its own way since then. To keep going back and taking anything more than the basics which are, I think, already known, and you risk ending up just copying paintings. In which case, why bother with photography?Basically because the inspiration for photographic composition starts with paintings. Art is art.
iirc, there is a woman photographer, one of whose projects is to reproduce old masters as photographs. Why? The old masters already exist. I suspect in that case it’s just novelty. Plus of course, with some of the art being made these days, you stand the chance of producing some right ropey images.
Then there is the ‘LOMO Philosophy’ explained in a book I got free with some magazine or other. Producing ropey pictures with second-rate equipment is apparently an homage to the early photographers who couldn’t produce the sort of high IQ quality images we have today due to the primitiveness of their gear. You can probably guess how I feel about that idea! And how the early photographers would probably feel too.
A further question would be where does ‘art’ get these basics from? Are they built into the human brain in some way? Derived/evolved from some ingrained survival instinct?
johnriley wrote:
It's a fair point though, up to a point. Photography exhibitions tend to be of a very different nature to conventional galleries, usually a long way from the basics, which I thought we were talking about here.
True. Maybe gallery visits of both kinds should be for inspirational purposes rather than basic education.It's a fair point though, up to a point. Photography exhibitions tend to be of a very different nature to conventional galleries, usually a long way from the basics, which I thought we were talking about here.
johnriley wrote:
There was an exhibition of David Bailey images in Aberystwyth a few years ago, and I was actually quite disappointed at the poor quality of the printing. These were iconic images that IMHO were better in a well printed book. It confuses many beginners who look at famous photographers' work and realise that whatever it holds that gives it its magic, it wouldn't pass muster in a beginner's competition at the average camera club. The things are just worlds apart.
Well, there you have the problem with reproducability. A painting exists as a single thing - if it looks rough, it is. Many prints can be made from a negative (or tranny, if you can find some Ilfochrome paper) or file. And the final print depends on more than just the source.There was an exhibition of David Bailey images in Aberystwyth a few years ago, and I was actually quite disappointed at the poor quality of the printing. These were iconic images that IMHO were better in a well printed book. It confuses many beginners who look at famous photographers' work and realise that whatever it holds that gives it its magic, it wouldn't pass muster in a beginner's competition at the average camera club. The things are just worlds apart.
Unless Bailey OKed the prints as what he wanted them to look like?
johnriley wrote:
I upset the lady in the Pentax Gallery in London once when I told her I didn't think much of the prints on the wall - montages made by sticking bits of prints on top of other prints and they were all peeling off. But I digress, and feel free to say whatever you feel about my images!
I have seen paintings in galleries that were dirty and crumbling. Heck, there’s a Leonardo fresco that’s falling apart because he ‘knew best’ and used the wrong materials, and Lichtenstein’s Whaam! in the Tate is filthy! Or was the last time I saw it. Bad workmanship/maintenance is not restricted to photography.I upset the lady in the Pentax Gallery in London once when I told her I didn't think much of the prints on the wall - montages made by sticking bits of prints on top of other prints and they were all peeling off. But I digress, and feel free to say whatever you feel about my images!
johnriley wrote:
But I digress, and feel free to say whatever you feel about my images!
Yeah, it’s partly my fault. But threads do tend to drift and it can be interesting and makes us all think. I hope.But I digress, and feel free to say whatever you feel about my images!
Sorry for going on at length a bit. And the delay in replying – real life intervened. Including a very slow and careful walk via Staines bridge to Sainsbury’s!
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Composition Question(s) at 02/03/2018 - 16:11
johnriley wrote:
If we want to explore composition, my best suggestion is to visit an art gallery and spend some time thinking about the paintings, which ones we like and why. Time well spent and my granddaughters have been amazed by some of them, including how huge the paintngs can be.
Why not go to a gallery and do the same for photographs? They have been around long enough to have developed their own aesthetic (probably from painting and so forth), which would be more relevant.If we want to explore composition, my best suggestion is to visit an art gallery and spend some time thinking about the paintings, which ones we like and why. Time well spent and my granddaughters have been amazed by some of them, including how huge the paintngs can be.
Unless you consider paintings etc to be superior in some way. In which case, an oil painting set would be a lot cheaper than a K-1 (other Pentax cameras are available).
Comment by Aitch53 posted on Composition Question(s) at 01/03/2018 - 16:51
