OK, thanks a bunch for all the feedback.
I've posted a modified version of the tryptich here:
http://www.whitneygallery.com/Jenn/Jenn_files/HF_TrypTry3.jpg
based on some input.
Anyone care to take a look and opine?
George
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Moose
> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 1:35 AM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] Opinions
>
>
> Of the 2 triptychs, I prefer the first. I generally prefer the 3rd image
> in it anyway for its luminous quality. I also prefer it as part of this
> set because it maintains the overall compositional theme of the first 2
> images. I find the big chunk of darker image in the lower right third of
> the right side image in the second triptych visually jarring.
>
> On the other hand, I don't like either triptych all that much (Although
> I love the individual images.) because they look too linear/mechanical
> in composition, like illustrations of focal length coverage in a lens
> brochure. I like triptych 1 better with the right image moved to the
> center. As the most visually powerful, luminous and even mysterious
> image (because the subject might not be immediately obvious without the
> other images), it rates center stage. In that form, the eye is no longer
> led to the right off the end in the expectation of a possible fourth
> image, but lands in the center, more in balance. If it were my
> composition, I would also then try out cropping both side images to
> narrow them equally by up to a quarter or so, possibly mostly from the
> right of each to maintain the luminous light on the (now) right one and
> the lovely cloud on the (still) left one. This might strengthen the
> whole triptych by emphasizing the strongest, central image while still
> framing it with images that give its abtract qualities context. It would
> take a bit of playing to see the impact. I might also try reversing the
> left and right images around the (new) center just to see how it feels.
> Hard to say how it might affect the overall impact without seeing it.
>
> Just one viewer's opinion.
>
> Moose
>
> George M. Anderson wrote:
>
> >OM'ers:
> >
> >An on-topic opinion poll of photos taken with OM cameras and lenses post.
> >
> >I'd like to solicit opinions from those interested on a couple of images.
> >
> >I got some nice images of Horsetail Falls in Yosemite being lit by the
> >setting sun. I'm thinking they might make a nice tryptich if combined
> >correctly. The first 2 images I think are pretty much a lock,
> but I'm not
> >quite sure which to use as the third.
> >
> >So I've posted a couple of jpgs to my site with each version of the
> >tryptich, 1 and 2.
> >
> >They are here:
> >http://www.whitneygallery.com/Jenn/Jenn_files/HF_TrypTry1.jpg
> >and here:
> >http://www.whitneygallery.com/Jenn/Jenn_files/HF_TrypTry2.jpg
> >
> >Anyone interested in giving me some feedback can do it on list or off.
> >
> >george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >All the images are on Kodak E100VS, taken with a 4T and scanned
> @4000dpi on
> >my Polaroid Sprintscan 4000.
> >
> >The lenses I used, all Zuikos, were the 180/2, the 350/2.8 and
> 1.x and maybe
> >the 2x. I'm sorry but I'm not absolutely sure of the combos for
> each shot,
> >but I think the first one (left end) is the 180/2 alone.
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >George
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>[mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Scott Gomez
> >>Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 12:44 PM
> >>To: 'olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> >>Subject: [OM] Shameless self promotion (longish, but on-topic)
> >>
> >>
> >>Ok, I'm going to toot my own horn here a bit (and I don't even *own* a
> >>trombone).
> >>
> >>Many of you have visited my web site once in a while. I've had a
> >>fair amount
> >>of OM content, a photo gallery (and lots of other stuff not OM related).
> >>
> >>I've recently redesigned the site with an eye to it being a bit more
> >>interactive. As a result, much of the OM gallery content has
> >>moved from its
> >>original location, the rest of the OM content will be moved just
> >>as soon as
> >>I figure out how to get it in the format I want, and much new has
> >>been added
> >>(both OM and not--).
> >>
> >>One of the new additions is a "Forums" section where people can post
> >>messages. It's not my intention to replace the list (I'd quickly
> >>get swamped
> >>for bandwidth) but it *is* my intention to supplement the list, esp. for
> >>those members who have no web space or don't care to build
> their own site.
> >>So... I've created some "For Sale" sections where list members
> are welcome
> >>to browse (and post!) for sale items.
> >>
> >>The only catch is that to see much of the new content (although not the
> >>Forums, where you can view, but not post, without logging in) one must
> >>register, using a valid email address (for confirmation). Don't
> worry, I'm
> >>not gonna hand out anyone's email address. Nor will I sell them,
> >>trade them
> >>or barter them. The primary purpose of requiring a registration
> is one of
> >>administration: it gives me the ability to prevent posting by
> >>"surf-bys" and
> >>to track potential offenders, as well as limit bandwidth usage to mostly
> >>those that have signed up.
> >>
> >>I've got a fair amount of web space available (it's my server) but
> >>constrained bandwidth (ADSL) so viewing the galleries, browsing
> links and
> >>downloading also requires registration. List members wishing for gallery
> >>space are welcome to contact me, OFF LIST, as I probably have more than
> >>enough room for your work. Fair warning though: we'll be
> >>experimenting with
> >>the ability to remote post to a gallery--at least for the first
> sucker...
> >>er... beta tester. :-)
> >>
> >>Currently some 80+ OM photo sites in the web links section, and
> all of my
> >>old OM downloadable content has been moved to "downloads".
> >>
> >>No fees anywhere. I just do this for fun, and hopefully some of you will
> >>find it useful... Suggestions gladly accepted for additional
> content, new
> >>forums and the like. Bug reports are needed as well.
> >>
> >>http://petroglyph.crestline.ca.us/
> >>
> >>---
> >>Scott Gomez
> >>
> >>< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> >>< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> >>< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> >< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> >< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|
