You do have a way with words, Stan. Your description of the "flash experience" had me rolling in the aisles (all the while nodding my head in agreement).
:-) cheers, frank "What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." -- Christopher Hitchens --- Original Message --- From: Stan Halpin <[email protected]> Sent: February 3, 2012 2/3/12 To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: GESO - Bologna, three in one Sorry - I wasn't clear. I think the field-of-view is fine, as is the distance from the participants. But if you turn a few degrees to your right, so that the trio in conversation is a bit further into the frame, and then get a good focus on the shorter young lady, she in the middle of the trio, then you would a) more forcefully bring that trio into the picture, b) isolate them a bit from the scene, as much as you can given fairly robust DOF with a wide angle, and c) still have a good broad shot of the piazza. As to the Flash, it is a nuisance partly because it is non-functional on some browsers (e.g., Safari on an iPad). But even when it works, it annoys because it imposes the site designer's way of seeing. I click the link, there is a pause, and then the first picture opens up. I start to look over the image, trying to see what you meant about three scenes within the scene. I have about finished looking at the first sub-scene when all of a sudden without warning the image vanishes to be replaced with a sub-scene which is other than the one I was attending to. So I mutter and try to find a Stop button or back arrow or some way of controlling the flow. But it just keeps going and going and going . . . Some random button clicks brought it under control, but the aggravation had already occurred. There are enough aspects of my life which are out of my control, I don't really need a web site to add to the list. Do note, however, that except for the out-of-control-auto-pilot nature of the experience, the site does a good job of loading fast and being responsive to controls once the visitor figures out what the controls are. On balance, not terrible; just not as good as it could be without the Flash. stan On Feb 3, 2012, at 7:22 PM, John Coyle wrote: > Thanks Stan. I was really intending only to take a general scene, and with > the 16-45 it > would have been difficult to take closer shots without intruding on the > action too much. > Finding the three contained images seemed to be a bonus! > > John Coyle > Brisbane, Australia > > >> >> http://www.members.iinet.net.au/[email protected]/Inclusions/index. >> html >> John Coyle Brisbane, Australia >> > > I agree that you have three subordinate images buried in the larger. The full > scene is > good enough, but really too busy; there are at least three different areas of > interest! > (:-)> Of the three narrower scenes, the third is ok. But of course the > context is lost. > > In some ideal world, a place I seldom have a chance to spend much time in, > you would be > able to discard all four images - the full scene and its piece-parts. Then > you would move > to the next frame on the film roll and delightedly examine a slightly > different image. > This other image would show the full scene, but the camera view would be > shifted to the > right a few notches. The trio standing in discussion would be the focal > point, and all of > the actors in motion around them would be contrasting minor players in the > scene. > > stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
